What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
The aircraft was on final to 7L at kdvt with the student at the controls. The instructor reported the winds were from the south at 12 knots gusting to 18 knots. As the aircraft approached the runway it drifted left of centerline. The instructor called for a go around. Neither the instructor nor the student could confirm who manipulated the throttle control and flap lever. The instructor was unsure as to why the aircraft was continuing on a divergent path from the runway. The instructor took controls. Neither of them remember a positive exchange of the controls. The instructor stated ?it wasn?t climbing.? He banked aircraft to the right back towards the runway and felt contact with the ground. The instructor said he noticed a sign and pulled up to avoid it. The right wing made contact with the sign. The instructor said the aircraft stalled and impacted the ground on right side of runway.
The instructor and student both stated they combined two lessons (lesson 1.9 and 1.10 of approved tco) on the flight. The student had 11 hours of flight training prior to these lessons. On day of accident, they had flown 2.8 hrs. On a previous go around attempt, the instructor reported that the student retracted the flaps incorrectly and the issue was discussed. The student was flying this approach without assistance as the instructor?s hands were on the glare shield. The FAA inspectors could not communicate with the student effectively
As the FAA filed it
THE AIRCRAFT WAS ON FINAL TO 7L AT KDVT WITH THE STUDENT AT THE CONTROLS. THE INSTRUCTOR REPORTED THE WINDS WERE FROM THE SOUTH AT 12 KNOTS GUSTING TO 18 KNOTS. AS THE AIRCRAFT APPROACHED THE RUNWAY IT DRIFTED LEFT OF CENTERLINE. THE INSTRUCTOR CALLED FOR A GO AROUND. NEITHER THE INSTRUCTOR NOR THE STUDENT COULD CONFIRM WHO MANIPULATED THE THROTTLE CONTROL AND FLAP LEVER. THE INSTRUCTOR WAS UNSURE AS TO WHY THE AIRCRAFT WAS CONTINUING ON A DIVERGENT PATH FROM THE RUNWAY. THE INSTRUCTOR TOOK CONTROLS. NEITHER OF THEM REMEMBER A POSITIVE EXCHANGE OF THE CONTROLS. THE INSTRUCTOR STATED ?IT WASN?T CLIMBING.? HE BANKED AIRCRAFT TO THE RIGHT BACK TOWARDS THE RUNWAY AND FELT CONTACT WITH THE GROUND. THE INSTRUCTOR SAID HE NOTICED A SIGN AND PULLED UP TO AVOID IT. THE RIGHT WING MADE CONTACT WITH THE SIGN. THE INSTRUCTOR SAID THE AIRCRAFT STALLED AND IMPACTED THE GROUND ON RIGHT SIDE OF RUNWAY.
THE INSTRUCTOR AND STUDENT BOTH STATED THEY COMBINED TWO LESSONS (LESSON 1.9 AND 1.10 OF APPROVED TCO) ON THE FLIGHT. THE STUDENT HAD 11 HOURS OF FLIGHT TRAINING PRIOR TO THESE LESSONS. ON DAY OF ACCIDENT, THEY HAD FLOWN 2.8 HRS. ON A PREVIOUS GO AROUND ATTEMPT, THE INSTRUCTOR REPORTED THAT THE STUDENT RETRACTED THE FLAPS INCORRECTLY AND THE ISSUE WAS DISCUSSED. THE STUDENT WAS FLYING THIS APPROACH WITHOUT ASSISTANCE AS THE INSTRUCTOR?S HANDS WERE ON THE GLARE SHIELD. THE FAA INSPECTORS COULD NOT COMMUNICATE WITH THE STUDENT EFFECTIVELY
NTSB investigation
The NTSB’s investigation of this event, with its probable cause and findings. Matched to this report by N-number and date.
Other reports on N297PA · 2
Matched to the same aircraft by N-number and date.