ERA14CA278

NTSB accident investigation · Cessna 172F · Mount Pleasant, PA · May 31, 2014

Accident · Minor injuriesData collectionFinal report
Date
May 31, 2014, 12:30 local (16:30 UTC)
Place
Mount Pleasant, PA
Injuries
1 minor, 1 uninjured
Damage
Substantial damage
Phase of flight
Takeoff
Aircraft
N8394UCessna 172F
Defining event
Takeoff-rejected takeoff: Runway excursion
Weather
Visual (VMC) · Day
Status
Completed · report September 2, 2014
Report
Approved by Office Director
NTSB office
Eastern Region Aviation
Parties
FAA/FSDO
FAA report
20140531008369A
Case key
89356

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 incorrect takeoff procedures from the soft grass runway and his delay in aborting the takeoff after recognizing slow acceleration.

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.

Action: delayed actionPersonnel issues › Action/decision · PilotCessna 172F: 2 casesAll aircraft: 894 casesProbable cause
Flight control system: tE flap control systemAircraft › Aircraft systems · Not used/operatedCessna 172F: 1 caseAll aircraft: 74 casesProbable cause
Runway/land/takeoff/taxi surface: soft surfaceEnvironmental issues › Physical environment · Effect on operationCessna 172F: 1 caseAll aircraft: 264 cases
Object/animal/substance: fence/fence postEnvironmental issues › Physical environment · Contributed to outcomeCessna 172F: 2 casesAll aircraft: 313 cases

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

The pilot stated that the preflight and engine run-up were satisfactory prior to the departure from the 1,641 foot long grass runway; the grass was a little high (estimated to be 5 to 6 inches) and soft due to rain from earlier that week. He consulted the POH and confirmed no flaps for the takeoff. After the engine run-up he taxied onto runway 32 and with the flaps retracted, applied full throttle noting 2,200 rpm, then released the brakes; the wind was from the northwest at 3 to 5 knots. He did not begin the takeoff roll utilizing soft field takeoff procedure of aft control input but did as the takeoff roll continued; later reporting that he "probably didn't initially have the yoke back enough." After a little more than ½ way down the runway at an airspeed less than 50 mph, he aborted the takeoff. Unable to stop, the airplane impacted a guard rail at the end of the runway causing the airplane to nose over. He further stated that there was no preimpact mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. He did state in the Recommendation Section of the submitted NTSB Pilot/Operator Aircraft Accident/Incident report that the accident might have been prevented by better assessment of the conditions/effects of the grass (softness) and length of the runway, and to either not initiate takeoff or abort sooner. He also indicated that the accident might have been prevented if, "…a perfect soft/short field technique was used." Postaccident inspection of the airplane by a Federal Aviation Administration airworthiness inspector revealed substantial damage to the right wing spar and structure adjacent to the left main landing gear attach point. Another FAA inspector reported no obstructions at the departure end of runway 32. A review of the airplane Owner's Manual indicates 0 flap extension is specified for normal and maximum performance takeoff; however, 10 degrees of flaps is specified to be used for minimum ground runs or for takeoff from soft or rough fields with no obstacles ahead. The takeoff performance chart does not indicate distances for grass runway. Excerpts of the Owner's Manual are contained in the NTSB public docket.

Factual narrative

The pilot stated that the preflight and engine run-up were satisfactory prior to the departure from the 1,641 foot long grass runway; the grass was a little high (estimated to be 5 to 6 inches) and soft due to rain from earlier that week. He consulted the POH and confirmed no flaps for the takeoff. After the engine run-up he taxied onto runway 32 and with the flaps retracted, applied full throttle noting 2,200 rpm, then released the brakes; the wind was from the northwest at 3 to 5 knots. He did not begin the takeoff roll utilizing soft field takeoff procedure of aft control input but did as the takeoff roll continued; later reporting that he "probably didn't initially have the yoke back enough." After a little more than ½ way down the runway at an airspeed less than 50 mph, he aborted the takeoff. Unable to stop, the airplane impacted a guard rail at the end of the runway causing the airplane to nose over. He further stated that there was no preimpact mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. He did state in the Recommendation Section of the submitted NTSB Pilot/Operator Aircraft Accident/Incident report that the accident might have been prevented by better assessment of the conditions/effects of the grass (softness) and length of the runway, and to either not initiate takeoff or abort sooner. He also indicated that the accident might have been prevented if, "…a perfect soft/short field technique was used."Postaccident inspection of the airplane by a Federal Aviation Administration airworthiness inspector revealed substantial damage to the right wing spar and structure adjacent to the left main landing gear attach point. Another FAA inspector reported no obstructions at the departure end of runway 32. A review of the airplane Owner's Manual indicates 0 flap extension is specified for normal and maximum performance takeoff; however, 10 degrees of flaps is specified to be used for minimum ground runs or for takeoff from soft or rough fields with no obstacles ahead. The takeoff performance chart does not indicate distances for grass runway. Excerpts of the Owner's Manual are contained in the NTSB public docket.

Aircraft

Registration
N8394U
Reported as
Cessna 172F
Category
Airplane
Serial number
17252294
Built
1964
Airframe hours
3,926
Engine
Cont Motor 0-300 SER, 145 horsepower, reciprocating
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Personal · Part 91
Operator
Daniels Arvin R
Registered owner
Daniels Arvin R
Airworthiness certificate
Standard, Utility; Standard, Normal
Last inspection
Annual · May 21, 2014
Departed
P45 · Mount Pleasant, PA
Destination
P45 · Mount Pleasant, PA
Airport
P45 · Mount Pleasant/Scottsdale, runway 32, 1,641 × 175 ft, grass/turf
Equipment
Stall warning system

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
73
Injuries
Minor
Certificate
Private
Airplane ratings
Single-engine land
Medical
Class 3, With waivers/limitations
Last flight review
August 16, 2013
Seat
Left
Restraint
Lap only
Flight hours
282 total · 69 in this make and model · 205 as pilot in command · 6 in the last 90 days · 1 in the last 30 days · 1 in the last 24 hours

Weather

Conditions
Visual (VMC) · Day
Wind
350° at 5 knots
Visibility
10 statute miles
Lowest ceiling
5,000 ft broken
Temperature
72 °F, dew point 52 °F
Altimeter
30.22 inHg
Observed at
LBE, 12 nm away

Docket · 7

The files NTSB released with the investigation on August 20, 2014, on NTSB’s docket system: statements, records, photos and specialists’ reports. 18.3 MB in all.

FAA reports on this event · 1

The FAA’s own accident and incident reports, matched to the aircraft by N-number and date.