The student pilot received his first solo endorsement 10 days before the accident after he had accrued about 165 hours of flight experience.
On the day of the accident, he was performing solo traffic pattern work, which included full-stop landings and then taxiing back for each subsequent takeoff.
However, interpolation of radar data and the timing of the call to report the accident indicated he had performed a touch-and-go landing before the accident takeoff and flight.
A witness described the Cessna 172 at a low altitude and airspeed as it crossed, at treetop height, an interstate highway immediately beyond the departure end of the runway at the airport in Diamondhead, Mississippi.
The airplane then disappeared below the trees.
Examination of the wreckage site and the airplane wreckage revealed evidence consistent with engine power at impact and no preimpact mechanical anomaly.
Measurement of the exposed threads of the flap actuator corresponded with a full-flap, 40° extension setting.
According to the manufacturer’s owner’s manual, “flap settings of 30° to 40° are not recommended at any time for takeoff.”
Because the pilot took off with 40° of flaps, the plane was unable to attain the normal climb speed and entered a stall/mush from which he could not recover because of the low altitude. The student pilot died in the crash.
Probable cause: The student pilot’s failure to retract the flaps following landing and the stall/mush that resulted during the subsequent full-flap takeoff and initial climb.
NTSB Identification: ERA18FA174
This June 2018 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.
Flying an airplane is easy. Landing one properly is another matter altogether. I’ve been a licensed pilot and CFI for more years than I care to admit to. It took me 23 hours to solo mainly because I couldn’t make consistently good landings. There is so much happening in a very short time very close to the ground, and it all has to be done precisely to get the tires to kiss the runway just past the numbers. Factor in a crosswind, and a short runway, the difficulty goes up exponentially.. For many if not most of us, that may well be the most difficult thing we ever learn to do after walking. And even when we think we have mastered landings, there will inevitably those that we feel very lucky to pull off with no damage to ourselves or the airplane. That is the reason for the expression “A good landing is one you can walk away from”. But of course, that is not always true. Accident files are replete with cases of landings that did not injure the pilot but made a mess of the airplane.
What was remarkable about the accident report is the student had logged 165 hours and had soloed only a few days earlier. I must agree with the comments that his instructor(s) should have realized there was something seriously wrong with him that would likely preclude him ever becoming a safe and proficient pilot. Had that happened, he would still be alive.
I once flew with a student who had accrued 57 hours and had not soloed. He flew the airplane quite well but on his first landing attempt, he flared about 20 feet above the runway. I pointed out he was too high and advised him to go around but he refused. He did manage to get it on the ground without collapsing the landing gear but I could see from that why he hadn’t soloed. That was the one and only time I flew with him.
Consistently good landings are what separates real pilots from wannabes.
Wow!
Joe Henry needs to stop commenting and go learn his airplane. If the plane wasn’t intended to use full flaps they wouldn’t have installed them. I land my 172C full flaps every landing including gusting cross winds. Know your plane is what is important
The crash happened on departure. Looks like he failed to retract the flaps and took off again.
The last time I flew retrofitted Diesel C172 and I noticed that the manufacturer limited the flaps extension to to 30 degrees only which I think is safe for touche and go or go around in case of an emergency specially for new soloed students
My first solo, without my instructor watching from the ground, was in a C152. The assignment was to fly to another airport and do a number of touch-n-goes and return to origin. The first landing I forgot to raise the flaps immediately after touch down. On the takeoff portion, I was alarmed at how much force was needed on the yoke to maintain Vx. Then I realized why and incrementally raised the flaps. I recall full flaps on a 152 are only 30 degrees, while a 172 are 40. It could have been worse if I was in a 172.
Your choice of a flight instructor is the most important decision you’ll make, when you decide that you want to learn to fly. When I made that decision, I asked everyone at the airport, “Who is the best pilot instructor out here?” Everyone agreed that it was Bob Watts (a WWII Pilot who flew “the hump”). They also agreed that he was the strictest, by the book instructor that ever lived. Many times, after flying with Bob, I would tell myself I would never fly with him again. He was extremely strict and demanded perfection from my flying. Five of us went through flight training at the same time. Three of the others would not fly with Bob. Come check ride time, those of us who flew with Bob passed and those who would not fly with Bob failed. Bob has long since flown west but his flying wisdom has always stuck with me. Choose your instructors carefully and, as Bob would always tell me, “If there’s air there, you can fly there.”
There is no substitute for knowing your airplane. I’ve been flying the same C150G since 1982 (almost typed 1892 😉 and have explored the envelope extensively. It WILL climb at full throttle with 40 degrees of flaps but you have to completely NAIL the airspeed. The magic number is 55 mph indicated (old style ASI, in MPH). Slower and you are on the edge of a stall, at 90 MPH you will get 600 FPM down even at full throttle.
I have a set of Demers droop wingtips on the airplane, they allow me to maintain level flight with no flaps at an indicated 35 MPH. I need to go play some more to establish the indicated airspeed for 40 degree flaps max ROC.
There’s an aileron seal kit and VGs in the immediate future as well, that should make it even more amusing. I’m not adding the flap well seal kit because that helps the at the top speed, not at the low speeds. A Cessna 150 is never, ever going to be a “fast” airplane, so I want to see how slow I can go in it. Play to your strengths, right?
Remember that these numbers are going to be sea level, standard day, so they are not a guarantee, they are just the best the airplane can possibly do under the specified conditions. YMMV, and so will mine.
Good place to start is a book called “Flying By The Numbers”, covers many GA aircraft. I think Richard Collins wrote it, but I could be mistaken.
I had a student “once” who nearly killed the DPE on his check ride by retracting flaps on initial climb out during a go-around. He told the examiner this is what his instructor taught him. I only had one short conversation with this individual afterward, and as far as I know he never achieved Private Pilot, even after enlisting another instructor. Yeah, some people shouldn’t ever touch the controls of an airplane, let alone think they can become a pilot.
The biggest mistake in flying a small single engine airplane, is being taught to use full flaps for any reason !!! No one ever needs to use full flaps for anything ! This killer continue’s to ac cure when people use more than twenty five degrees of flaps, any more than that is nothing but drag, and declines the performance of the aircraft. If you think you need more than twenty five degrees of flaps you are not doing something right !!! Even in a short field take off, you don’t need more than twenty five degrees of flaps, I even do short field take offs with no flaps. Why CFI’s continue to teach students to use full flaps especially in a Cessna type aircraft is an invitation to a funeral… It doesn’t serve a purpose and does get student’s in trouble !!! These are facts.
Landing with full flaps is a normal landing with the FAA and if you were taking a flight test, you could be 100% sure of the examiner asking for a full flap landing. The climb performance is not that bad actually. In C172R’s (160hp/30 degrees flaps) during training flights (less than gross weight) we regularly saw a 500fpm climb when practicing go-arounds with a simulated flap failure at 30 degrees.
I went up with a new to me CFI for a bi-annual who had tens of thousands of hours. I too was in my Cessna 172. I normally land with 10 – 20* of flaps.
He had me do numerous landings with different flap settings including 40* which I rarely use.
On one landing on final he told me to leave the flaps at 40* and do a touch and go. I replied I didn’t think it would. Wheels touched, full throttle, carb heat in, trimming the plane and Johnson bar full up. Climb was shallower, not as much elevator used, but lo and behold she climbed. 40* and climbing! We did a few more and also did a few at other settings.
His point was if I was on short final and had to go around the aircraft was capable of doing it.
You do need to climb a little shallower and be careful when you take flaps out, but she will climb.
I had a CFI do the same with me in a C182. I questioned if he was sure and he said “go” and it was an odd sensation climbing out, but like your CFI he was emphasizing if for some reason a go around became necessary with full flaps the plane could do it.
Okay, on that day, given that load, and those ambient conditions, and that engine health, it would climb with 40 degrees flap setting.
And you want others to always, in varying circumstances, expect similar results? Not sure that makes for good advice.
I know what you were probably trying to say, but also see how misleading that message could be, well intentioned as it might have been.
Try learning to fly in a taildragger with no flaps. That’s what I leaned on, an Aronica champ😊.
You may have learned to fly in an Aeronca, but you never learned how to spell it!
You win the internet for today!!!
Thank you. I get sick of seeing it mispronounced and mis-spelled.
I get sick of seeing people not knowing how to spell “misspelled.”
It’s not “mis-spelled.”
I don’t typically correct other’s spelling, but spelling Nazis just beg to be hoisted on their own petard when they make a spelling mistake in the very sentence in which they are criticizing others.
A parent lee 😉 there are a lot of sick people (of course not me).
Sorry the devil made me do it. My bad. Slap on wrist!
I had a similar incident in a 152 when I was a student (in another century). The 152 was new, if that helps place the time. I was flying solo and one of the requirements for solo at that time was all landings to a full stop, taxi back and landings not allowed at other airports. Home was a 3,000′ strip with rising terrain off the departure end plus a rather complicated and strictly enforced noise abatement procedure.
After doing several full stop landings I decided to do a touch-and-go. Why not, I did them with my instructor all the time. Unfortunately, I did exactly as we practiced together. In this case, I would handle carb heat, throttle, and trim and he would handle the flaps (can you see what’s coming?).
I made a pretty good landing, throttle to full, carb heat in, trim for climb. As I’m roaring down the pavement, and not climbing, I look out at the wings and hey, the flaps are still down. So, I reached over and swatted the switch up, all the way up. Yes, I know, that’s the worst thing you can do.
As the airplane began to settle, the junk yard at the end of the runway was getting pretty big in the window. I managed to avoid panicking and resisted the urge to pull back on the yoke. After a few very exciting seconds, the airplane finally began to climb. I went around the pattern and landed, deciding that I had had enough for the day and put the airplane away.
It just goes to show how you end up repeating what you learn initially. If there had been obstacles at the end of the runway, the story may have ended differently.
I have no problem with the language. I had the experience of initiating a go around with flaps at 30 on my solo (so I have never forgotten). I had to nurse it for a positive rate of climb, making sure to not input too much up elevator. When I had positive rate of climb, I then started to nurse off the flaps. There was a drop in altitude on the first notch off but a little bit better climb rate.
I think the student panicked when they didn’t get the climb rate they were expecting (soft field take-off practice?) and pulled on the elevators too much. At that altitude a stall or mush probably looks the same. When panic sets in the thinking gears come off and there is not much bandwidth for reasoned thought. The only question is why would the pilot think more then one notch of flaps on a take-off was a good idea? If you landed with full flaps on a touch and go why wouldn’t you retract the flaps on the go? I am sure there are other possible questions but given the lack of data (no black boxes) they will remain unanswered.
If you are still a student at 165 hours, you should have canned the idea of learning to fly a long time ago. It’s rare, buy occasionally there is a person who must not be at the controls of an airplane. How unfortunate this person’s instructors and/or family didn’t pull the plug on this endeavor.
According to the accident report, the instructor had been teaching him since 0 time. The time frame was only for a couple/few months. He’s reason for not allowing him to solo earlier was his trouble in learning to land.
I thought the hours were high but after reading the instructor interview, it may have been a cautious instructor. It was the instructor’s airplane.
If a person is unable to safely land an airplane after 10 hours of instruction I’d be concerned. 165 hours and still at it is obviously a huge red flag that something is fundamentally wrong.
Learning to land properly takes the most time. Experienced pilots know that landings are NEVER perfected. Even high time pilots can have trouble given a every set of landing variables are different. But understanding drag, stall and takeoff configuations should be something a student learns in the first ten hours easily.
Not always brother Brown, so you should not make such a blanket statement. I was 67 years old when I started taking flying lessons in a family owned airplane, a 1969 C172 my son owned. I had 135 hours before I soloed because for various reasons, mine as well as my flight instructor, I would go weeks and occasionally a month or more without instruction so would find myself sort of back to square one when I took up the lessons again. Finally after my instructor moved to another part of the state I got a new instructor and he had me ready for my check ride in one month to the day; which I passed on the first try, the examiner telling me I was one of the better pilots he had tested. As soon as I passed the check ride I parked the 172 my son had sold at the new owner’s hangar and started taking lessons in a nearly new C182 we both had just purchased. This was when I was 69 years old and I’ll soon be 80 and still flying.
Like I said, if it takes more than 10 hours or so, there is something obviously wrong and some adjustments in the training need to be tried. I soloed in 5 hours. I think the average these days is about 15 hours, but that is only due to flight schools being so scared of liability problems.
You seem to be ignoring my premise of why blanket statements of this type should not be made. There was nothing “wrong” in my case other than the fact unavoidable circumstances delayed my training. I knew a WWII pilot who soloed in 2 hours but that didn’t make him a great and safe pilot. In fact he told me it was suicide but at his age he didn’t realize it.
The Wright brothers soloed in NO hours. Do you want to try and top that too?
Yes I will top that. I “soloed” before I ever took a flying lesson. Of course it was in a simulator while I was in the navy.
We should expect more from the NTSB than imprecise and vague language like “stall/mush”. Frankly it’s an embarrassment to the profession that we allow ourselves to communicate that way.
It may seem like a small thing that I’ve fixated on, but attention to detail is not a small thing. Trimming the aircraft may seem like a small thing, but when we trim the aircraft, we fly better.
Maybe it came from Wolfgang Langewiesche. He used the term mushing flight for flight at slow speed and high angle of attack.