What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
Witnesses (father & son) stated that the aircraft seemed to be practicing; a loud noise was heard not usual for the aircraft; (witnesses frequently observe this type aircraft in the area); the aircraft made a quick rotational turn, nosed down, wobbled, tumbled and hit the ground and began burning: aircraft direction of rotation could not be specified by witnesses. An additional witness, with helicopter experience, stated that he had been observing the aircraft practicing 4 or 5 power recovery autorotations; witness, who lives in gaston, or aprx 2 miles south, did not see the accident; on scene investigation revealed that the aircraft contacted the ground vertically in an upright condition, slightly left skid low; fuel tanks burst, a localized fire insued and demolished the aircraft except for the tail boom aft of the tailboom to fuselage attachment point; no forward fuselage momentum evidenced by the confined area of the fire including lack of movement evidence on the ground; damage to overhanging folage was vertical in nature; little or no main rotor RPM; no indication of blades strikes on the ground; main rotor blades were bent up 90 deg aprx 18 inches outboard of main rotor grips; appeared that there was no tail rotor RPM evidenced by the lack of any rototional damage; tail rotor drive intact with the forward flex coupling torn away from the free wheeling unit; the loud noise reported by witnesses could not be determined on site; further NTSB teardown to follow; onsite control continuity confirmed to the extent where fire had destroyed the flight controls, especially from the transmission deck upward to the swash plate. 2 occupants (CFI & student); no survivors aircraft destroyed.
As the FAA filed it
WITNESSES (FATHER & SON) STATED THAT THE AIRCRAFT SEEMED TO BE PRACTICING; A LOUD NOISE WAS HEARD NOT USUAL FOR THE AIRCRAFT; (WITNESSES FREQUENTLY OBSERVE THIS TYPE AIRCRAFT IN THE AREA); THE AIRCRAFT MADE A QUICK ROTATIONAL TURN, NOSED DOWN, WOBBLED, TUMBLED AND HIT THE GROUND AND BEGAN BURNING: AIRCRAFT DIRECTION OF ROTATION COULD NOT BE SPECIFIED BY WITNESSES. AN ADDITIONAL WITNESS, WITH HELICOPTER EXPERIENCE, STATED THAT HE HAD BEEN OBSERVING THE AIRCRAFT PRACTICING 4 OR 5 POWER RECOVERY AUTOROTATIONS; WITNESS, WHO LIVES IN GASTON, OR APRX 2 MILES SOUTH, DID NOT SEE THE ACCIDENT; ON SCENE INVESTIGATION REVEALED THAT THE AIRCRAFT CONTACTED THE GROUND VERTICALLY IN AN UPRIGHT CONDITION, SLIGHTLY LEFT SKID LOW; FUEL TANKS BURST, A LOCALIZED FIRE INSUED AND DEMOLISHED THE AIRCRAFT EXCEPT FOR THE TAIL BOOM AFT OF THE TAILBOOM TO FUSELAGE ATTACHMENT POINT; NO FORWARD FUSELAGE MOMENTUM EVIDENCED BY THE CONFINED AREA OF THE FIRE INCLUDING LACK OF MOVEMENT EVIDENCE ON THE GROUND; DAMAGE TO OVERHANGING FOLAGE WAS VERTICAL IN NATURE; LITTLE OR NO MAIN ROTOR RPM; NO INDICATION OF BLADES STRIKES ON THE GROUND; MAIN ROTOR BLADES WERE BENT UP 90 DEG APRX 18 INCHES OUTBOARD OF MAIN ROTOR GRIPS; APPEARED THAT THERE WAS NO TAIL ROTOR RPM EVIDENCED BY THE LACK OF ANY ROTOTIONAL DAMAGE; TAIL ROTOR DRIVE INTACT WITH THE FORWARD FLEX COUPLING TORN AWAY FROM THE FREE WHEELING UNIT; THE LOUD NOISE REPORTED BY WITNESSES COULD NOT BE DETERMINED ON SITE; FURTHER NTSB TEARDOWN TO FOLLOW; ONSITE CONTROL CONTINUITY CONFIRMED TO THE EXTENT WHERE FIRE HAD DESTROYED THE FLIGHT CONTROLS, ESPECIALLY FROM THE TRANSMISSION DECK UPWARD TO THE SWASH PLATE. 2 OCCUPANTS (CFI & STUDENT); NO SURVIVORS AIRCRAFT DESTROYED.
NTSB investigation
The NTSB’s investigation of this event, with its probable cause and findings. Matched to this report by N-number and date.