What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
(.19) On March 15, 2003, at 0809 mountain standard time, a Piper PA24, N842PS, landed gear up at the williams gateway airport (iaw), mesa, Arizona. The gear up landing was precipitated by inadvertent contact with the runway surface at memorial airfield (34AZ), Chandler, Arizona, and the subsequent failure of the landing gear to fully extend. The airplane was owned and operated by Arizona cloud busters under the provisions of 14 CFR part 91. The certified flight instructor (CFI), private pilot, and one passenger, were not injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the local area practice flight, and no flight plan had been filed. The flight departed the stellar airpark (P19), Chandler, Arizona, at an undetermined time. According to both the CFI and student, the purpose of the flight was to practice commercial maneuvers for the student's upcoming commercial check ride. While at 34AZ they were conducting emergency procedures that culminated in go-arounds. On the accident landing, with the landing gear extended, the engine lost power. The student stated that they were about 100 feet above ground level (AGL). The airplane started to sink and contacted the ground. The CFI stated that as the airplane was hitting the ground the engine "came up," so he executed an aborted landing. The CFI reported that they retracted the landing gear, and flew to chd. Upon arrival at chd, they lowered the landing gear, and did a flyby so the tower could confirm that the landing gear was extended. Chd tower personnel said that the landing gear was partially extended. They overflew the airport for about 45 minutes trying to extend the landing gear. The CFI informed chd that they would be landing gear up. According to the CFI and the student, chd personnel told them they should go to iaw because they had better "equipment." They flew to iaw and landed gear up with no problems. According to a federal aviation administration (FAA) inspector who visually examined the airplane, multiple holes were observed on the fuselage. (-23) when pilot increased power for go around at the bottom as a descent at idle power for the simulation of a forced landing, the engine did not initially respond. Aircraft then struck the ground short of the runway. When aircraft struck ground, the engine power came back and the pilot executed a go around. Pilot stated there were no abnormal indications prior to the point when he first pushed the throttle in to attempt the go around. The PIC assumed there was some belly and landing gear damage to the aircraft and elected to continue to an airport where emergency services were available. Instructor/pic counseled regarding monitoring of engine operating condiction during simulated emergency landing practice.
As the FAA filed it
(.19) ON MARCH 15, 2003, AT 0809 MOUNTAIN STANDARD TIME, A PIPER PA24, N842PS, LANDED GEAR UP AT THE WILLIAMS GATEWAY AIRPORT (IAW), MESA, ARIZONA. THE GEAR UP LANDING WAS PRECIPITATED BY INADVERTENT CONTACT WITH THE RUNWAY SURFACE AT MEMORIAL AIRFIELD (34AZ), CHANDLER, ARIZONA, AND THE SUBSEQUENT FAILURE OF THE LANDING GEAR TO FULLY EXTEND. THE AIRPLANE WAS OWNED AND OPERATED BY ARIZONA CLOUD BUSTERS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF 14 CFR PART 91. THE CERTIFIED FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR (CFI), PRIVATE PILOT, AND ONE PASSENGER, WERE NOT INJURED. VISUAL METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS PREVAILED FOR THE LOCAL AREA PRACTICE FLIGHT, AND NO FLIGHT PLAN HAD BEEN FILED. THE FLIGHT DEPARTED THE STELLAR AIRPARK (P19), CHANDLER, ARIZONA, AT AN UNDETERMINED TIME. ACCORDING TO BOTH THE CFI AND STUDENT, THE PURPOSE OF THE FLIGHT WAS TO PRACTICE COMMERCIAL MANEUVERS FOR THE STUDENT'S UPCOMING COMMERCIAL CHECK RIDE. WHILE AT 34AZ THEY WERE CONDUCTING EMERGENCY PROCEDURES THAT CULMINATED IN GO-AROUNDS. ON THE ACCIDENT LANDING, WITH THE LANDING GEAR EXTENDED, THE ENGINE LOST POWER. THE STUDENT STATED THAT THEY WERE ABOUT 100 FEET ABOVE GROUND LEVEL (AGL). THE AIRPLANE STARTED TO SINK AND CONTACTED THE GROUND. THE CFI STATED THAT AS THE AIRPLANE WAS HITTING THE GROUND THE ENGINE "CAME UP," SO HE EXECUTED AN ABORTED LANDING. THE CFI REPORTED THAT THEY RETRACTED THE LANDING GEAR, AND FLEW TO CHD. UPON ARRIVAL AT CHD, THEY LOWERED THE LANDING GEAR, AND DID A FLYBY SO THE TOWER COULD CONFIRM THAT THE LANDING GEAR WAS EXTENDED. CHD TOWER PERSONNEL SAID THAT THE LANDING GEAR WAS PARTIALLY EXTENDED. THEY OVERFLEW THE AIRPORT FOR ABOUT 45 MINUTES TRYING TO EXTEND THE LANDING GEAR. THE CFI INFORMED CHD THAT THEY WOULD BE LANDING GEAR UP. ACCORDING TO THE CFI AND THE STUDENT, CHD PERSONNEL TOLD THEM THEY SHOULD GO TO IAW BECAUSE THEY HAD BETTER "EQUIPMENT." THEY FLEW TO IAW AND LANDED GEAR UP WITH NO PROBLEMS. ACCORDING TO A FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) INSPECTOR WHO VISUALLY EXAMINED THE AIRPLANE, MULTIPLE HOLES WERE OBSERVED ON THE FUSELAGE. (-23) WHEN PILOT INCREASED POWER FOR GO AROUND AT THE BOTTOM AS A DESCENT AT IDLE POWER FOR THE SIMULATION OF A FORCED LANDING, THE ENGINE DID NOT INITIALLY RESPOND. AIRCRAFT THEN STRUCK THE GROUND SHORT OF THE RUNWAY. WHEN AIRCRAFT STRUCK GROUND, THE ENGINE POWER CAME BACK AND THE PILOT EXECUTED A GO AROUND. PILOT STATED THERE WERE NO ABNORMAL INDICATIONS PRIOR TO THE POINT WHEN HE FIRST PUSHED THE THROTTLE IN TO ATTEMPT THE GO AROUND. THE PIC ASSUMED THERE WAS SOME BELLY AND LANDING GEAR DAMAGE TO THE AIRCRAFT AND ELECTED TO CONTINUE TO AN AIRPORT WHERE EMERGENCY SERVICES WERE AVAILABLE. INSTRUCTOR/PIC COUNSELED REGARDING MONITORING OF ENGINE OPERATING CONDICTION DURING SIMULATED EMERGENCY LANDING PRACTICE.
NTSB investigation
The NTSB’s investigation of this event, with its probable cause and findings. Matched to this report by N-number and date.