# NTSB ERA13CA377: Cessna 172P, N98923, Mitchellville, MD, August 24, 2013

- Type: NTSB accident investigation
- Classification: Accident · No injuries · Data collection · Final report
- Date: August 24, 2013, 10:00 local (14:00 UTC)
- Place: Mitchellville, MD
- Coordinates: 38.941112, -76.772224 (estimated)
- Nearby events: https://openairdocs.org/map.md?lat=38.9411&lon=-76.7722&mi=10
- Phase of flight: [Landing](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-phases/550) (OpenAirDocs' grouping)
- Defining event: [Landing-flare/touchdown: Loss of control on ground](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/230)
- Highest injury: No injuries
- Injuries: 4 uninjured
- Status: Completed, report October 21, 2013
- Report: Approved by Office Director
- NTSB office: Eastern Region Aviation
- Parties: FAA/FSDO
- NTSB case key (mKey): 87863
- NTSB case page: https://web.ntsb.gov/investigations/?ntsbnumber=ERA13CA377
- NTSB report (PDF, downloads): https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/87863/pdf
- NTSB docket: https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=87863
- Page: https://openairdocs.org/ntsb/ERA13CA377

## Probable cause

The pilot’s decision to depart with a known deficiency following a hard landing. Contributing to the accident was an anomaly of the airplane’s nosewheel steering that could not be replicated during post-accident examination.

## Findings

NTSB's coded findings; those marked are part of the probable cause.

- [Landing gear system: nose/tail landing gear](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/01023220): Aircraft › Aircraft systems · Malfunction (probable cause); cases with it: [Cessna 172P, 3 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/01023220/cases.md?model=2072436), [All aircraft, 185 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/01023220/cases.md)
- [Info processing/decision: decision making/judgment](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/02041520): Personnel issues › Action/decision · Pilot (probable cause); cases with it: [Cessna 172P, 20 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/02041520/cases.md?model=2072436), [All aircraft, 3,098 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/02041520/cases.md)

## Sequence of events

The events NTSB coded, in order, by phase of flight. The defining event best describes what happened.

- [Landing-flare/touchdown: Loss of control on ground](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/230) (defining event); cases with it: [Cessna 172P, 37 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/230/sequence.md?model=2072436), [All aircraft, 4,585 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/230/sequence.md)
- [Approach-VFR go-around: Off-field or emergency landing](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/440); cases with it: [Cessna 172P, 22 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/440/sequence.md?model=2072436), [All aircraft, 3,365 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/440/sequence.md)
- [Landing-landing roll: Landing gear collapse](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/094); cases with it: [Cessna 172P, 7 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/094/sequence.md?model=2072436), [All aircraft, 1,787 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/094/sequence.md)
- [Landing-landing roll: Nose over/nose down](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/096); cases with it: [Cessna 172P, 18 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/096/sequence.md?model=2072436), [All aircraft, 2,287 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/096/sequence.md)

## Analysis

The pilot reported that while taxiing for takeoff for a local flight with passengers, the right rudder felt “stiff.” Once in the air, the rudder operated normally; however, the pilot’s first landing was “hard.” After picking up a second set of passengers, the pilot noticed that while taxiing back to the runway, the right rudder felt even more stiff. At one point during the taxi, the pilot “stomped” on the rudder to steer the airplane right, but did not think much of the anomaly, as the airplane seemed to move normally after applying additional engine power. During the subsequent takeoff, the pilot noticed that the right rudder pedal continued to feel stiffer than it had during the previous takeoff. During the second landing, the airplane veered immediately left upon touchdown and departed the runway. The pilot attempted to correct the airplane’s course, but the right rudder pedal was unresponsive. The pilot then attempted to abort the landing, but once in the air, he realized the airplane would not be able to climb above approaching trees and decided to land the airplane in a farm field. During the landing the nose landing gear collapsed and the airplane nosed over, resulting in substantial damage. A Federal Aviation Administration inspector examined the airframe and flight controls following the accident and confirmed that the rudder was free to move, but that the nose steering system of the airplane had been compromised during the accident and its pre-impact functionality could not be determined. When asked how the accident could have been prevented the pilot stated, “After a hard land[ing] have the plane inspected – Don’t takeoff even if it seems normal.”

## Factual narrative

The pilot reported that while taxiing for takeoff for a local flight with passengers, the right rudder felt “stiff.” Once in the air, the rudder operated normally; however, the pilot’s first landing was “hard.” After picking up a second set of passengers, the pilot noticed that while taxiing back to the runway, the right rudder felt even more stiff. At one point during the taxi, the pilot “stomped” on the rudder to steer the airplane right, but did not think much of the anomaly, as the airplane seemed to move normally after applying additional engine power. During the subsequent takeoff, the pilot noticed that the right rudder pedal continued to feel stiffer than it had during the previous takeoff. During the second landing, the airplane veered immediately left upon touchdown and departed the runway. The pilot attempted to correct the airplane’s course, but the right rudder pedal was unresponsive. The pilot then attempted to abort the landing, but once in the air, he realized the airplane would not be able to climb above approaching trees and decided to land the airplane in a farm field. During the landing the nose landing gear collapsed and the airplane nosed over, resulting in substantial damage. A Federal Aviation Administration inspector examined the airframe and flight controls following the accident and confirmed that the rudder was free to move, but that the nose steering system of the airplane had been compromised during the accident and its pre-impact functionality could not be determined. When asked how the accident could have been prevented the pilot stated, “After a hard land[ing] have the plane inspected – Don’t takeoff even if it seems normal.”

## Aircraft

- Registration: [N98923](https://openairdocs.org/aircraft/N98923), registered now, S/N 17276381, built 1985 (OpenAirDocs)
- Reported make and model: CESSNA 172P
- Registry model: [Cessna 172P](https://openairdocs.org/model/cessna-172p) (registry code 2072436) (OpenAirDocs)
- Registry engine: [Lycoming 0-320 series](https://openairdocs.org/engine/lycoming-0-320-series) (registry code 41508, reciprocating) (OpenAirDocs)
- Category: Airplane
- Serial number: 17276381
- Airframe hours: 12252
- Engines: LYCOMING O-320-D2J 160 horsepower reciprocating
- Damage: Substantial damage
- Flight: Personal, Part 91
- Operator: Freeway Airport Inc
- Registered owner: Freeway Airport Inc
- Airworthiness certificate: Standard, Normal; Standard, Utility
- Last inspection: 100 hour, June 26, 2013
- Departed: W00, Mitchellville, MD
- Destination: W00, Mitchellville, MD
- Flight plan: VFR
- Airport: W00, Freeway Airport, runway 36, 2,420 × 40 ft, asphalt

## Flight crew

As NTSB recorded them. NTSB leaves out names.

- Pilot; age 43; injuries: none; private; airplane ratings: single-engine land; medical: class 3, without waivers/limitations; last flight review June 14, 2013; seat: left; flight hours: 80 total, 80 in this make and model, 17 as pilot in command, 3 in the last 90 days, 3 in the last 30 days, 1 in the last 24 hours

## Weather

- Conditions: Visual (VMC), Day
- Wind: 40° at 4 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Lowest ceiling: none
- Temperature: 73 °F, dew point 61 °F
- Altimeter: 30.27 inHg
- Observed at: CGS, 7 nm away

## FAA reports on this event (1)

The FAA's own accident and incident reports, matched to the aircraft by N-number and date (OpenAirDocs).

- [Accident 20130824016549A](https://openairdocs.org/incident/20130824016549A), Aug 24, 2013: Cessna 172P, Mitchellville, MD, Substantial damage. There was a right crosswind on runway 36 (050@08KT). The pilot stated he was in a crab at touchdown and the aircraft immediately veered left. He had right…

## Other investigations on N98923 (2)

From the NTSB's public API. Aircraft are matched to registry aircraft by N-number and event date, checked against the reported serial number, make and model; the registry's history has gaps, so older matches can be wrong. Compare the reported make and model.

- [NTSB CHI90LA063](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb/CHI90LA063), Jan 6, 1990: Cessna 172 (N98923), Newark, IL, substantial damage. Probable cause: IMPROPER PLANNING/DECISION BY THE PILOT. THE WET CONDITION OF THE GRASS RUNWAY WAS A RELATED FACTOR.
- [NTSB CHI89LA081](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb/CHI89LA081), Apr 25, 1989: Cessna 172D (N98923), Ottawa, IL, substantial damage. Probable cause: STUDENT PILOT'S CONTINUING AN APPROACH TO LANDING BEYOND THE POINT WHERE SHE COULD BRING THE AIRCRAFT TO A CONTROLLED STOP ON THE REMAINING RUNWAY SURFACE.

## Docket (4 files)

The files NTSB released with the investigation on September 25, 2013, on NTSB's docket system: https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=87863. 4.5 MB in all.

- Pilot/Operator Aircraft Accident Report, NTSB Form 6120.1 (item 1, .PDF, 384 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40400824&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Pilot%2FOperator%20Aircraft%20Accident%20Report,%20NTSB%20Form%206120.1-Redacted.PDF
- Record of Correspondence - Telephone Interview, Pilot (item 2, .PDF, 189 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40401222&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Record%20of%20Correspondence%20-%20Telephone%20Interview,%20Pilot-Master.PDF
- Record of Correspondence - FAA Inspector's Statement (Summary) (item 3, .PDF, 195 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40400826&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Record%20of%20Correspondence%20-%20FAA%20Inspector%27s%20Statement%20(Summary)-Master.PDF
- Photo 1 - Airplane from Right (Photo Courtesy of FAA) (item 4, .PDF, 3.8 MB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40401225&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%201%20-%20Airplane%20from%20Right%20(Photo%20Courtesy%20of%20FAA)-Master.PDF

From the NTSB's public API. Aircraft are matched to registry aircraft by N-number and event date, checked against the reported serial number, make and model; the registry's history has gaps, so older matches can be wrong. Compare the reported make and model.

---
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.