What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
On 08/31/2018, the PIC and her passenger were conducting a personal flight from southern California to northern California and were landing for fuel at Porterville airport, Porterville CA. During a phone conversation, the pilot describe the event as such. When entering the traffic pattern, the PIC asked her passenger to observe the windsock and let her know what the wind was doing. His report was that the wind was variable and that the wind sock was not stable but changing directions continuously. The PIC then stated that the approach was normal up until the point of touchdown. Shortly after touchdown, the aircraft made an uncommanded turn to the right, seemed to have accelerated and, headed off the runway to the right. The pilot stated that she was unable to correct the misalignment and ultimately, the aircraft departed the runway to the right and contacted runway marking signs before coming to a stop. The aircraft was substantially damaged by the metal runway signs, both the pilot and passenger were uninjured. After departing the aircraft, the pilot and passenger took photographs of the crash seen to document the event for their own records. During this time, they stated that they observed two or three ?dust devils? In the vicinity of the runway. Also noted, was that while facing the approach and of the runway to obtain pictures, they felt a strong gust of wind in their face. Leading them to believe that they may have encountered a tail wind while on their landing roll-out. When questioned about the possibility of a mechanical failure of an aircraft system contributing to the cause of the accident, she stated that she was not sure. She also stated that a local mechanic had performed a brief inspection of the aircraft after the accident and stated that the ?right? Brake pedal seemed mushy.
After the occurrence, airport personnel moved the aircraft from the infield area to the parking area. Neither the NTSB nor the FAA were ever formally notified of the accident. The following week, inspectors from this office investigating a separate occurrence at the same airport, confirmed that the aircraft had been involved in an accident and obtained basic information from the aircraft. Until the date of discovery, staff from our office had only heard reports of more than one accident at the same airport, over the same weekend, threw local news reports. Therefore, it took substantial time to locate and make contact with the registered owner and the pilot who was operating the aircraft on the day of the accident.
As the FAA filed it
ON 08/31/2018, THE PIC AND HER PASSENGER WERE CONDUCTING A PERSONAL FLIGHT FROM SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TO NORTHERN CALIFORNIA AND WERE LANDING FOR FUEL AT PORTERVILLE AIRPORT, PORTERVILLE CA. DURING A PHONE CONVERSATION, THE PILOT DESCRIBE THE EVENT AS SUCH. WHEN ENTERING THE TRAFFIC PATTERN, THE PIC ASKED HER PASSENGER TO OBSERVE THE WINDSOCK AND LET HER KNOW WHAT THE WIND WAS DOING. HIS REPORT WAS THAT THE WIND WAS VARIABLE AND THAT THE WIND SOCK WAS NOT STABLE BUT CHANGING DIRECTIONS CONTINUOUSLY. THE PIC THEN STATED THAT THE APPROACH WAS NORMAL UP UNTIL THE POINT OF TOUCHDOWN. SHORTLY AFTER TOUCHDOWN, THE AIRCRAFT MADE AN UNCOMMANDED TURN TO THE RIGHT, SEEMED TO HAVE ACCELERATED AND, HEADED OFF THE RUNWAY TO THE RIGHT. THE PILOT STATED THAT SHE WAS UNABLE TO CORRECT THE MISALIGNMENT AND ULTIMATELY, THE AIRCRAFT DEPARTED THE RUNWAY TO THE RIGHT AND CONTACTED RUNWAY MARKING SIGNS BEFORE COMING TO A STOP. THE AIRCRAFT WAS SUBSTANTIALLY DAMAGED BY THE METAL RUNWAY SIGNS, BOTH THE PILOT AND PASSENGER WERE UNINJURED. AFTER DEPARTING THE AIRCRAFT, THE PILOT AND PASSENGER TOOK PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE CRASH SEEN TO DOCUMENT THE EVENT FOR THEIR OWN RECORDS. DURING THIS TIME, THEY STATED THAT THEY OBSERVED TWO OR THREE ?DUST DEVILS? IN THE VICINITY OF THE RUNWAY. ALSO NOTED, WAS THAT WHILE FACING THE APPROACH AND OF THE RUNWAY TO OBTAIN PICTURES, THEY FELT A STRONG GUST OF WIND IN THEIR FACE. LEADING THEM TO BELIEVE THAT THEY MAY HAVE ENCOUNTERED A TAIL WIND WHILE ON THEIR LANDING ROLL-OUT. WHEN QUESTIONED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF A MECHANICAL FAILURE OF AN AIRCRAFT SYSTEM CONTRIBUTING TO THE CAUSE OF THE ACCIDENT, SHE STATED THAT SHE WAS NOT SURE. SHE ALSO STATED THAT A LOCAL MECHANIC HAD PERFORMED A BRIEF INSPECTION OF THE AIRCRAFT AFTER THE ACCIDENT AND STATED THAT THE ?RIGHT? BRAKE PEDAL SEEMED MUSHY.
AFTER THE OCCURRENCE, AIRPORT PERSONNEL MOVED THE AIRCRAFT FROM THE INFIELD AREA TO THE PARKING AREA. NEITHER THE NTSB NOR THE FAA WERE EVER FORMALLY NOTIFIED OF THE ACCIDENT. THE FOLLOWING WEEK, INSPECTORS FROM THIS OFFICE INVESTIGATING A SEPARATE OCCURRENCE AT THE SAME AIRPORT, CONFIRMED THAT THE AIRCRAFT HAD BEEN INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT AND OBTAINED BASIC INFORMATION FROM THE AIRCRAFT. UNTIL THE DATE OF DISCOVERY, STAFF FROM OUR OFFICE HAD ONLY HEARD REPORTS OF MORE THAN ONE ACCIDENT AT THE SAME AIRPORT, OVER THE SAME WEEKEND, THREW LOCAL NEWS REPORTS. THEREFORE, IT TOOK SUBSTANTIAL TIME TO LOCATE AND MAKE CONTACT WITH THE REGISTERED OWNER AND THE PILOT WHO WAS OPERATING THE AIRCRAFT ON THE DAY OF THE ACCIDENT.
NTSB investigation
The NTSB’s investigation of this event, with its probable cause and findings. Matched to this report by N-number and date.