What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
(-23) Mr. Van dwingelen stated that he was returning to 1HO from mem with a stop in pof. He got a weather briefing via duat's in mem. He stated the flight was a night flight in VMC conditions and his plan was to land on the unlighted sod runway using the moonlight for visual reference. He had planned to continue to spirit of st. Louis airport if unable to get into 1HO. Upon arrival at 1HO he observed that there was a high overcast sky. Mr. Van dwingelen stated he had noticed that there was a light used for the construction of runway 16/34 effectively marked the approach end of runway 7. He decided to continue the landing using the construction light as a reference for the approach end of runway 7. He stated that he landed long and was unable to come to a complete stop prior to reaching the end of the runway. Upon reaching the end of the runway the nose buried into the freshly plowed field and flipped the aircraft upside down. There were two passengers on board. The aircraft was substantially damaged. (.4) the pilot reported that he '...was too high at the threshold...' And, '...landed too FAR down the runway to allow the plane to stop before it ran off the end of the runway... .' He reported that the visibility was poor due to darkness. The pilot reported, 'better runway lighting could have prevented this accident...as could better pilot judgement... .'
As the FAA filed it
(-23) MR. VAN DWINGELEN STATED THAT HE WAS RETURNING TO 1HO FROM MEM WITH A STOP IN POF. HE GOT A WEATHER BRIEFING VIA DUAT'S IN MEM. HE STATED THE FLIGHT WAS A NIGHT FLIGHT IN VMC CONDITIONS AND HIS PLAN WAS TO LAND ON THE UNLIGHTED SOD RUNWAY USING THE MOONLIGHT FOR VISUAL REFERENCE. HE HAD PLANNED TO CONTINUE TO SPIRIT OF ST. LOUIS AIRPORT IF UNABLE TO GET INTO 1HO. UPON ARRIVAL AT 1HO HE OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS A HIGH OVERCAST SKY. MR. VAN DWINGELEN STATED HE HAD NOTICED THAT THERE WAS A LIGHT USED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF RUNWAY 16/34 EFFECTIVELY MARKED THE APPROACH END OF RUNWAY 7. HE DECIDED TO CONTINUE THE LANDING USING THE CONSTRUCTION LIGHT AS A REFERENCE FOR THE APPROACH END OF RUNWAY 7. HE STATED THAT HE LANDED LONG AND WAS UNABLE TO COME TO A COMPLETE STOP PRIOR TO REACHING THE END OF THE RUNWAY. UPON REACHING THE END OF THE RUNWAY THE NOSE BURIED INTO THE FRESHLY PLOWED FIELD AND FLIPPED THE AIRCRAFT UPSIDE DOWN. THERE WERE TWO PASSENGERS ON BOARD. THE AIRCRAFT WAS SUBSTANTIALLY DAMAGED. (.4) THE PILOT REPORTED THAT HE '...WAS TOO HIGH AT THE THRESHOLD...' AND, '...LANDED TOO FAR DOWN THE RUNWAY TO ALLOW THE PLANE TO STOP BEFORE IT RAN OFF THE END OF THE RUNWAY... .' HE REPORTED THAT THE VISIBILITY WAS POOR DUE TO DARKNESS. THE PILOT REPORTED, 'BETTER RUNWAY LIGHTING COULD HAVE PREVENTED THIS ACCIDENT...AS COULD BETTER PILOT JUDGEMENT... .'
NTSB investigation
The NTSB’s investigation of this event, with its probable cause and findings. Matched to this report by N-number and date.