# Incident 20230928016059I: Cessna 140, Leesburg, VA, September 28, 2023 - Type: FAA incident report (Accident/Incident Data System), as reported - Date: September 28, 2023, 14:40 local time - Place: Leesburg, VA - Airport: Leesburg Executive - Damage: Minor damage - Phase of flight: Landing: Rollout - Operating rules: General operating rules (Part 91) - Location: 39.0780° N, 77.5575° W: Placed by OpenAirDocs at LEESBURG EXEC (JYO), within about a mile (OpenAirDocs) - Nearby events: https://openairdocs.org/map.md?lat=39.0780&lon=-77.5575&mi=10 - Aircraft: N4088N, registered now (https://openairdocs.org/aircraft/N4088N) (OpenAirDocs) - Registry model: Cessna 140 (registry code 2071602, https://openairdocs.org/model/cessna-140) (OpenAirDocs) - Registry engine: Continental C85 series (registry code 17008, https://openairdocs.org/engine/continental-c85-series) (OpenAirDocs) - Reported make and model: CESSNA 140 - Reported engine: CONT MOTOR C85 SERIES - People aboard: 2 - Fatal injuries: 0 - Other injuries: 0 - Pilot certificates: Commercial pilot, flight instructor - Pilot flight hours: 4,000 total, 250 in this make and model, 100 in the last 90 days - FAA source: FAA Aviation Safety Information Portal (https://asip.faa.gov/) - Page: https://openairdocs.org/incident/20230928016059I ## Narrative As the FAA filed it, in capitals; the FAA replaces private details with ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^. INVESTIGATION. I WAS NOTIFIED BY ACCIDENT/INCIDENT INITIAL REPORT THAT ON SEPTEMBER 28, 2023, AT 14:40L EDT (18:40Z), ON A LOCAL VFR FLIGHT PLAN, AIRMAN WAS OPERATING A PIPER 140, WHEN, DURING LANDING ON RWY 35, EXITED THE RUNWAY, STRUCK A RUNWAY LIGHT, RETURNED TO THE RUNWAY, AND TAXIED TO PARKING. NO VIOLATION HAS BEEN DETERMINED. THE FAA LEARNED OF THIS INCIDENT ON SEPTEMBER 28, 2023. ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS (RCA). THE FLIGHT WAS AN INSTRUCTIONAL FLIGHT WITH AIRMAN ACTING AS THE INSTRUCTOR AND PIC. THE STUDENT IS AN EXPERIENCED PILOT WHO IS WORKING ON THEIR TAILWHEEL ENDORSEMENT. THIS WAS THE SECOND INSTRUCTIONAL FLIGHT WITH THE STUDENT. THE ENTIRE FLIGHT WAS CONDUCTED IN THE TRAFFIC PATTERN PRACTICING TAKE OFF AND LANDINGS (TOUCH AND GOES). THE STUDENT COMPLETED APPROXIMATELY 8-10 THREE POINT LANDINGS AND TAKEOFFS SUCCESSFULLY WITH LITTLE OR NO INTERVENTION BY THE INSTRUCTOR. THE INSTRUCTOR THEN DEMONSTRATED A WHEEL LANDING TO THE STUDENT. THE STUDENT ACCOMPLISHED THEIR FIRST WHEEL LANDING REASONABLY WELL ALTHOUGH THE INSTRUCTOR HAD TO ASSIST WITH ADDITIONAL FORWARD YOKE PRESSURE ON TOUCHDOWN. INSTRUCTOR BELIEVES THAT THE STUDENT DID APPLY FORWARD PRESSURE BUT SOMEWHAT INADEQUATE. THE SECOND LANDING WAS SIMILAR BUT AFTER TOUCHDOWN, THE AIRCRAFT VEERED TO THE LEFT FOR REASONS THE INSTRUCTOR IS UNABLE TO DETERMINE. THE VEER WAS NOT VIEWED BY THE INSTRUCTOR AS EXCESSIVE BUT THE STUDENT OVERCORRECTED USING HARD RIGHT RUDDER WHICH INSTRUCTOR WAS UNABLE TO COUNTERACT IN A TIMELY MANNER. THE AIRCRAFT DEPARTED TO THE RIGHT WITH THE LEFT LANDING GEAR HITTING THE RUNWAY LIGHT. INSTRUCTOR NOTED THAT UPON HITTING THE LIGHT, IT DISINTEGRATED WITH DEBRIS FLYING. INSTRUCTOR RECOVERED THE AIRCRAFT BACK TO THE RUNWAY AND NOTED THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO TAXI UNEVENTFULLY. INSTRUCTOR REPORTED TO THE TOWER CONTROLLER THAT THEY HAD IMPACTED THE RUNWAY LIGHT, AND THEY UNEVENTFULLY CONTINUED TAXI TO PARKING. ROOT CAUSE WAS INADEQUATE AND UNTIMELY CORRECTION BY THE INSTRUCTOR TO EXCESSIVE APPLICATION OF CONTROLS BY THE STUDENT PILOT CONDUCTING THE LANDING. WIND WAS VARIABLE AT 5 KNOTS, THEREFORE, WIND WAS LIKELY NOT A FACTOR IN THIS INCIDENT. ROOT CAUSE: CATEGORY B HUMAN PERFORMANCE. SUBCATEGORY: B3 MISTAKE (INADEQUATE AND UNTIMELY CORRECTION OF EXCESSIVE CONTROL APPLICATION BY THE STUDENT PILOT). CORRECTIVE ACTION. IT IS DIFFICULT TO SUGGEST CORRECTIVE ACTION BEYOND THE INSTRUCTOR INTENDING TO TAKE CONTROL EARLIER IN THE LANDING SEQUENCE AT THE SLIGHTEST INDICATION OF DIVERGENCE FROM NORMAL PARAMETERS. IN THIS CASE THE STUDENT WAS EXPERIENCED, HAD DEMONSTRATED SEVERAL SATISFACTORY LANDINGS, AND THE DIVERGENCE WAS NOT JUDGED BY THE INSTRUCTOR TO BE EXCESSIVE. HOWEVER, THE STUDENT'S CORRECTION WAS SUDDEN AND EXCESSIVE, WHICH IS VERY DIFFICULT, IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE, TO ANTICIPATE AND TO TAKE IMMEDIATE CORRECTIVE ACTION WITHOUT EXERCISING EXCESSIVE CONTROL DURING THE STUDENT'S LANDINGS WHICH WOULD NORMALLY TEND TO INTERFERE WITH EFFECTIVE LEARNING. INSTRUCTOR WILL CONTINUE TO EXERCISE CAUTION WITH THE INTENT OF EARLY AND TIMELY INTERVENTION IN THE FUTURE IN THE EVENT OF EXCESSIVE CONTROL APPLICATION BY THE STUDENT. COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. THERE WAS NO VIOLATION OF 14 CFR OR GENERAL SAFE OPERATING PRACTICES. INSTRUCTOR AND STUDENT DISPLAY A CONSCIENTIOUS AND COMPLIANT ATTITUDE. I AM CONFIDENT THAT BOTH WILL CONTINUE TO IMPROVE THEIR SKILLS IN A SAFE AND COMPLIANT MANNER AND RECOMMEND NO FURTHER ACTION AT THIS TIME. From the FAA Accident/Incident Data System. Reports are matched to registry aircraft 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. For accidents, the NTSB's own investigation is the fuller record. --- OpenAirDocs.org is an independent research project of [Contrail Labs](https://contraillabs.com/). It is not affiliated with the FAA or the NTSB. Source documents are U.S. government works in the public domain.