• 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

Stearman noses over when passenger mistakenly applies brakes

By NTSB · May 13, 2021 ·

The pilot of the Stearman B75N1 (N75577) reported that upon touch down at the airport in Bradford, Pennsylvania, the passenger in the front seat of the tandem cockpit airplane “mistakenly applied full braking” and the airplane nosed over.

The airplane sustained substantial damage to the vertical stabilizer.

The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.

Probable Cause: The passenger’s inadvertent brake application during landing, which resulted in a nose-over.

NTSB Identification: 99512

The NTSB report indicates this pilot is not rated SEL and a CFI only for twins. Familiarity with this operation is in question. Also a full passenger briefing (and supervision) might have prevented this outcome. Personally verify “no brakes” on every dual tandem tailwheel landing; you can’t fix this issue from the other seat!

This May 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.

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. Wylbur Wrong says

    May 14, 2021 at 7:09 pm

    These reviewing CFI’s should read more NTSB reports. Notice that this was a Part91 flight. NTSB did not note that.

    The NTSB did not note that this pilot was SEL as well as MEL. But they did note the multiple thousand hours SEL and 260 MEL hours. — PIC.

    In my experience reading NTSB reports, the NTSB does not take Part 91 seriously unless it is a “revenue” or hi-profile flight. And so they do not make sure they have all the facts, they do not make sure that report is accurate (it did not have tail wheel checked off).

    So I question the CFI’s as to whether they really examined the NTSB report — because there are things missing in it. So I would not be so quick to rush to judgement about whether or not the pilot’s “Familiarity with this operation” is really in question.

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

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