What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
On 18 may, 2026 privacy data omitted while taking a single engine commercial check ride, had a hard landing at kues, creating light damage on the tail of aircraft privacy data omitted. During the approach to landing he was given clearance to land on runway 18, number 2 behind a landing aircraft. Mr. Kawamua stated that he had the aircraft in site. The DPE on board did not have the aircraft in site. Mr. Kawamura turned on base and the tower questioned again if he had the aircraft in site and again he stated yes. The DPE having acquired the aircraft asked tower permission to do a spacing turn in order to give the other aircraft some room and they felt they were too close. After completing the spacing turn Mr. Kawamura took back control of he aircraft an on attempting to land did not have the aircraft in a coordinated manner and it landed hard on the runway. The DPE then took control of the aircraft again as it veered off the runway into the grassy area between the runway and taxiway.
Upon interviewing Mr. Kawamura he stated that he in fact did not have the other aircraft in site when he responded to tower twice. He than also indicated that he exceeded the cross wind component of the aircraft by 3 degrees which was the leading factor to the unstabilized approach.
As the FAA filed it
ON 18 MAY, 2026 ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^ WHILE TAKING A SINGLE ENGINE COMMERCIAL CHECK RIDE, HAD A HARD LANDING AT KUES, CREATING LIGHT DAMAGE ON THE TAIL OF AIRCRAFT ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^. DURING THE APPROACH TO LANDING HE WAS GIVEN CLEARANCE TO LAND ON RUNWAY 18, NUMBER 2 BEHIND A LANDING AIRCRAFT. MR. KAWAMUA STATED THAT HE HAD THE AIRCRAFT IN SITE. THE DPE ON BOARD DID NOT HAVE THE AIRCRAFT IN SITE. MR. KAWAMURA TURNED ON BASE AND THE TOWER QUESTIONED AGAIN IF HE HAD THE AIRCRAFT IN SITE AND AGAIN HE STATED YES. THE DPE HAVING ACQUIRED THE AIRCRAFT ASKED TOWER PERMISSION TO DO A SPACING TURN IN ORDER TO GIVE THE OTHER AIRCRAFT SOME ROOM AND THEY FELT THEY WERE TOO CLOSE. AFTER COMPLETING THE SPACING TURN MR. KAWAMURA TOOK BACK CONTROL OF HE AIRCRAFT AN ON ATTEMPTING TO LAND DID NOT HAVE THE AIRCRAFT IN A COORDINATED MANNER AND IT LANDED HARD ON THE RUNWAY. THE DPE THEN TOOK CONTROL OF THE AIRCRAFT AGAIN AS IT VEERED OFF THE RUNWAY INTO THE GRASSY AREA BETWEEN THE RUNWAY AND TAXIWAY.
UPON INTERVIEWING MR. KAWAMURA HE STATED THAT HE IN FACT DID NOT HAVE THE OTHER AIRCRAFT IN SITE WHEN HE RESPONDED TO TOWER TWICE. HE THAN ALSO INDICATED THAT HE EXCEEDED THE CROSS WIND COMPONENT OF THE AIRCRAFT BY 3 DEGREES WHICH WAS THE LEADING FACTOR TO THE UNSTABILIZED APPROACH.