The commercial pilot was participating in a World War II educational reenactment program with a passenger onboard the P-51.
The plane was supposed to perform four to five passes in front of an amphitheater in Fredericksburg, Texas, where the reenactment was being conducted.
Witnesses at the amphitheater stated that the airplane performed a low pass before entering a climb. The airplane then entered a turn, followed by a steep descent from which it did not recover before disappearing from view behind trees.
The airplane hit the ground in a near-vertical attitude. The propeller blades exhibited abrasions and leading-edge gouges consistent with the engine producing power at impact. All observed flight control separations exhibited features consistent with overload.
Both the pilot and passenger died in the crash.
The accident pilot ran a charity that provided flights in his warbird airplane to veterans. He typically participated in the reenactment program with a veteran seated in the rear seat of his airplane.
The director of the educational program stated that, in a pre-performance briefing on the day of the accident, the pilot was reminded of “all pertinent FAA requirements,” including that the fly-by be conducted no lower than 1,000 feet above ground level. Given the available information, the pilot most likely performed a low-level maneuver with a passenger on board and was unable to recover from that maneuver before hitting terrain.
Although the pilot held an authorization to fly the airplane at the time of the accident, he had a history of failed check rides, airspace violations, and enforcement actions. In each instance, his certificate was issued or reinstated upon reexamination.
Probable cause: The pilot’s decision to perform a low-level maneuver at an altitude where he was unable to recover the airplane before impacting terrain.
NTSB Identification: CEN19FA028
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.
“Probable cause” and “most likely”. That definely means it was pilot error.
Not seeing the actual cause of the accident, but I suppose previous indiscretions or accusations are sufficient causes for condemnations for life.
New rule, all airshow flights require aircraft parachutes and conducted at no less than 20k feet.
20,000 ft?
Yup, plenty of room for maniacs to recover.
That was sarcasm directed toward the assumptions that the pilot was in error.
Remember a similar incident at the Reno races. Fortunately that time there was enough video coverage to detect the structural failure.
From the NTSB report:
“The director of the educational program stated that, in a pre-performance briefing on the day of the accident, the pilot was reminded of “all pertinent [Federal Aviation Administration] requirements,” including that
the fly-by be conducted no lower than 1,000 ft above ground level.
Given the available information, the pilot most likely performed a low-level maneuver with a passenger on board and was unable to recover from that maneuver before impacting terrain.”
______
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:
The pilot’s decision to perform a low-level maneuver at an altitude where he was unable to recover the airplane before impacting terrain.
Another example of an idiot who does something stupid and outside of his competency level. These type of crashes are what gives the general public the impression that anything smaller than a B-747 is an accident waiting to happen. Too bad he caused the death of an innocent passenger.
Makes one wonder, if a pilot with a “History” of failed check rides, airspace violations, and enforcement actions – might have gotten his ticket back one too many times.
I looked at the NTSB documents. This pilot was an absolute menace, not just to himself and his passengers, but to other aircraft as well. He had numerous checkride failures and enforcement actions against him, but unfortunately none of them grounded him for good. Incidentally, he was 73 and his passenger was 93.
When I was a new CFI working for the Spartan mechanics school out of Tulsa Downtown I reported a pilot who I’d seen drinking and f lying. The FSDO response was ” that’s after our hours. ”
A week or so later that pilot had a few beers while washing his Citobra. Then he went flying, maybe to dry the plane.
He had parked his car by the hanger door. When he tacked back he used the prop to lover his car’s trunk.
Pilots seem to be afraid to report bad pilot’s.
I think it was the wrong attitude that caused the crash. Not aircraft attitude but pilot attitude.
A P51 or other ww11 fighter can be pitched up but the AOA must still be reduced before By else a stall requiing10,000 feet for recovery.
You are correct pilot attitude, ego and pride. A human failure.
It wasn’t so much the low altitude as the steep climb that resulted in a low altitude stall spin.