What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
(.19)On January 25, 1999, about 1630 hours pacific standard time, a Cessna 172, N7639G, sustained substanial damage while landing at the Santa Paula, California, airport. The student pilot and the certified flight instructor were not injured. The instructor stated the landing was normal until the wheels contacted water on the runway and braking became ineffective. The aircraft departed the end of the runway and stuck a perimeter fence. The prop, cowling, and right wing were damaged. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the local flight and no flight plan was filed. The safety board was notified of the accident on February 1, 1999. (.4) basic instrument flight maneuvers were practiced on the dual instrument instructional flight. The pilot under instruction was given a series of headings, altitudes, and airspeeds to fly. These vectors terminated in the airport traffic pattern and when the pilot under instruction removed his vision restricting device, the airplane was on final approach close to the runway and left of centerline. The pilot under instruction stated that he would have gone around if he were alone and stated this to the instructor. The instructor then took control of the airplane and a landing was attempted. Witnesses said the touchdown was approximately halfway down the wet 2,650 foot-long-runway. The pilots said they felt there was no apparent braking, especially from the right brake. The airplane departed the runway, traveled through a muddy overrun area, then back onto a taxiway and into a block wall. Two skid marks were evident before and after the overrun area. The brakes were functionally checked after the accident with no discrepancies found.
As the FAA filed it
(.19)ON JANUARY 25, 1999, ABOUT 1630 HOURS PACIFIC STANDARD TIME, A CESSNA 172, N7639G, SUSTAINED SUBSTANIAL DAMAGE WHILE LANDING AT THE SANTA PAULA, CALIFORNIA, AIRPORT. THE STUDENT PILOT AND THE CERTIFIED FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR WERE NOT INJURED. THE INSTRUCTOR STATED THE LANDING WAS NORMAL UNTIL THE WHEELS CONTACTED WATER ON THE RUNWAY AND BRAKING BECAME INEFFECTIVE. THE AIRCRAFT DEPARTED THE END OF THE RUNWAY AND STUCK A PERIMETER FENCE. THE PROP, COWLING, AND RIGHT WING WERE DAMAGED. VISUAL METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS PREVAILED FOR THE LOCAL FLIGHT AND NO FLIGHT PLAN WAS FILED. THE SAFETY BOARD WAS NOTIFIED OF THE ACCIDENT ON FEBRUARY 1, 1999. (.4) BASIC INSTRUMENT FLIGHT MANEUVERS WERE PRACTICED ON THE DUAL INSTRUMENT INSTRUCTIONAL FLIGHT. THE PILOT UNDER INSTRUCTION WAS GIVEN A SERIES OF HEADINGS, ALTITUDES, AND AIRSPEEDS TO FLY. THESE VECTORS TERMINATED IN THE AIRPORT TRAFFIC PATTERN AND WHEN THE PILOT UNDER INSTRUCTION REMOVED HIS VISION RESTRICTING DEVICE, THE AIRPLANE WAS ON FINAL APPROACH CLOSE TO THE RUNWAY AND LEFT OF CENTERLINE. THE PILOT UNDER INSTRUCTION STATED THAT HE WOULD HAVE GONE AROUND IF HE WERE ALONE AND STATED THIS TO THE INSTRUCTOR. THE INSTRUCTOR THEN TOOK CONTROL OF THE AIRPLANE AND A LANDING WAS ATTEMPTED. WITNESSES SAID THE TOUCHDOWN WAS APPROXIMATELY HALFWAY DOWN THE WET 2,650 FOOT-LONG-RUNWAY. THE PILOTS SAID THEY FELT THERE WAS NO APPARENT BRAKING, ESPECIALLY FROM THE RIGHT BRAKE. THE AIRPLANE DEPARTED THE RUNWAY, TRAVELED THROUGH A MUDDY OVERRUN AREA, THEN BACK ONTO A TAXIWAY AND INTO A BLOCK WALL. TWO SKID MARKS WERE EVIDENT BEFORE AND AFTER THE OVERRUN AREA. THE BRAKES WERE FUNCTIONALLY CHECKED AFTER THE ACCIDENT WITH NO DISCREPANCIES FOUND.
NTSB investigation
The NTSB’s investigation of this event, with its probable cause and findings. Matched to this report by N-number and date.