# NTSB MIA01LA118: Cessna 172R, N436ER, Ormond Beach, FL, April 9, 2001 - Type: NTSB accident investigation - Classification: Accident · No injuries · Limited investigation · Final report - Date: April 9, 2001, 09:00 local (13:00 UTC) - Place: Ormond Beach, FL - Location: 29.3011° N, 81.1138° W: Placed by OpenAirDocs at ORMOND BEACH MUNI (OMN), within about a mile (OpenAirDocs) - Nearby events: https://openairdocs.org/map.md?lat=29.3011&lon=-81.1138&mi=10 - Phase of flight: [Landing](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-phases/550) (OpenAirDocs' grouping) - Highest injury: No injuries - Injuries: 2 uninjured - Status: Completed, report April 1, 2003 - Report: Approved by Office Director - Parties: FAA FSDO - NTSB case key (mKey): 52044 - NTSB case page: https://web.ntsb.gov/investigations/?ntsbnumber=MIA01LA118 - NTSB report (PDF, downloads): https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/52044/pdf - Page: https://openairdocs.org/ntsb/MIA01LA118 ## Probable cause the flight instructor's inadequate supervision and the dual student's improper use of brakes which resulted in the loss of directional control and collision with a wind sock. Contributing to the accident was the flight instructor's failure to follow procedures/directives. ## Sequence of events In NTSB's coding before 2008 (https://www.ntsb.gov/GILS/Documents/codman.pdf). - Loss of control - on ground/water, landing - flare/touchdown - supervision - inadequate, pilot in command(cfi) (cause) - brakes(normal) - improper use of, dual student (cause) - directional control - not maintained, flightcrew (cause) - procedures/directives - not followed, pilot in command(cfi) (cause) - On ground/water collision with object, landing - roll - object - wind sock/indicator ## Analysis The student said he had some difficulty with the traffic pattern and that during the landing as he started reducing power and initiating the flare, it seemed like it was a high flare, and they hit the runway hard. He said the instructor told him to go around, so he gave the airplane full power and tried to liftoff, but he "blew to the left, and headed off the runway." The instructor stated that she immediately told the student to go around, but as he added power, the airplane headed hard to the left, and did not liftoff. She said she yelled "my controls" but the left wing hit the wind sock. She said she did not know what caused the airplane to turn so severely, and further stated that she taught the student "CRAMB, CLIMB, CLEAN, COMUNICATE," when executing go-arounds, and the "CLEAN" part of the sequence had not been performed, since the climb had not been established. She said that full flaps were still down, and had been down before, during, and after the event. The instructor said that the student has large feet and she had warned him several times about making sure they were far enough back on the floor so that he would not hit the brakes accidentally. A functional check of the aircraft did not identify any preaccident failure or malfunction to the aircraft or any if its systems. The information handbook for the Cessna 172R, Section 4 specifies that the wing flaps must be retracted to 20 degrees immediately after the application of full throttle while executing balked landings. ## Factual narrative HISTORY OF FLIGHT On April 9, 2001, about 0900 eastern daylight time, a Cessna 172R, N436ER, registered to Boeing Capital, and operated by Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, as a Title 14 CFR Part 91 instructional flight, departed the runway during landing and collided with a wind sock at Ormond Beach, Florida. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan was filed. The commercial-rated flight instructor, and the dual student were not injured. The airplane incurred substantial damage. The flight originated from Ormond Beach, the same day, about 0845. The student pilot stated that he was piloting the aircraft, and had been having trouble with the traffic pattern. He said that during the landing that precipitated the accident, he had flown a perfect pattern, but as he started getting closer to the runway, and started the transition by reducing power and initiating the flare, it seemed like it was a high flare because he felt the airplane sink under him. He said they hit the runway hard, and he heard the flight instructor say go around, so he gave the airplane full power and tried to climb out, but he was blown left, and headed off the runway. The flight instructor stated the student had made a nice approach, but began to flare too early. The instructor further stated that she immediately told the student to go around. She said the student added power, but in less time than it takes to blink an eye the airplane was headed hard to the left, and was not climbing. The instructor said she yelled "my controls" but the aircraft was headed directly towards the wind sock. She said the left wing hit the wind sock, and she was able to stop the airplane past the wind sock in the grass. She said the whole event happened fast, and she was focused on looking outside the airplane and did not know what abrupt control input by the student, along with the crosswind from the right, caused the airplane to change direction so severely. She said the student had been pointing the nose of the aircraft down the runway correctly, and even had proper crosswind correction during the flare. The instructor stated that the airplane had not been in an excessive nose high attitude as the go-around was attempted, and there was no buffeting or stall warning horn activation. She said the airplane simply was not climbing. She said she had taught the student "CRAMB, CLIMB, CLEAN, COMUNICATE," when executing go-arounds, and the "CLEAN" part of the sequence had not been performed, since the climb had not been established. She said that full flaps (30 degrees) was still down before, during, and after the crash. The instructor also said that it was possible that in a panic the student slammed on the left brake causing the airplane to turn abruptly, since he has large feet and she had warned him several times about making sure they were far enough back on the floor so that he would not hit the brakes accidentally. She also said that the student tended to land to the left of the runway centerline. WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION The accident scene was examined by company safety personnel, and the examination revealed that the airplane collided with the wind sock about 6 feet above the ground, about 180 feet to the left of runway 17. The aircraft traveled about 387 feet before coming to rest in the grass. The aircraft main gear tires, and marks on the left edge of runway 17 revealed that side loads had been applied to the main gear tires. The left main gear tire showed evidence of outboard and inboard side loading, and the right main gear tire showed signs of outboard side loading. According to company safety personnel, several wheel marks indicated that the left main gear had been off the ground, and that the right main gear had stayed on the ground. There were also gouges leading up to, and away from the wind sock, consistent with the aircraft having incurred tail strikes. A functional check of the aircraft did not identify any preaccident failure or malfunction to the aircraft or any if its systems. TESTS AND RESEARCH The information handbook for the Cesna 172R, Section 4 specifies the following for balked landings: 1) Throttle - full open. 2) Wing flaps - retract to 20 degrees. 3) Climb - 60 knots indicated airspeed (KIAS). 4) Wing flaps - 10 degrees until obstacles are cleared. 5) Wing Flaps - retract after reaching a safe altitude and 65 KIAS ## Aircraft - Registration: N436ER (not matched to a registry record) - Reported make and model: Cessna 172R - Category: Airplane - Serial number: 17280659 - Airframe hours: 2269.8 - Engines: Lycoming IO-360-L2A 180 horsepower reciprocating - Damage: Substantial damage - Flight: Instructional, Part 91 - Operator: Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University - Registered owner: Boeing Capital - Airworthiness certificate: Standard, Normal - Last inspection: AAIP, April 4, 2001, 21.4 hours before - Departed: OMN, Ormond Beach, FL - Airport: OMN, Ormond Beach Municipal Airport, runway 17, 3,701 × 100 ft, asphalt ## Flight crew As NTSB recorded them. NTSB leaves out names. - Pilot; age 21; injuries: none; commercial, flight instructor; airplane ratings: multi-engine land, single-engine land; instrument ratings: airplane; medical: class 1, valid medical--no waivers/lim.; last flight review May 5, 2000; seat: right; flight hours: 470 total, 192 in this make and model, 345 as pilot in command, 131 in the last 90 days, 51 in the last 30 days, 2 in the last 24 hours - Student pilot; age 20; injuries: none; student; medical: class 1, valid medical--no waivers/lim.; seat: left; flight hours: 30 total, 30 in this make and model, 0 as pilot in command, 26 in the last 90 days, 6 in the last 30 days, 0 in the last 24 hours ## Weather - Conditions: Visual (VMC), Day - Wind: 220° at 7 knots - Visibility: 10 statute miles - Lowest ceiling: none - Temperature: 72 °F, dew point 64 °F - Altimeter: 30.14 inHg - Observed at: DAB, 10 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 20010409009029A](https://openairdocs.org/incident/20010409009029A), Apr 9, 2001: Cessna 172R, Ormond Beach, FL, Substantial damage. (-23)During practice landings, instructor advised student to "go around". Student applied full power and aircraft veered to the left. Instructor took controls… 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.