19960919028729A

Accident · Substantial damage

FAA accident report · Gruman F9F2PRYOR · Kalamazoo, MI · September 19, 1996

Date
September 19, 1996 · 17:21 local
Place
Kalamazoo, MI
Airport
Kalamazoo County
Phase of flight
Forced/Precautionary Landing
Operating rules
General operating rules (Part 91)
Damage
Substantial damage
Aircraft
N72WP
Reported as
Gruman F9F2PRYOR
Fatal injuries
0
Pilot’s flight hours
2,323 total236 in this make and model12 in the last 90 days

From the FAA’s Accident/Incident Data System (AIDS), through its Aviation Safety Information Portal, as reported. The NTSB investigates accidents separately, and its record of an accident is the fuller one. The aircraft is matched to the registry by N-number and event date, checked against the reported make and model; the registry’s history has gaps, so older matches can be wrong. Compare the reported make and model.

What happened

The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.

Landed on runway and unable to stop, ran off end of runway, crashed and burned. (.4)according to the pilot, shortly after takeoff, about 200 feet above ground level, he felt a sudden deceleration and was thrown forward in his seat. He also noted that the airplane would not accelerate beyond 120 knots indicated airspeed, which he attributed to a problem with the pitot system, and that he decided to return to land. He said that while on the downwind leg, he retarded the throttle to idle, but the engine RPM reduced to 65 percent instead of the normal 28 percent. At this time, a red light illuminated in the cockpit, and the pilot stated that he believed this to be the warning light for the emergency fuel system. He said that as a precaution, he decided to shut the engine down and do a power-off landing. The pilot reported that he aimed for the first third to one-half-the-way down the runway, and he landed 'long and hot.' He was unable to stop on the remaining runway and steered the airplane on to a grassy area to the right side of the runway. He indicated that he had previously experienced anomalies with the f uel control unit and fuel pump; however, postaccident testing of thses compenents did not reproduce the conditions reported by the pilot on the accident flight. Except for a slightly higher than noraml idle (36 percent), the fuel controller performed satisfactorily. A visual examination of the airspees indicator could not conclude it the unit was functional during the flight; the visual examination suggested that a valid operational test could not be performed. (-23) shortly after take off the pilot reported to ATCT an engine problem and requested a return to the airport. The plane landed long and fast and went off the end of the runway into a berm. The pilot received serious injuries. The pilot reported the airplane did not accelerate properly, that power lever responses were not as they should have been.

As the FAA filed it

LANDED ON RUNWAY AND UNABLE TO STOP, RAN OFF END OF RUNWAY, CRASHED AND BURNED. (.4)ACCORDING TO THE PILOT, SHORTLY AFTER TAKEOFF, ABOUT 200 FEET ABOVE GROUND LEVEL, HE FELT A SUDDEN DECELERATION AND WAS THROWN FORWARD IN HIS SEAT. HE ALSO NOTED THAT THE AIRPLANE WOULD NOT ACCELERATE BEYOND 120 KNOTS INDICATED AIRSPEED, WHICH HE ATTRIBUTED TO A PROBLEM WITH THE PITOT SYSTEM, AND THAT HE DECIDED TO RETURN TO LAND. HE SAID THAT WHILE ON THE DOWNWIND LEG, HE RETARDED THE THROTTLE TO IDLE, BUT THE ENGINE RPM REDUCED TO 65 PERCENT INSTEAD OF THE NORMAL 28 PERCENT. AT THIS TIME, A RED LIGHT ILLUMINATED IN THE COCKPIT, AND THE PILOT STATED THAT HE BELIEVED THIS TO BE THE WARNING LIGHT FOR THE EMERGENCY FUEL SYSTEM. HE SAID THAT AS A PRECAUTION, HE DECIDED TO SHUT THE ENGINE DOWN AND DO A POWER-OFF LANDING. THE PILOT REPORTED THAT HE AIMED FOR THE FIRST THIRD TO ONE-HALF-THE-WAY DOWN THE RUNWAY, AND HE LANDED 'LONG AND HOT.' HE WAS UNABLE TO STOP ON THE REMAINING RUNWAY AND STEERED THE AIRPLANE ON TO A GRASSY AREA TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE RUNWAY. HE INDICATED THAT HE HAD PREVIOUSLY EXPERIENCED ANOMALIES WITH THE F UEL CONTROL UNIT AND FUEL PUMP; HOWEVER, POSTACCIDENT TESTING OF THSES COMPENENTS DID NOT REPRODUCE THE CONDITIONS REPORTED BY THE PILOT ON THE ACCIDENT FLIGHT. EXCEPT FOR A SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN NORAML IDLE (36 PERCENT), THE FUEL CONTROLLER PERFORMED SATISFACTORILY. A VISUAL EXAMINATION OF THE AIRSPEES INDICATOR COULD NOT CONCLUDE IT THE UNIT WAS FUNCTIONAL DURING THE FLIGHT; THE VISUAL EXAMINATION SUGGESTED THAT A VALID OPERATIONAL TEST COULD NOT BE PERFORMED. (-23) SHORTLY AFTER TAKE OFF THE PILOT REPORTED TO ATCT AN ENGINE PROBLEM AND REQUESTED A RETURN TO THE AIRPORT. THE PLANE LANDED LONG AND FAST AND WENT OFF THE END OF THE RUNWAY INTO A BERM. THE PILOT RECEIVED SERIOUS INJURIES. THE PILOT REPORTED THE AIRPLANE DID NOT ACCELERATE PROPERLY, THAT POWER LEVER RESPONSES WERE NOT AS THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN.