The solo student pilot reported that, during the takeoff roll at the airport in Reno, Nevada, he applied aft pressure on the control yoke at about 65 knots, and the airplane started to shake.
The Cessna 172 continued to shake as he applied more aft pressure, so he rejected the takeoff.
As he reduced power and released the pressure on the control yoke, the airplane veered right. He overcorrected and the airplane veered left, right, then left again. The plane went off the runway and hit a ditch, sustaining substantial damage to the lower fuselage.
The student reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
Probable Cause: The student pilot’s failure to maintain directional control during a rejected takeoff, which resulted in a runway excursion and impact with a ditch.
This January 2019 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.
Cessnas use bungee cord like things to connect the rudder peddles to the nose gear. If a bungee give out, that side has to use braking to get it to steer especially if you are below speed for rudder effectiveness (authority).
Wonder if that had been examined before the NTSB report if they would have found this was a mechanical problem?
C77R did that to me on landing on a 75′ wide runway and as I lost rudder effectiveness, it started turning left. I had to use right brake to gain control.
Right bungee cord had the elastic/rubber just give out. Mechanic showed me why I had lost normal steering.
The shimmy issue is another problem and yet could have been related.
My son and I bought a 1969, 172 to use getting our license and it would shimmy on occasion at even speeds too low to rotate. Sometimes I would halt the take off roll then start again and the shimmy would be absent? No one could ever determine the cause and after we received our licenses we sold that plane and bought a 2005, 182, and that solved the 172 shimmy.
If there was no preaccident mechanical issue, what caused the shake? Or not being airborne at 65 knots with back pressure in a 172?
Maybe nose wheel shimmy possibly related to rotating 10 kts over normal rotation speed? Nothing in the pilot report.
I have not flown the iconic C172, but C175, C177 and once the nose wheel lifts off the ground, the “shimmy” dampens out. Perhaps he never experienced it before and over/under reacted. Dunno.
Yes – normally I could get any shimmy to stop by applying back pressure and minimizing the load on the nose wheel in a slightly positive pitch attitude. This report is confusing though. If he was at 65, ten over normal rotation speed, then why didn’t he get into the air. Maybe he had it trimmed nose down, or the nose wheel strut wasn’t pressured normally, and despite some back pressure it was still in that range where a shimmy can occur. I don’t know either.