• 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

Pilot crashes after flying with known brake problem

By NTSB · July 7, 2020 ·

According to the pilot receiving instruction during instrument training, she and the flight instructor noted that the Piper PA-28’s left brake was less effective than the right brake during landing.

Following the training, she returned to her home airport in Oregon, Wisconsin, and during landing on the wet, grass runway, she executed a go-around because there was insufficient runway to safely stop the airplane.

During the second landing, the plane touched down with about two-thirds of the 2,600-foot-long runway remaining. During the landing roll, the pilot ensured that the throttle was in the idle position, and she retracted the flaps and applied aft pressure to the yoke. She applied the foot brakes and then the hand brake and again noted that the left brake was less effective than the right brake, and the airplane continued to slide on the wet grass. The airplane overran the runway and hit a drainage culvert.

The right wing then hit a barn, and the left wing hit a trailer. The airplane sustained substantial damage to both wing’s spars and ribs.

According to the FAA aviation safety inspector who examined the airplane, there was a pool of hydraulic fluid on the ground that appeared to be consistent with an O-ring failure or displacement. He affirmed that, although degraded, the brake would still have been functional but would have required more input by the pilot to build pressure within the brake line.

Probable cause: The pilot’s improper decision to take off with a known brake malfunction, which resulted in a collision with a barn during landing on a wet runway.  

NTSB Identification: GAA18CA432

This July 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.

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. scott says

    October 12, 2020 at 8:27 am

    Degraded indeed….wonder how much air was sucked into the line through the distorted seal?
    May have been the inspector that red tagged a B-55 for damaged prop blades…. setting on the ramp with six brand new Q-Tips.

  2. John says

    July 8, 2020 at 4:14 pm

    The mechanical issue could have been an important factor in her over run. Whether it was the short, wet grass of ineffective braking due to a known maintenance problem is difficult to tell. According to the Pilot/Operator report in the NTSB Docket the left brake reservoir was topped of just two days prior to the accident, and it was known that it was still ‘soft’. How “soft”? Dunno. Other factors were at play. The reported runway length is 2600′. However, based on nearly identical distance measurements using the aerial images provided in Foreflight and Google Earth it looks like the actual runway surface is about 200′ shorter than advertised. By those images and app measurement tools, the absolute distance from the western wall of a 20′ tall hangar located on the east end of the runway grass to the ditch on the west is about 2400′. So is 2400′ “useable”? Not likely. A third of the measured runway length from the two app images would leave only 1600′ remaining to the wall. That’s enough to land on a dry, level, paved runway in no wind conditions. But margins are important. The pilot didn’t have good margins.

  3. Jerry Morris says

    July 8, 2020 at 6:33 am

    Probable Cause? Maybe landing a third of the way down a wet grass runway had more to do with it than weak brakes. Brakes sure don’t work well on wet grass. I guess our investigator here had little, or no experience, with wet grass. Silly probable cause.

    • CJ says

      January 15, 2021 at 10:34 am

      Jerry your so right!

  4. Jerry Van. says

    July 7, 2020 at 11:37 am

    Instrument Pilot training? Pilot needs remedial training at the Private Pilot level.

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

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