What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
The pilot was practicing short field landings on a plowed bean field. On this landing...he explained that he may have applied too much braking after a bounce. The marks on the field indicated a touchdown primarily on the left main, a bounce, then another touchdown, still primarily on the left main. The left main tire tread had a contact area filled with dirt and a corresponding shallow rut in the soil, indicating a wheel lock. There was a more shallow, less distinctive rut in the soil corresponding to the right main. Landing was primarily to the northwest. At about 100-150 feet from initial touchdown and at the end of the ruts, the aircraft pitched over, with its propeller contacting the ground, coming to rest on its back, wings level. The pilot egressed, uninjured. Both propeller blades bent, both wing tips damaged (slightly more to the left), both wing main struts bent, fuselage damage between wing and tail, vertical tail damaged and windscreen broken. Almost full fuel but no spill. The pilot explained that he had surveyed the field and his intended landing area the day before. The field appeared to be suitable with no immediate obstructions, ruts or washes in the landing area. There were no spas flags on the pilot or aircraft. He made all records available...which were well organized and documented. A recent airframe annual and engine 100 hr had been performed and documented. The aircraft appeared to be in good shape and well maintained. AD applicability and accomplishment were documented as part of the annual. The pilot was very forthcoming and cooperative. This aircraft is equipped with heel brakes...rather than the typical toe brakes...and that with only ~30 hrs of the pilot's tt (~240 hrs) in this aircraft...using heel brakes during a challenging landing could have been a contributing factor.
As the FAA filed it
THE PILOT WAS PRACTICING SHORT FIELD LANDINGS ON A PLOWED BEAN FIELD. ON THIS LANDING...HE EXPLAINED THAT HE MAY HAVE APPLIED TOO MUCH BRAKING AFTER A BOUNCE. THE MARKS ON THE FIELD INDICATED A TOUCHDOWN PRIMARILY ON THE LEFT MAIN, A BOUNCE, THEN ANOTHER TOUCHDOWN, STILL PRIMARILY ON THE LEFT MAIN. THE LEFT MAIN TIRE TREAD HAD A CONTACT AREA FILLED WITH DIRT AND A CORRESPONDING SHALLOW RUT IN THE SOIL, INDICATING A WHEEL LOCK. THERE WAS A MORE SHALLOW, LESS DISTINCTIVE RUT IN THE SOIL CORRESPONDING TO THE RIGHT MAIN. LANDING WAS PRIMARILY TO THE NORTHWEST. AT ABOUT 100-150 FEET FROM INITIAL TOUCHDOWN AND AT THE END OF THE RUTS, THE AIRCRAFT PITCHED OVER, WITH ITS PROPELLER CONTACTING THE GROUND, COMING TO REST ON ITS BACK, WINGS LEVEL. THE PILOT EGRESSED, UNINJURED. BOTH PROPELLER BLADES BENT, BOTH WING TIPS DAMAGED (SLIGHTLY MORE TO THE LEFT), BOTH WING MAIN STRUTS BENT, FUSELAGE DAMAGE BETWEEN WING AND TAIL, VERTICAL TAIL DAMAGED AND WINDSCREEN BROKEN. ALMOST FULL FUEL BUT NO SPILL.THE PILOT EXPLAINED THAT HE HAD SURVEYED THE FIELD AND HIS INTENDED LANDING AREA THE DAY BEFORE. THE FIELD APPEARED TO BE SUITABLE WITH NO IMMEDIATE OBSTRUCTIONS, RUTS OR WASHES IN THE LANDING AREA. THERE WERE NO SPAS FLAGS ON THE PILOT OR AIRCRAFT. HE MADE ALL RECORDS AVAILABLE...WHICH WERE WELL ORGANIZED AND DOCUMENTED. A RECENT AIRFRAME ANNUAL AND ENGINE 100 HR HAD BEEN PERFORMED AND DOCUMENTED. THE AIRCRAFT APPEARED TO BE IN GOOD SHAPE AND WELL MAINTAINED. AD APPLICABILITY AND ACCOMPLISHMENT WERE DOCUMENTED AS PART OF THE ANNUAL.THE PILOT WAS VERY FORTHCOMING AND COOPERATIVE.THIS AIRCRAFT IS EQUIPPED WITH HEEL BRAKES...RATHER THAN THE TYPICAL TOE BRAKES...AND THAT WITH ONLY ~30 HRS OF THE PILOT'S TT (~240 HRS) IN THIS AIRCRAFT...USING HEEL BRAKES DURING A CHALLENGING LANDING COULD HAVE BEEN A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR.
NTSB investigation
The NTSB’s investigation of this event, with its probable cause and findings. Matched to this report by N-number and date.