- Date
- October 6, 2011, 11:00 local (15:00 UTC)
- Place
- Culpeper, VA
- Injuries
- 1 uninjured
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Phase of flight
- Landing
- Aircraft
- N9268CPiper PA-28R-201T
- Defining event
- Landing-landing roll: Landing gear collapse
- Weather
- Visual (VMC) · Day
- Status
- Completed · report January 18, 2012
- Report
- Approved by Office Director
- NTSB office
- Eastern Region Aviation
- Parties
- FAA/FSDO
- Case key
- 82072
From the NTSB’s public API. By law, NTSB reports can’t be used as evidence in lawsuits over the accident.
On this page
Probable cause
The pilot's inadequate knowledge of the airplane's emergency gear extension procedures, which resulted in his failure to successfully perform a manual extension of the landing gear.
Findings · 4
NTSB’s coded findings. Those marked are part of the probable cause; the rest are factors or other findings. Under each, the cases with the same finding.
Sequence of events
The events NTSB coded, in order, by phase of flight. The defining event is the one that best describes the accident. Under each, the cases with the same event anywhere in their sequence.
Analysis
According to the pilot/owner, the airplane sustained a loss of electrical power, and he decided to return to the airport. On the downwind leg of the traffic pattern, the pilot moved the landing gear lever to the down position but did not see the three green lights or hear the landing gear extend. He then called a maintenance facility located at the airport and asked them to verify if the landing gear was down while he performed a low pass over the runway. The maintenance personnel indicated that the gear was not down; the pilot attempted an emergency gear extension procedure. After another low pass, the maintenance personnel stated that the gear was extended, and the pilot landed the airplane. During the landing roll, the right main landing gear collapsed, and the airplane veered off the runway, impacting a runway light, which resulted in substantial damage to the right wing. A postaccident examination of the airplane revealed that the battery had been removed, and, therefore, the reason for an electrical failure could not be determined. Examination and operation of the landing gear revealed no anomalies. The pilot owned the airplane for about 8 years prior to the accident and had accumulated 1,650 hours of flight time in the make and model; however, the pilot could not successfully perform or articulate the emergency gear extension procedure. The pilot was also unable to locate the emergency landing gear extension procedure in the pilot’s operating handbook.
Factual narrative
According to the pilot/owner, the airplane experienced a loss of electrical power and he decided to return to the airport. On the downwind leg of the traffic pattern, the pilot moved the landing gear lever to the down position, but did not see the three green lights or hear the landing gear extend. He then called a maintenance facility located at the airport and asked them to verify if the landing gear was down while he performed a low pass over the runway. The maintenance personnel indicated that the gear was not down, and the pilot attempted an emergency gear extension procedure. After another low pass, the maintenance personnel stated that the gear was extended and the pilot landed the airplane. During the landing roll, the right main landing gear collapsed, the airplane veered off the runway, and impacted a runway light, which resulted in substantial damage to the right wing. A postaccident inspection of the airplane by a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspector revealed that the battery had been removed prior to his arrival, therefore, the reason for the electrical failure could not be determined. Examination and operation of the landing gear revealed no anomalies. The pilot owned the airplane for about 8 years prior to the accident, and had accumulated 1,650 hours of flight time in make and model. When asked by the FAA inspector, the pilot could not successfully perform nor articulate the emergency gear extension procedure. The pilot was then handed the Pilot's Operating Handbook (POH) and asked to locate the procedure in the handbook. The pilot was unable to locate the emergency landing gear extension procedure in the POH.
Aircraft
- Registration
- N9268C
- Reported as
- Piper PA-28R-201T
- Category
- Airplane
- Serial number
- 28R-7803248
- Airframe hours
- 2,210
- Engine
- Cont Motor TSIO-360 SER, 225 horsepower, reciprocating
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal · Part 91
- Airworthiness certificate
- Standard, Normal
- Last inspection
- Annual · July 1, 2011
- Departed
- CJR · Culpeper, VA
- Destination
- CJR · Culpeper, VA
- Airport
- CJR · Culpeper Regional Airprot, runway 04, 5,000 × 100 ft, asphalt
Matched to the registry by N-number and the event date; the registry’s history has gaps, so older matches can be wrong. Compare the reported make and model.
Flight crew
As NTSB recorded them. NTSB leaves out names.
- Role
- Pilot
- Age
- 63
- Injuries
- None
- Certificate
- Commercial
- Airplane ratings
- Single-engine land
- Instrument ratings
- Airplane
- Medical
- Class 3, With waivers/limitations
- Last flight review
- March 4, 2011
- Seat
- Left
- Flight hours
- 3,342 total · 1,650 in this make and model · 3,200 as pilot in command · 10 in the last 90 days · 1 in the last 30 days
Weather
- Conditions
- Visual (VMC) · Day
- Wind
- 60° at 3 knots
- Visibility
- 10 statute miles
- Lowest ceiling
- None
- Temperature
- 63 °F, dew point 46 °F
- Altimeter
- 30.42 inHg
- Observed at
- CJR
Docket · 4
The files NTSB released with the investigation on December 8, 2011, on NTSB’s docket system: statements, records, photos and specialists’ reports. 1.0 MB in all.