CEN16FA145

The flight instructor was demonstrating a takeoff to the student pilot in the tailwheel-equipped airplane. During the takeoff, the instructor was flying the airplane and was seated in the rear seat, with the student pilot observing and following along on the flight controls in the front seat. The instructor stated that, as the airplane lifted off the runway, he could not move the control stick. The airplane continued to climb in an increasingly nose-high pitch attitude, and the instructor stated that his efforts to apply forward pressure on the control stick had "no effect." The airplane subsequently experienced an aerodynamic stall and impacted the ground. Examination of the airframe and engine revealed no preimpact anomalies that would have precluded normal operation, and examination of the flight controls found no evidence of interference. While the flight instructor expected the student pilot to follow along on the control stick, it could not be determined if the student interfered with the movement of the controls. With the instructor unable to move the elevator control and reduce the nose-high pitch attitude of the airplane, the airplane exceeded its critical angle of attack and experienced an aerodynamic stall.

The 2-seat, tandem, high-wing, tailwheel-equipped, single-engine airplane was manufactured in 1979. Flight controls were installed at both seat locations. On April 8, 2016, at 1502 central daylight time, a Bellanca 7GCBC airplane, N5046N, was substantially damaged after impacting terrain near Mid-Way Regional Airport (JWY), Midlothian, Texas. The student pilot was fatally injured and the flight instructor sustained minor injuries. The airplane was registered to a private individual and was operated by Big Q Aviation, Midlothian, Texas, as a 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 instructional flight. Day visual meteorological conditions prevailed and no flight plan was filed for the local flight. The airplane was departing JWY at the time of the accident. The accident flight was the instructor's second flight of the day in the accident airplane; he stated that had experienced no anomalies with the airplane during the previous flight on the day of the accident. The flight was the student pilot's second flight lesson; the first was with a different instructor. The instructor stated that he and the student conducted a preflight inspection, which included inspection and operation of the flight control surfaces. After completing the preflight inspection, the student sat in the front seat and the instructor sat in the rear seat; they then taxied the airplane to the runway for takeoff. The instructor did not remember performing a flight control check before takeoff. He initiated the takeoff with the student pilot following along on the control stick. As the airplane lifted off the runway, the flight control stick "wasn't moving." The airplane continued to climb in an increasingly nose-high pitch attitude, and the instructor's efforts to apply forward pressure on the control stick had "no effect." He stated that the airplane was "well above" a 45° nose-up pitch attitude when the airplane experienced an aerodynamic stall and subsequently impacted the ground. The instructor stated that, due to the tandem seating configuration, he could not see if the student was inadvertently interfering with movement of the control stick. A witness reported that, after takeoff, the airplane entered a nose-up climb to about 50 feet above ground level, followed by a sudden roll to the left, then to the right, followed by a steep nose-down descent. Video images from a security camera about 700 ft to the west showed that, at the time of impact, the airplane was in a left-wing-low, nose-down attitude of about 45°. The airplane came to rest upright, and several witnesses quickly responded to give aid and assistance to the two occupants. There was a fuel spill but no postimpact fire. The airplane impacted the infield grass between the runway and the taxiway. A ground scar, about the length of the left wing, was found just before a shallow crater. The airplane's propeller was found outside of the crater and more ground scarring and debris led to the main wreckage. The mainwreckage consisted of the entire airplane and the engine. All major components remained attached to their mounts. The left wing leading edge was crushed rearward starting at the wing strut and the outer portion of the wing was deformed upward. The right wing was also crushed rearward starting at the wing strut, but lacked upward damage to its wingtip. The cabin area of the fuselage was distorted. The engine remained attached to the mounts and was bent upward. The instrument panel was crushed aft toward to the front cockpit seat. The rear seat was relatively undamaged. The empennage, elevator, and rudder were not damaged. The elevator trim was fully deflected trailing edge down. Examination of the airframe found that all flight controls remained securely fastened, and control continuity was established from the cockpit to the flight control surfaces. A thorough inspection of the control linkages and tubing did not find any evidence of jammed flight control, nor evidence of a foreign body obstructing the flight controls. The elevator trim cockpit control was damaged, and the elevator trim cables displayed slack. However, a photo of the airplane taken just before departure showed no evidence of a fully deflected elevator trim surface. The engine examination revealed engine valvetrain continuity and thumb compression to all cylinders. All screens were found clear of debris. The left magneto sparked at three of its outlets; the fourth outlet was impact-damaged. The right magneto sparked at all outlets. The carburetor was disassembled; fuel was found in the float chamber and the float was deformed. No preimpact anomalies were detected with the engine.