The pilot reported that, during a night currency flight, he flew to the airport in Merced, California, which he was not familiar with.
He recalled that the approach was normal and that, during the flare, the Piper PA-28 hit three of the runway’s medium-intensity approach lighting system runway alignment indicator lights.
He then landed on the runway, and during taxi to parking, the nosewheel tire deflated.
The airplane sustained substantial damage to both wings and the lower right aft fuselage.
The pilot reported that it had been more than 90 days since his last flight at night.
He added that there were no mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
Probable cause: The pilot’s improper glidepath during a landing at night, which resulted in a collision with approach lights.
NTSB Identification: GAA19CA052
This November 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.
Just another never was actually competent to land anything anywhere at night. Pretty sad if you can’t remember how to after 90 days.
T’was not the captain of his ship, just managed to get by.
Aircraft Accidents issues, findings & causes:
Should each event be given a % Pilot Error or Pilot Training Error Ratio Rating?
Example – Accident Cause Error System Ratios ( ACES-R ) – was it a 10/90 or 90/10
10% Pilot Error and 90% Pilot Training Error? or a 90% Pilot Error and 10% Pilot Training Error?
Who wants to give their assessment? TSB, NTSB, GAN, FAA, AOPA, EAA, GAMA, LAMA, NBAA, …
We at FASTA USA hope someday soon, the TSB, NTSB & FAA and others will join the industry and make it a hard requirement* …that before anyone flies an aircraft they have never flown before – they must have available – be made aware of all the accidents, incidents and equipment failure data base for that aircraft. Agree? Disagree ? Why ?
* This requirement may be made mandatory by insurance companies. But need not be mandatory yes/no?
We ask every pilot this simple question:
Q – Before you fly an aircraft you have never flown before do you want the know the accident incident and mechanical problems associated with that aircraft – the preSTP problems?
A – My answer as a 6,000 hour pilot is yes…
P.S. The above two recommendations could apply to the reduction of all types of mobility accidents and incidents.
FMI FASTA neil Tampa 813-784-4669 or [email protected]
I tell my students the day they get their pilot certificate:
“ to do me a big favor… that I hope they never have an accident, but if it happens please make it an original one! “
First, this accident is why there is a night currency requirement. The rusty night landing happened with only the pilot on board.
Second, what is the fraction of accidents attributed to non-currency in the aircraft? Insurance companies already require transition training in more expensive aircraft. Maybe the FAA could require a logbook sign-off by a CFI as part of the AC Form 8050-1 process.
Neil, my initial thoughts are: based on the ratio of stupid pilot tricks to actual mechanical failures or non-standard performance, the collection of accident incident and mechanical problems associated with (I presume you mean) a specific MODEL of aircraft isn’t worth the trouble and may actually cause information overload.
I would rather see an initial checkout by a truly qualified check-pilot who can discuss the corner cases of the particular aircraft’s performance. As an example, how many times have you heard that “it’ll carry anything you can get in it”? You never hear the caveats that go along with that idiom.
While this particular incident write up dealt with the pilot’s lack of night currency, it didn’t say if PAPI or ILS or WAAS was available or if the pilot had ever been trained to use them. How would you distinguish the ratio you’re proposing and have it mean anything in cases like this?
Neil – I don’t think this would have much impact and it would be a daunting amount of material to collect, sort, distribute and plow through. Accidents roll into themes that are relevant to most GA aircraft. Its highly unlikely the material you propose would produce much insight. Some 80% or more of accidents are pilot error and inside the remaining 20% is more pilot error (like engine seizure due to the pilot forgetting to replace oil during an oil change). I’m reluctant to support and new “hard requirements”. GA isn’t military or airline flying (thank goodness). We could absolutely improve safety by levying gads of requirements, restrictions, procedures, etc. It would strangle GA and ruin the essence of why people come from all over the world to fly here. A “hard” requirement?? No. Time, resources misapplied.
Thoughtful.