ERA16CA241

According to the pilot of the tailwheel- equipped airplane, the airport UNICOM operator advised the active runway as 33, and he did not listen to the automated weather broadcast. The pilot performed a two-point (main wheel) landing to the asphalt runway, and the airplane initially tracked straight, slightly right of centerline. As it decelerated, the tailwheel touched down, and the airplane began to turn left. The pilot applied right rudder with no effect. He then applied the right brake, but the airplane kept turning to the left. It then slid sideways, and the right main landing gear folded, damaging the outboard section of the right wing as it contacted the runway. When the pilot disembarked, he noted that he had landed with a quartering tailwind. Wind, recorded at the airport about the time of the accident, was from 190° at 7 knots, and runway 24 was available. The pilot reported that there were no preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. In retrospect, he noted that he landed on an advised runway instead of determining actual winds to land on the most appropriate runway.

According to the pilot of the tailwheel equipped airplane, the airport Universal Communications (UNICOM) operator advised the active runway as 33, and he did not listen to the automated weather broadcast. The pilot performed a two-point (main wheel) landing to the asphalt runway, and the airplane initially tracked straight, slightly right of centerline. As it decelerated, the tailwheel touched down and the airplane began to turn left. The pilot applied right rudder, with no effect. He then applied the right brake, but the airplane kept turning to the left. It then slid sideways, and the right main landing gear folded, damaging the outboard section of the right wing as it contacted the runway. When the pilot disembarked, he noted that he had landed with a quartering tailwind. Wind, recorded at the airport about the time of the accident, was from 190° true at 7 knots, and runway 24 was available. The pilot reported that there were no preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. In retrospect, he noted that he landed on an advised runway instead of determining actual winds to land on the most appropriate runway.