It’s a chilly November morning on the ramp at KABE — the Class C Lehigh Valley International Airport in Allentown, Pennsylvania — and a flight instructor and her student are preparing a 1976 Piper Cherokee PA-28-140 for a training flight that will focus on pattern work.
It’s windy during the preflight, so the instructor elects to leave the nose gear wheel chocks — which she charmingly calls “wheel stoppers” — in place. They finish the preflight at about 10:30 in the morning and then hole up inside the cabin to wait for the winds to abate. About 30 minutes later, they are rewarded. The winds have improved, and the CFI commands her student to fire up the engine.
They grab the ATIS, get their clearance, throttle up to taxi, and the airplane refuses to budge.
Damn! The wheel chocks are still in place. Arrgggg…!
Now, in fairness, there are only two types of pilots in the world: Those who have left the wheel chocks in place and those who will.
It’s especially common for traveling pilots who hangar at home. But it’s what you choose to do next that reveals whether or not you exhibit one of the FAA’s hazardous attitudes.
The Accident
The CFI later told the NTSB: “I realized that the nose wheel stopper was not removed. I thought I could quickly run out to move them out of the way. So I got down from the aircraft and removed it.”
Yes. You read that right. Quoting the NTSB: “The flight instructor decided to deplane to remove the chock without shutting down the engine.”
And, not too surprisingly, that’s when the accident happened.
“After removing the chock, the flight instructor moved to signal the student pilot that the chock was removed. In the process, the flight instructor made physical contact with the spinning propeller, resulting in serious injury.”
The Pilots
The student, sitting in the left seat, was a 23-year-old male. He held a third class medical and had 31 hours in his logbook, all in the make and model. He had no reported endorsements nor did he have any pilot in command time, suggesting he was pre-solo. He’d only flown nine hours in the last 90 days, and only 2.1 hours in the month previous to the accident.
The flight instructor was a 21-year-old female. She held a commercial/instrument ticket along with CFI and CFII flight instructor certificates. She was also flying on a third class medical. She was just shy of 550 hours, about 110 in make and model, and she was flying a decent amount. She’d racked up 185 hours in the previous three months, nearly 60 of them in the previous 30 days. She flew 2.3 hours in the previous 24, suggesting that this was her second flight of the day.
A Serious Injury
I confess when I hear of someone getting seriously injured by a spinning propeller, my imagination conjures up a pretty grisly scene. And many prop-to-person strikes are just that.
But the final report on the accident provides no details, only that the CFI’s injuries were “serious.” Did her arm get lopped off? Did she suffer a crude lobotomy?
Just how does the NTSB define serious?
I don’t know for certain, but as the NTSB regulations for reporting aviation accidents (49 CFR part 830) provides five kinds of injuries that the board regards as “serious,” presumably they use the same classifications in their own reporting.
One of the five involves burns, obviously not the case here. The others are injuries requiring hospitalization for more than two days; injuries of internal organs; severe hemorrhage, nerve, muscle, or tendon damage; or broken bones other than fingers or the nose. So the flight instructor must have suffered more than a broken nose — and perhaps very much worse.
But in truth, she got pretty lucky, if such a thing can be said about being hit by a spinning propeller.
Digging deeper into the documents on the investigative docket, the extent of her injuries are revealed.
In her words: “Once the nose wheel stoppers were removed, I did a hand gesture indicating thumbs up with my right hand to the student sitting inside. While I did the thumbs up, I extended my hand far enough that it was close to the propeller and came in contact with the propeller.”
The student’s version of the report adds an interesting tidbit. Upon thumping against the chocks, he told the NTSB in his written report, “we recognized that the nosewheel was still chocked” (he actually wrote “chalked,” how cute is that?).
He said his CFI “told me that she was going to remove the chocks. I suggested shutting down, but she said it was alright. She exited the aircraft. After she tried to move the chocks she looked up at me like she was in pain, and told me to secure the airplane. After I secured the airplane I got out and saw that she was bleeding and immediately put pressure on the injury and called the fuelers for assistance.”
Analysis & Discussion
In the safety recommendation section of the report the flight school stated, “We will instruct all renters to shut down the aircraft before exiting the cockpit.”
Well, better late than never, I suppose.
I looked up both the student and the CFI on the FAA Airman Registry. The CFI must have recovered and continued working in aviation, as she received a first class medical about six months after the accident. On her LinkedIn profile, in describing her aviation journey, she wrote, “Along the way, I’ve developed imperishable skills in flight safety, problem-solving, decision-making, and critical thinking.”
I wonder if she wrote that before, or after, she pulled the chocks?
Her student’s journey appears different. Nearly two years after the accident, he remains a student pilot, suggesting that he never completed his flight training. Did the accident play a role in his dropping out? There is no way to know.
Of mild interest, this is sort of a hard-luck airplane, having been involved in two other accidents. In 2017, it was damaged on the ground by a thunderstorm. Then in January of 2020 it went off the runway on landing and took out two runway lights.
But back to the prop strike. Speaking for myself, I have a healthy fear of propellers. And setting aside mechanics who can manage to be in a zen-like place between the wing root and the spinning buzz saw while tinkering on engines, is there ever a reason to get near a prop?
Of course, some older planes without electrical systems need to be hand propped, but once the damn thing is running, is there ever a reason to get near to it? The nose chock is pretty darn close to the prop arc in most GA airplanes.
And, yeah, I get it, some airplanes can be cantankerous when it comes to starting — and some will more readily restart after a short run than others.
The Takeaway
I can’t find it anywhere, doggone it, but I recall that back when the Commemorative Air Force was still called the Confederate Air Force, and people in aviation still had a sense of humor, the CAF had a hysterical flight manual that included a cartoon of how to power-jump over neglected chocks (proceeded by faux advice on how to deal with realizing you just got into the cockpit backwards in front of a crowd).
But in the real world, I have seen numerous pilots get out of running airplanes — both to remove chocks and to untie still-tied tie-downs. And most of the time, this ends as planned: With a freed airplane and an un-mauled pilot.
But how much of that comes down to skill and how much of it comes down to luck?
Is this the aviation equivalent of Russian Roulette, where the odds will catch up to you eventually or can it be cultivated as a safe standard operating procedure?
For me, I’m really not much of a klutz, but I’m not immune from the odd banana peel, so I’ll stick with the time-honored curse-sigh-shutdown method the next time I forget the chocks.
What will you do?
The Numbers
Want to read more? Download the NTSB’s final report here or view the items on docket here.
“Interesting take on human factors! A poorly-timed gesture can definitely lead to unexpected consequences. It’s a great reminder of how small actions can have a big impact.”
Interesting reading, If I may insert my opinion, This is why I no longer use the mixture control to shut down the engine after a flight, I now use the ignition switch to shut down the engine, this way it guarantees me that my airplane does not have a “hot” mag. when I walk away. The mixture control will shut off the engine because it does starve the engine of fuel, but if you have an ungrounded mag at the end of your flight and use the mixture control to shut down, you are masking a very dangerous problem, the engine will shut down but will leave you with a hot mag. Where as if you use the ignition switch to shut down, if you have an ungrounded mag. at the end of that flight the engine will not shut down if one of your mags. is ungrounded the engine will continue to run, letting you know you have a hot mag. The mixture control is what it says it is, a control to adjust the mixture in flight that’s all, not to shut down the engine after a flight !!
A prudent pilot will do a ‘mag check’ before shutdown, to be sure that the engine stops running when the mags are turned to the ‘off’ position, momentarily.
Then, the mixture is moved to the ‘idle/ cutoff’. to starve the engine of any fuel.
So, one does both, ensure that the mags are off, AND there is no mixture in the cylinders.
Remember not all airplanes have impulse mags.
Yes, the A65 and A75 don’t have an impulse coupling or shower-of-sparks, and takes a hefty swing to get the mags to fire. So, slowly turning the prop will not fire a plug.
The ‘shower-of-sparks’ requires the master to be on, so little chance of a plug to fire…
In all cases, turning the prop opposite normal rotation will ensure no mags will fire a plug.!
When I bought my A65 powered 1945 J3 Cub in 1971 it had Eismemann magnetos with impulse coupling on the left magneto. Most likely original since the pilot’s handbook called for starting on the left magneto.
Early on I converted to dual impulse Slick magnetos, which make starting much easier.
I have run across very few small Continentals without impulse couplings, mostly early Bendix model magnetos and yes they can be temperamental to hand prop.
I still have the Cub and fly it as much as I can…
You are correct.! The A65 OH manual.X-30008, lists the LH mag as an Eiseman with an impulse coupling…
So, the recommendation still stands, turn the prop opposite normal rotation.
…back in the 70s, I was a line boy at International/HPN. We had a tenant that was… casual, for lack of a better way to put it, when he pre-flighted his 50s vintage straight tail 310. I finished helping to fuel one of the Wayfarer GIIs and watched him walk over, hop in fire up and taxi away. Apparently said 310 had just come out of an annual. As he taxied away to the active, I noticed the rudder flapping back and forth, mentioned it to my partner (who was a Panorama student pilot) who ran back to the cab of the fueler, and radioed ground that something on the 310 looked wrong. By this time the 310 had taken the active and was rolling. About 3/4 of the way down 5/23 he aborted and taxied back to the hangar. Somehow, during the annual the rudder cables were not fastened, hence the flapping. Did he learn his preflight lesson? Nope. A few years later he pranged the 421 he upgraded to (again, on takeoff roll) because the external control locks were not removed. He walked away from both the wreck and aviation.
Monitor and adjust unmetered fuel pressures on a TCM 300 hp engine at full throttle and you will gain respect for the propeller, or you better.
Also just doing a compression test can cause serious injury if the propeller is not worshiped properly.
The article incident is scary, but not surprising. Today most of society is far removed from any sort of knowledge about the hazards of machinery. A few generations back many folks had some sort of agricultural or industrial knowledge, the kind that teaches you to have a healthy respect for moving parts.
Years ago I watched a fellow hop into his Mooney after a lunch break at the FBO, and I’d noticed he didn’t disconnect his tie downs. Naturally he fires it up, adds some power, then some more power, then shuts it down and sheepish hops out. Nothing injured but his ego. Fortunately the tie downs held. At the same airport the local ag pilot had a close call. Someone noticed him taxi by trailing the tail tie down. Apparently a super Agcat makes a good puller, but I suspect a concrete filled tire would have not lead to a safe takeoff.
Great article; props are dangerous for all kinds of reasons. To me it is amazing some student pilots think they are qualified to hand-start a plane because their CFI explained it verbally once; professionals only please!
My most horrifying hand start accident was watching an older gentleman trying to handprop his Mooney with his young grand daughter standing on the wing. It was chocked but not a good plan (how many ways could this go wrong?)
A retired Marine Aviator taught me to walk in front of the AC before I enter the cockpit and give one last look at the situation. He would do this while making any needed adjustments to his flight suit.
I have followed his advice. I stand about ten feet from the spinner and take a few moments to observe the plane and the surrounding environment.
I’ve done this bone-headed thing a few times in my life, but all that was decades ago. I chalk it up to immaturity and inexperience of young age. I wouldn’t dream of stepping anywhere near a spinning propeller anymore – especially at my current age. Glad she survived the ordeal.
I agree with Paul…
Reading about the set-up to this incident made me cringe.
I’ve been flying for a while, and have flown a few single-engine trikes…but I have never chocked the nose wheel on one. Ever.
That made me wonder…and since it’s a slow news day…I decided to go conduct an informal survey at my home ‘drome.
Out of several dozen tricycle-gear, piston-engine singles (including high & low wing models), tied down on the ramp…only two had the nose wheel chalked. And these were a V-35B & PA-24-260 that have been fully ‘wrapped’ & secured for the winter.
Maybe half had the tail secured.
In fact, the only other planes with nose wheel chocks were the bizjets at our two FBOs.
Is there a lesson there?
Chocks should go under the main u/c. What has happened that has created this lax attitude to safety ? How thorough is the pre-cockpit entry walk-around inspection of the aircraft that includes ensuring that the chocks are removed together with pitot covers, cowl bungs etc & yes checking nothing foreign is in the engine bay including bird nests etc (YES birds can get to many hangers and choose your ‘plane for a new home). There seems to be a casual attitude among many pilots these days.
Paul.
In almost 52 years of flying, I’ve made my share of oopsies, including forgetting to pull the chocks. The most embarrassing was when I was ready for the return Part 135 flight in a PA28 Archer, from Cody, WY, to Laramie. We’d loaded up, I started the engine, and when I released the brakes to taxi, the airplane didn’t move. I added a little power, which should have caused movement, but it still didn’t move. Light bulb! (Remember the old “Ford has a better idea” TV ads?) So I shut down the engine, sheepishly told my passengers that I’d forgotten to remove the nose gear chock, asked the lady who was the front seat passenger to get up and stand on the wing while I got out and removed the chock. Boy did I wish we’d flown one of the Skylanes that day! At least I wouldn’t have had to have anyone get up to solve my dilemma.
The flight home was also marred by a pitot that froze over, so I landed in Laramie without an airspeed indicator. The fool airplane was not equipped with a heated pitot, and we’d flown through a very light bit of snow that apparently was enough to freeze it.
But the real positive of it all was that when we were walking from the airplane back to the FBO shack, that passenger who’d had to get out asked me who she should talk to about taking flight lessons! She’d enjoyed the flight so much, in spite of the defugalties, that she wanted to learn to fly!
The blatant ignorance of removing chocks on a single engine airplane while it’s running…….is stunning.
Glad she survived.
Tell me if I’m wrong…..The engine cannot start if you move the prop backwards from direction of rotation.
You’re wrong. Anytime the mags are hot the engine can fire. It may not “start” and continue running, but anytime the mags fire and there’s combustible fuel in a cylinder the engine can at least kick over—enough to take off a hand or a head. And the mags can be hot even though the switch is “off,” if the P-lead has come ungrounded. Always treat the propeller as though it’s hot.
slow rotation of the prop will not allow the mag to fire the plugs, unless the impulse coupling ‘snaps’ and the mag generates enough energy to fire the a plug.
Mechanic just quoted me: “You can turn the prop either direction, but the best way is to turn it in the reverse direction of normal rotation, for one main reason. If one or both mags have an impulse coupling for starting, you will not engage the impulse coupling in the reverse direction. NO KICK OVER.
You’re wrong, but what does that have to do with a situation in which the engine is already running?
correct, the impulse couplings will not fire the plugs turning the prop backward.
THANK YOU….Mechanics have beet telling me this for years. I always have to turn my prop slightly backwards to engage the towbar.
Every instructor needs to ensure EVERY student [and many supposedly ‘experienced pilots’] in their proximity is/are trained on basic aviation hand/marshalling signals… before beginning instruction. Brain-engaged-safety starts on the ground! USE THEM… ln-lieu-of home-brewed shade-tree alternatives.
/NOTE/ It might be a good idea for every ‘ops shack’ in existence is to have a copy of these hand signals poster(s) in full-size-living-color… posted on/beside the door exiting to the ramp area.
Multiple Examples of hand signal charts… pick your favorites!!! https://www.google.com/search?q=aviation+hand+signal
/Personal NOTE, Years Ago/
I tied down my aircraft and was casually walking towards the transient-parking office when a Bonanza pilot yelled ‘CLEAR’… which snapped my head to the right. Without even thinking about it… almost stumbling side ways… I raised my arms and crossed them over my head… while looking the pilot dead in his eyes. He threw up his hands and placed them on the dash… so I COULD SEE he was no where near the the panel… and likewise his right seater, too. I approached the prop with arms crossed… and then he realized what I was about to do… I reached down, in front of the prop… and removed a small plastic crate that he had use to stand-on while checking the engine-oil. I took it over to one of the under-wing tiedowns and secured it tightly in the chains. Backing-away… arms crossed… I double checked the aircraft for any other obstructions… received a simple gesture of the pilot’s relief/thanks… and headed on my way to the office. His ‘uneventful’ start-up and taxi-out came a bit later… I want to think… after he had a chance to regain his composure and ‘double-check himself’.
I’m with the guy above- I’ve never actually left something in place -yet- but have had to shut down to ensure I have removed a pitot cover, chains, etc. i always step back and survey the underside now from a few yards away. Then it’s in and I go. I have to admit, I still wonder sometimes…
I’ve seen chocks and tow-bars left in place when the pilot started the engine. Therefore, I have developed the habit of stepping back after the preflight and look at the whole airplane before getting inside.
Also, I do use a preflight checklist, not during the preflight itself, but the first thing when I am in the airplane and before I touch any button or lever to start the engine, to check whether I have not overlooked something.
I’m an old and bald pilot, not a bold pilot 😉
I suppose my age has finally caught up with me. I, too, remember the ‘real’ CAF and some of the characters who populated it but it seemed to me then, as now, that those characters became coldly serious when they approached an airplane. Oh, the bravado and the laughs were there but inside there was the sure knowledge that, as was once written, even a Cub is a baby bear.