The flight instructor reported that, during an instructional flight, while on short final, he told the student pilot to “pitch down” to maintain airspeed.
He added that the student did not respond and that he again instructed the student to “pitch down now” while simultaneously pressing forward on the yoke.
As he pushed forward on the yoke, the student “pulled [back] with equal force on the yoke,” he said.
Subsequently, the flight instructor pushed forward on the yoke “with greater force” than the previous attempt and stated “my plane” to the student, but “continued to wrestle the controls with the student” as the airplane entered an aerodynamic stall.
The Cessna 172 then hit the runway threshold hard at the airport in Ravenna, Ohio, the nose landing gear collapsed, and the airplane veered off the runway to the right.
The student pilot reported that this was his first flight with this flight instructor but that he had accumulated about 82 hours of dual instruction previously. He noted that, during the second landing of the day, while on final approach, “the instructor had me pull the power and told me nose down.”
He further added that he “felt we were getting low and I told the instructor I wanted to increase power, but the instructor told me to ‘nose down.’”
The student pilot reported that the instructor again stated multiple times to “nose down,” but he “did not believe there was enough room to continue nose down.”
The student pilot reported that the flight instructor subsequently took the flight controls and nosed the airplane down and that the airplane hit the runway threshold hard and veered off the runway.
The fuselage and firewall sustained substantial damage.
During post-accident correspondence with the National Transportation Safety Board investigator-in-charge, the flight instructor reported that he could not recall if, during preflight, he and the student pilot discussed the positive transfer of the flight controls.
FAA Advisory Circular 61-115, “Positive Exchange of Flight Controls Program,” dated March 10, 1995, stated, in part: During flight training, there must always be a clear understanding between students and flight instructors of who has control of the aircraft. Prior to flight, a briefing should be conducted that includes the procedure for the exchange of flight controls.
A positive three-step process in the exchange of flight controls between pilots is a proven procedure and one that is strongly recommended. When an instructor is teaching a maneuver to a student, the instructor will normally demonstrate the maneuver first, then have the student follow along on the controls during a demonstration and, finally, the student will perform the maneuver with the instructor following along on the controls.
When the flight instructor wishes the student to take control of the aircraft, he says to the student, “You have the flight controls.” The student acknowledges immediately by saying, “I have the flight controls.” The flight instructor again says, “You have the flight controls.”
During this procedure, a visual check is recommended to see that the other person actually has the flight controls.
When returning the controls to the instructor, the student should follow the same procedure the instructor used when giving control to the student. The student should stay on the controls and keep flying the aircraft until the instructor says, “I have the flight controls.” There should never be any doubt as to who is flying the aircraft.
Probable cause: The flight instructor’s failure to perform a go-around during final approach, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall and a hard landing. Contributing to the accident was the flight instructor’s failure to brief the student pilot on the positive transfer of aircraft control during preflight.
NTSB Identification: GAA17CA337
This June 2017 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.
“I had a friend instructor killed because the student probably froze on the controls during stall practice. This had happened to two other instructors who had since refused to fly with him is the reason I said probably. He was known to be deathly afraid of stalls”.
I DONT FLY WITH AFRAID OF STALLS CHUMPS.. They are the panicky kind, go bring your fobias somewhere else. They can do Panic Pulls out of the blue like above and kill you.
CFI’s are not mental institution workers fighting fobias of fools.. But some think they can change a freak like that. You cannot take the freak out of a freak. Only foolish CFI’s fly with nervous guys.. They think about the money first. Only a fool agree on putting a freak out on a flyer position??
I was given that instruction on day one before even getting in the plane. When my CFI says he has the controls, I let go immediately.
I’m a beginning student. I have about 20 hours as a student. When my instructor says “my airplane”, I RELEASE THE CONTROLS IMMEDIATELY! What is so difficult to understand about this? Who is the captain of the airplane? Certainly NOT the student! Fighting the controls with the instructor is both foolish and idiotic! The police should have been called at the end of that flight, and that student charged with reckless endangerment.
It never takes long for us to start sniping at each other over differences of opinion, and that is sad.
Agree
Thankfully they survived. Although failing to specifically brief exchange of controls is a factor to consider, any student who has accumulated very many hours should know not to fight the instructor for the controls. Once the instructor indicates that he/she is taking over, whether it’s the magic words “I have the controls” “you have the controls” “I have the controls” sequence or simply an emphatic “MY AIRPLANE”, “GET YOUR HANDS OFF THE DAMN YOKE”, or otherwise, the student needs to let go.
And yes, I have been in the situation in which my student panicked and wouldn’t release the controls. The details are unimportant here, but had I not forcefully knocked his hands off the yoke, 4 people would have died that day.
Both have some fault in this case.
The student was at fault. He did not trust the instructor and refused to obey the instruction. Then refused to give control to the instructor. Verbally or physically fighting in a cockpit is a recipe for disaster no matter who is flying.
When flying with the RAF even as a student in the early ’60’s the very first briefing given is the ‘I have control’ instruction and the requirement for the reply is ‘you have control’. When handing over it’s ‘you have control’ to the student which he must repeat as ‘I have control’ hence there is never any confusion as to who is the pilot flying. In this case I do agree that it appears the Instructor was at fault for not briefing correctly and not going around to have sufficient time for the student to understand what was happening.
Ummm…yes it is. Red flag red flag red flag! I think I had 39.5 hours total time before I went to take my checkride getting the remaining half hour in route to my examiner. This person was a danger to himself and others. Moreover, when an instructor calls out that “it’s their plane” then you just let go. It makes you wonder what other standard protocols this student was not observing. We can all hope the student pilot never goes back into the air, because I would not want them within the uncontrolled pattern of my airport.
Go around there both at fault never continue a botched approach especially vfr.
I think the report is incomplete to draw conclusions from. Foremost I see a mistake on not covering change of controls with the student. there should have been a very clear understanding that under any situation where instructor feels they need to take control of the aircraft the student should be cognizant of the fact that when the insteuctor says “my plane” it’s not up for debate. It doesn’t appear either person was forceful in their view in a very critical time. There are times when the changing of controls does not have the luxury of the three-way check that is also used in many other situations, an example being, mountaineering when you going on to belay. That aside, there is no statement of time in make and model nor recency to give an idea of experience in flying the 172. Most prominent is a new student (to this instructor), a plane on an unstable approach, both pilotswanting to change the approach, one for airspeed the other rate of descent. A go-around would have seemed most appropriate here. It would fall onto the shoulders of the instructor. I concur with an earlier post regarding hours are not a viable guage to judge this with.
OK let’s talk about mountaineering for a second :). Maybe I misunderstood you, but as a mountaineer I always had a three-way check with my climbing partner. Climber: “On belay?”. Belayer: “Belay on”. Climber: “Climbing”. Always, without fail.
I think Peter’s point was that there as not the luxury of enough time to do the “I have the controls, you have the controls, I have the controls” sequence, unlike in mountaineering where there is the time for the “On belay? Belay on, Climbing” sequence.
In much instructional flying, there is that amount of time; but not always. I was instructing before the FAA’s magic sequence was created, so I told my students something like, “If I need to take over, let me have the airplane, no matter what words I use.” In most circumstances, a simple “let me have the airplane” was enough. Once in awhile, such as an impending stall at low altitude, I might have said emphatically and loudly, “MY AIRPLANE!!!” But as I said earlier, I have had the experience of a student panicking and failing to release the controls–it can be pretty scary, and that one was.
I had 122 hours before passing my checkride…over 22 years though.
Positive exchange of flight controls was learned the first day we got in the aircraft, it was then learned on the second day, the third, the fourth, so on and so on. If the instructor says my airplane don’t fight with him turn it over.
CORRECT!!!! To me, the instructor is the aircraft commander. ALWAYS comply.
If that student had 82 hours and was still a student, he needs to take up another hobby, maybe being a busboy for a local restaurant. No way should that student refused to turn control over to the instructor and he should have been blamed for this accident. I had a friend instructor killed because the student probably froze on the controls during stall practice. This had happened to two other instructors who had since refused to fly with him is the reason I said probably. He was known to be deathly afraid of stalls.
This is a terrible attitude to have in aviation. You have no idea why he has 80 plus hours. Maybe he started and stopped a few times maybe he had poor instructors who told him to go be a bus boy. The instructor is clearly at fault. They are the pilot in command, if they cannot command the aircraft then they are at fault. Rather then try to force the landing the instructor should have gone around explained the problem and tried again. I am an instructor and have delt with lots of students of varying skill. General aviation is dying and to have the attitude of if you’re not a pilot in 40 hours then quit is part off the problem. Another part is CFIs who fail their students.
I have had 100 hour PPL students. They had a student pilot ticket and flew all sorts of planes but never had a fire under them to finish flying. 82 hours is not the alarm bell, the alarm is 82 hours and still not knowing how to land.
Courtney, When a student refuses to let go of the controls when the instructor tries to take control, it will lead to a “bad attitude of the plane”. You saying I have a bad attitude means you obviously haven’t had to physically fight a student like the two instructors I mentioned reported they had to do to keep from crashing. Some people have a fright about certain phases of flying and when it gets to the point that panic sets in, it is time to quit. I never mentioned 40 hours in my comment, but I was presuming that he had not soloed yet when I made the 82 hours comment. Presuming that was wrong on my part.
I wish I was surprised with Richard’s opinion. I have about 60 hours and 8 hours solo. I have changed 2 fly schools and 4 instructors. Why? Because the majority of the CFI are idiotic morons , without any kind of education from college, looking forward to abuse the time and the money of their students, like the one who posted his comment about the busboy. It took me time (4 months) to find an instructor who has experience (particularly mine is flying private jets and is ex-airliner), has education (mine has a BS in Aeronautics) and therefore has manners and most importantly be honest (he was the one that I did my first solo after 3 hours flying with him) and respect me because it is me who pays him. He is pushing me, yelling at me, annoys me but he always respects me. That is my advice to all the PPL students: Find the proper flight instructor and not waste your money and time with any moron who is trying to push you down saying that you should become a busboy because flying is so difficult while he has hardly finished the high school.
Finally regarding the busboy, I have never thought to pursuit a career as a busboy. The reason is very simple: I make 3-4 times more than any moronic CFI (I have PhD in petroleum engineering) therefore I am covered on that topic. I fly for fun, I got curious about the news, saw your response and thought to share some of my experiences with helpless CFIs I had n the past few months.
Right ! 82 hours, regardless how many times the student had start and stopped training, he had to have passed control back to the instructors many, many times. The instructor should have realized the student zoned out and took control more forcefully and sooner.
Lucky they are both alive.