The student pilot was on final approach to the airport in Kelso, Wash., in a Cessna 152. When he reduced engine power, the plane developed a higher sink rate than expected.
It subsequently landed hard and bounced three to four times, collapsing the nose landing gear and substantially damaging the firewall.
The student pilot stated that he did not attempt to go around.
The NTSB determined the probable cause was the student pilot’s inadequate landing flare and lack of remedial actions, which resulted in a hard bounced landing.
NTSB Identification: WPR13CA130
This February 2013 accident report is provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. Published as an educational tool, it is intended to help pilots learn from the misfortunes of others.
The Student needed five hours of Dual on Take offs and Landings,Stalls and Slow Flight,before the accident from a good Flight Instructor.
I didn’t know you can break a 152. Wow…
As a student pilot myself, I’m sometimes not sure what I should take home from some of these reports. If the plane was sinking faster than normal, and the student didn’t flare, doesn’t is sound like the student was on final in a nose-up attitude, essentially already flared? He was flying on the back side of the curve and didn’t realize it. When he cut power, the plane started to sink, there was no flare left and he just dropped onto the runway? Why else would he be surprised by the sink rate? (there was no mention of gusting tail winds or icing conditions).
Otherwise, I have to conclude airplanes sometimes mysteriously stop flying and the solution is “remedial action” whatever that is.
I think the remedial action would have been to add power to correct the sink rate. And once the airplane bounced, immediately add power and go around.
to the student, which we all once were – i was lucky to learn at SQL, which almost always has a good crosswind. the obvious rule for me quickly became, ” Every approach is a go around until proven otherwise. When in doubt go around “.
while i was a student, there are two entires in my first log book where i wrote ” practiced go arounds ” , one was .5 hours, the other was .7 hours. i never touched on any approach, when i caught a lull in the wind and was able to finally land it was time time taxi back to the tie down.
for me, forever, every approach is a go around until proven otherwise. and from time to time i still do. and i don’t hesitate.
Wonder how long it took the geniuses at NTSB to reach that conclusion?