20090701054129A

Accident · Substantial damage

FAA accident report · Cessna R172K · Page, AZ · July 1, 2009

Date
July 1, 2009 · 09:30 local
Place
Page, AZ
Airport
Page
Phase of flight
Landing: Touchdown
Operating rules
General operating rules (Part 91)
Damage
Substantial damage
Aircraft
N1055V
NTSB investigation
NTSBWPR09LA480
Reported as
Cessna R172K
Fatal injuries
0
Other injuries
0
Pilot’s flight hours
0 total0 in this make and model0 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.

There are conflicting reports on the actual date of the hard landing. There is a date of July 1, 2009 where the pilot reported to the aircraft rental location that she experienced a hard landing. Then there is another report of a hard landing by the same pilot in this aircraft that was reported to insurance. The insurance company is investigating both dates as potential for insurance fraud. Since the insurance company is investigating, all parties are less then cooperative in giving any additional information. Additional facts: the airplane remained in service after the first reported date and may have been flown by other operators prior to any reported damage to the aircraft. After the first date given for a hard landing, the aircraft was given a limited inspection by an A&P who reported the aircraft was airworthy. The second hard landing report was investigated by another FSDO as a complaint. The complaint investigation confirmed that a hard landing did not occur in bakersville, CA.

As the FAA filed it

THERE ARE CONFLICTING REPORTS ON THE ACTUAL DATE OF THE HARD LANDING. THERE IS A DATE OF JULY 1, 2009 WHERE THE PILOT REPORTED TO THE AIRCRAFT RENTAL LOCATION THAT SHE EXPERIENCED A HARD LANDING. THEN THERE IS ANOTHER REPORT OF A HARD LANDING BY THE SAME PILOT IN THIS AIRCRAFT THAT WAS REPORTED TO INSURANCE. THE INSURANCE COMPANY IS INVESTIGATING BOTH DATES AS POTENTIAL FOR INSURANCE FRAUD. SINCE THE INSURANCE COMPANY IS INVESTIGATING, ALL PARTIES ARE LESS THEN COOPERATIVE IN GIVING ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. ADDITIONAL FACTS: THE AIRPLANE REMAINED IN SERVICE AFTER THE FIRST REPORTED DATE AND MAY HAVE BEEN FLOWN BY OTHER OPERATORS PRIOR TO ANY REPORTED DAMAGE TO THE AIRCRAFT. AFTER THE FIRST DATE GIVEN FOR A HARD LANDING, THE AIRCRAFT WAS GIVEN A LIMITED INSPECTION BY AN A&P WHO REPORTED THE AIRCRAFT WAS AIRWORTHY. THE SECOND HARD LANDING REPORT WAS INVESTIGATED BY ANOTHER FSDO AS A COMPLAINT. THE COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION CONFIRMED THAT A HARD LANDING DID NOT OCCUR IN BAKERSVILLE, CA.

NTSB investigation

The NTSB’s investigation of this event, with its probable cause and findings. Matched to this report by N-number and date.