SEA04CA105

The pilot came to the airport to regain takeoff and landing proficiency in the subject aircraft since he had not flown it for a "considerable period of time." After taking off from runway 29, he continued around the VFR pattern, and established the aircraft on a final approach for a three-point landing on the same runway. As he crossed the runway threshold at about 65 mph, he added a little power and started moving the control stick aft. The aircraft's nose then moved upwards, partially blocking the pilot's view of the runway, so he looked along the left side of the cowling in an attempt to keep the runway in sight. Although he expected the aircraft to slow rather quickly, it did not do so, and continued to float at a height of about five feet above the ground. The aircraft then suddenly dropped hard onto the runway and bounced back into the air. During this sequence, the pilot "lost visual orientation with the direction the plane was headed," so he added full power in an attempt to execute a go-around, but the aircraft dropped onto the runway a second time. According to the pilot, he then moved the stick to the "full back" position, but the aircraft did not lift off again, and instead exited the side of the runway where its left main gear impacted a mound of earth. At that point, the left main gear separated from the aircraft, which continued on for about another thirty yards before the right main gear collapsed, which resulted in significant damage to the wings and fuselage. After the accident, the pilot noticed that a slight tailwind was blowing. There was no evidence of any anomaly in the flight control or breaking system of the aircraft.

On June 16, 2004, approximately 1200 mountain daylight time, an experimental Fetherolf Hatz CB-1, collided with the terrain during an attempted go-around at Nampa Municipal Airport, Nampa, Idaho. The private pilot, who was the sole occupant, was not injured, but the aircraft, which is owned and operated by the pilot, sustained substantial damage. The 14 CFR Part 91 personal pleasure flight, which was taking place within the confines of the VFR traffic pattern, was being operated in visual meteorological conditions. The aircraft had been airborne for about five minutes at the time of the accident. No flight plan had been filed.

According to the pilot, he came to the airport to regain takeoff and landing proficiency in the subject aircraft since he had not flown it for a "considerable period of time." After taking off from runway 29, he continued around the VFR pattern, and established the aircraft on a final approach for a three-point landing on the same runway. As he crossed the runway threshold at about 65 mph, he added a little power and started moving the control stick aft. The aircraft's nose then moved upwards, partially blocking the pilot's view of the runway, so he looked along the left side of the cowling in an attempt to keep the runway in sight. Although he expected the aircraft to slow rather quickly, it did not do so, and continued to float at a height of about five feet above the ground. The aircraft then suddenly dropped hard onto the runway and bounced back into the air. During this sequence, the pilot "lost visual orientation with the direction the plane was headed," so he added full power in an attempt to execute a go-around, but the aircraft dropped onto the runway a second time. According to the pilot, he then moved the stick to the "full back" position, but the aircraft did not lift off again, and instead exited the side of the runway where its left main gear impacted a mound of earth. At that point, the left main gear separated from the aircraft, which continued on for about another thirty yards before the right main gear collapsed, which resulted in significant damage to the wings and fuselage. The aircraft ultimately came to rest pointing 180 degrees from its final approach course heading.

The pilot further stated that after the accident, as he was exiting the aircraft, he noticed that the nearest wind sock was indicating a tailwind. According to both the pilot, and the FAA Inspector who responded to the scene, there was no evidence of any anomaly in the flight control or braking system of the aircraft.