• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
General Aviation News

General Aviation News

Because flying is cool

  • Pictures of the Day
    • Submit Picture of the Day
  • Stories
    • News
    • Features
    • Opinion
    • Products
    • NTSB Accidents
    • ASRS Reports
  • Comments
  • Classifieds
    • Place Classified Ad
  • Events
  • Digital Archives
  • Subscribe
  • Show Search
Hide Search

Bad first solo for student pilot

By NTSB · June 8, 2015 ·

The flight instructor had the non-certified student pilot performing touch-and go-landings in Morrilton, Ark. The student had applied for, but not received, a student pilot certificate.

She told investigators that she studied Gleim FAA Test Preparation since her first flight and believed that her flight instructor’s “diligent” flight training, along with the Gleim material, prepared her for her first solo. The student pilot had logged 12.5 hours at the time of the accident.The student’s CFI instructed her to do touch and goes. The first touch and go was fine, but during the second landing, while the CFI was talking to the student over the radio, the plane veered off the runway and nosed over.

The plane lacked shoulder restraints and the student pilot was injured when her face hit the instrument panel.

Upon review of the student pilot’s logbook it was determined that the majority of the student pilot’s training was in takeoffs and landings, and training logbook entries indicated that she was not in compliance with the minimum regulatory pre-solo training requirement, of which there are 15 areas the student must receive instruction in and maneuvers the student must be found proficient in before solo can take place.

The student pilot told investigators that she did not know what many of the maneuvers she had performed during her flight training were called. She told investigators that she had not performed ground reference maneuvers, and had only performed two stalls.

She said she performed a simulated engine-out during her flight training. The student pilot was asked if she had performed emergency procedures and she said that they had only discussed emergency procedures. When the student pilot was asked if she performed go-arounds during her flight training, she responded by asking what a go-around was. When a go-around maneuver was described to her, she said she had performed go-arounds.

The NTSB determined the probable cause of this accident as the flight instructor’s inadequate training and oversight of the student pilot, which resulted in the non-certificated student pilot’s loss of control during landing.

NTSB Identification: CEN13LA342

This June 2015 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.

About NTSB

The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent federal agency charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation accident in the United States and significant events in the other modes of transportation, including railroad, transit, highway, marine, pipeline, and commercial space. It determines the probable causes of accidents and issues safety recommendations aimed at preventing future occurrences.

Reader Interactions

Share this story

  • Share on Twitter Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook Share on Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit Share on Reddit
  • Share via Email Share via Email

Become better informed pilot.

Join 110,000 readers each month and get the latest news and entertainment from the world of general aviation direct to your inbox, daily.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Curious to know what fellow pilots think on random stories on the General Aviation News website? Click on our Recent Comments page to find out. Read our Comment Policy here.

Comments

  1. BJS says

    June 10, 2015 at 9:16 am

    I’ve landed at this airport several times and it’s not an easy airport to approach due to trees and so forth. However, that being said, if the student just ran off the runway after touchdown and she had practiced mostly landings and take offs then she got distracted, over corrected or something along that line. Practicing stalls, engine outs or whatever and if she’d had 3,000 hours it wouldn’t have had a thing to do with this situation. I believe I recall a jet liner doing a similar thing not too long ago at Boston International?

    I also have to ask what in the world was the CFI doing communicating on the radio with her? When I did my first solo my CFI got out, went inside the terminal and I never saw him again until I had done 8 landings like he told me (6 full stop and 2 touch and go’s) and taxied back to where he left me alone in the plane.

  2. Paul says

    June 9, 2015 at 8:24 am

    The CFI probably should have stayed off the radio to minimize the distractions. If he felt it necessary to talk her through the T&Gs then she wasn’t adequately prepared. Rhetorically speaking – what do all those ground reference maneuvers have to do with failure to land on the centerline and/or maintain directional control during a T&G landing?

    Veering off the runway was likely due to failure to land on the centerline and/or pay attention to directional control while heads down fumbling with the flaps, trim, power and not adequately countering the yaw with rudder with the addition of power. In sum, not adequately prepared/trained for solo in the landing pattern.

    • Mike says

      June 10, 2015 at 7:43 am

      What do ground reference maneuvers have to do with loss of directional control on landing? A good landing is the result of a good approach. If she had no idea where she was in the pattern, no idea where to start her turns, make power adjustment/add flaps, etc., I could very easily see where she could wind up in a bad spot on touchdown and lose control. Actually she probably “lost control” well before that, it just wasn’t evident until she was on the ground and it could be more readily quantified. And puh-leeze, I soloed at 11 hours, having satisfied all the pre-solo requirements, and I for darn sure knew what a go-around was.

  3. Andy says

    June 9, 2015 at 7:30 am

    OK, I’ll go first. She was SUPER HOT! 🙂

  4. theo says

    June 8, 2015 at 9:21 am

    After having met some people who have PP and CP certificates and been amazed at their lack of knowledge this doesn’t surprise me. For example a commercial pilot who didn’t really know why we leaned the mixture at altitude since it wasn’t necessary in a car when driving up hill, a CFI who didn’t know what compass deviation was or what caused it and a PP who didn’t know how to tie down an aircraft or how to add fuel to the AC.
    Well this is one of those people who was on the easy train but it bit the instructor in the butt. I have my own opinion why the instructor made these decisions but I won’t say it out loud….unless you go first.

© 2025 Flyer Media, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy.

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Comment Policy
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Writer’s Guidelines
  • Photographer’s Guidelines