What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
(-23) Although there were clouds in the area of the mountain ridge where the crash occurred, this pilot was known to have good instrument flying skills and had recently accomplished his instrument currency requirements. An interview with the chief pilot, who is responsible for pilot training and administers the required checks as check airman, indicates the pilot had superior piloting skills and was conservative concerning flight safety. Therefore, pilot competence does not appear to be a factor in this accident. This does not appear to be a cfit accident. An examination of the surrounding cliffs by helicopter revealed no impact scars. The airplane impacted the ground very hard in a vertical nose down attitude. Radar data showed the altitude to be more than 1,000 feet above the ridge before rapidly losing altitude. Both wings were present and evident at the crash site. A structural failure of some portion of the tail section would explain such a sudden rapid descent, assuming the loss of control was not induced by the pilot. Damage to the right horizontal stabilizer have previously been reported and repaired. Concerns expressed about this company's maintenance practices have prompted this fdso to conduct increased surv. (-23 amendment) the aircraft was returning to its home base after conducting a weather reconnaisance flight for king airlines when it crashed on the east side of wilson ridge in Arizona. The airplane impacted the ground very hard in a vertical nose down attitude. Radar data showed the altitude to be more than 1,000 feet above the ridge before rapidly losing altitude. Both wings were present and evident at the crash site. A structural failure of some portion of the tail section would explain such a sudden rapid descent, assuming the loss of control was not induced by the pilot. Damage to the right horizontal stabilizer had previously been reported and repaired. Concerns expressed about this company's maintenance practices have prompted this FSDO conduct increased surveillance after the accident. The accident investigation has never found significant portions of the right horizontal stabilizer and elevator. Special airworthiness information bulletin (SAIB) CE-05-27, issued by the FAA on January 20, 2005, appears relevant to the cause of this accident. It discusses a corrosion problem with foam-filled elevator trim tabs on this airplane type that can cause an in-flight flutter of the elevator trim tab.
As the FAA filed it
(-23) ALTHOUGH THERE WERE CLOUDS IN THE AREA OF THE MOUNTAIN RIDGE WHERE THE CRASH OCCURRED, THIS PILOT WAS KNOWN TO HAVE GOOD INSTRUMENT FLYING SKILLS AND HAD RECENTLY ACCOMPLISHED HIS INSTRUMENT CURRENCY REQUIREMENTS. AN INTERVIEW WITH THE CHIEF PILOT, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PILOT TRAINING AND ADMINISTERS THE REQUIRED CHECKS AS CHECK AIRMAN, INDICATES THE PILOT HAD SUPERIOR PILOTING SKILLS AND WAS CONSERVATIVE CONCERNING FLIGHT SAFETY. THEREFORE, PILOT COMPETENCE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A FACTOR IN THIS ACCIDENT. THIS DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A CFIT ACCIDENT. AN EXAMINATION OF THE SURROUNDING CLIFFS BY HELICOPTER REVEALED NO IMPACT SCARS. THE AIRPLANE IMPACTED THE GROUND VERY HARD IN A VERTICAL NOSE DOWN ATTITUDE. RADAR DATA SHOWED THE ALTITUDE TO BE MORE THAN 1,000 FEET ABOVE THE RIDGE BEFORE RAPIDLY LOSING ALTITUDE. BOTH WINGS WERE PRESENT AND EVIDENT AT THE CRASH SITE. A STRUCTURAL FAILURE OF SOME PORTION OF THE TAIL SECTION WOULD EXPLAIN SUCH A SUDDEN RAPID DESCENT, ASSUMING THE LOSS OF CONTROL WAS NOT INDUCED BY THE PILOT. DAMAGE TO THE RIGHT HORIZONTAL STABILIZER HAVE PREVIOUSLY BEEN REPORTED AND REPAIRED. CONCERNS EXPRESSED ABOUT THIS COMPANY'S MAINTENANCE PRACTICES HAVE PROMPTED THIS FDSO TO CONDUCT INCREASED SURV. (-23 AMENDMENT) THE AIRCRAFT WAS RETURNING TO ITS HOME BASE AFTER CONDUCTING A WEATHER RECONNAISANCE FLIGHT FOR KING AIRLINES WHEN IT CRASHED ON THE EAST SIDE OF WILSON RIDGE IN ARIZONA. THE AIRPLANE IMPACTED THE GROUND VERY HARD IN A VERTICAL NOSE DOWN ATTITUDE. RADAR DATA SHOWED THE ALTITUDE TO BE MORE THAN 1,000 FEET ABOVE THE RIDGE BEFORE RAPIDLY LOSING ALTITUDE. BOTH WINGS WERE PRESENT AND EVIDENT AT THE CRASH SITE. A STRUCTURAL FAILURE OF SOME PORTION OF THE TAIL SECTION WOULD EXPLAIN SUCH A SUDDEN RAPID DESCENT, ASSUMING THE LOSS OF CONTROL WAS NOT INDUCED BY THE PILOT. DAMAGE TO THE RIGHT HORIZONTAL STABILIZER HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN REPORTED AND REPAIRED. CONCERNS EXPRESSED ABOUT THIS COMPANY'S MAINTENANCE PRACTICES HAVE PROMPTED THIS FSDO CONDUCT INCREASED SURVEILLANCE AFTER THE ACCIDENT. THE ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION HAS NEVER FOUND SIGNIFICANT PORTIONS OF THE RIGHT HORIZONTAL STABILIZER AND ELEVATOR. SPECIAL AIRWORTHINESS INFORMATION BULLETIN (SAIB) CE-05-27, ISSUED BY THE FAA ON JANUARY 20, 2005, APPEARS RELEVANT TO THE CAUSE OF THIS ACCIDENT. IT DISCUSSES A CORROSION PROBLEM WITH FOAM-FILLED ELEVATOR TRIM TABS ON THIS AIRPLANE TYPE THAT CAN CAUSE AN IN-FLIGHT FLUTTER OF THE ELEVATOR TRIM TAB.
NTSB investigation
The NTSB’s investigation of this event, with its probable cause and findings. Matched to this report by N-number and date.