WPR11CA142

NTSB accident investigation · Piper PA-31P-350 · North Bend, OR · February 22, 2011

Accident · No injuriesData collectionFinal report
Date
February 22, 2011, 13:00 local (21:00 UTC)
Place
North Bend, OR
Injuries
1 uninjured
Damage
Substantial damage
Phase of flight
Landing
Aircraft
N9237YPiper PA-31P-350
Defining event
Landing-flare/touchdown: Landing gear not configured
Weather
Visual (VMC) · Day
Status
Completed · report June 20, 2011
Report
Approved by Office Director
NTSB office
Western Pacific Region
Parties
Portland FSDO
FAA report
20110222002269A
Case key
78408

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 failure to lower the landing gear while on approach to landing. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's failure to follow a written checklist during the approach portion of the flight.

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.

Landing gear system: landing gear actuatorAircraft › Aircraft systems · Not used/operatedPiper PA 31P 350: 1 caseAll aircraft: 54 casesProbable cause
Use of equip/info: use of checklistPersonnel issues › Task performance · PilotPiper PA 31P 350: 1 caseAll aircraft: 336 casesProbable cause
Action: forgotten action/omissionPersonnel issues › Action/decision · PilotPiper PA 31P 350: 1 caseAll aircraft: 440 casesProbable cause
Use of equip/info: use of equip/systemPersonnel issues › Task performance · PilotPiper PA 31P 350: 1 caseAll aircraft: 1,391 casesProbable cause

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

According to the pilot, while in the process of executing a terminal instrument approach to his home airport, he transitioned from instrument meteorological conditions to visual meteorological conditions. He canceled his instrument flight rules clearance, and transitioned from the terminal instrument approach to a visual flight rules approach pattern. During this sequence of events he did not follow a written checklist, and inadvertently forgot to lower the landing gear. During the landing flare, he heard the noise caused by the wing flaps and both propellers contacting the surface of the runway, and he added power and immediately executed a go-around. He then entered a closed pattern, lowered the landing gear and repositioned the flaps, before making an uneventful landing. He said during the approach he heard the gear warning horn sounding, but he thought it was the altitude alerting system. An inspection of both the runway surface scarring and each propeller blade revealed that the tips of all six blades had been grounded down by repeated contact with the asphalt surface. He also said that the airplane did not have any system malfunctions.

Factual narrative

According to the pilot, while in the process of executing a terminal instrument approach to his home airport, he transitioned from instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) to visual meteorological conditions (VMC). He therefore canceled his instrument flight rules (IFR) clearance, and transitioned from the terminal instrument approach to a visual flight rules (VFR) approach pattern. During this sequence of events, the pilot, who was not following a written checklist, inadvertently forgot to lower the landing gear. During the landing flare, the pilot heard the noise caused by the wing flaps and both propellers contacting the surface of the runway, and therefore he added power and immediately executed a go-around. The pilot then entered a closed pattern, lowered the landing gear and repositioned the flaps, before making an uneventful landing. According to the pilot, during his approach he heard the gear warning horn sounding, but he thought it was the altitude alerting system. An inspection of both the runway surface scarring and each propeller blade revealed that the tips of all six blades had been ground down by repeated contact with the asphalt surface. The pilot also said that the airplane did not have any system malfunctions.

Aircraft

Registration
N9237Y
Reported as
Piper PA-31P-350
Category
Airplane
Serial number
31P-8414022
Engine
Lycoming TIO-540-V2AD, 350 horsepower, reciprocating
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Positioning · Part 91
Operator
EAL Leasing, Inc.
Registered owner
EAL Leasing, Inc.
Airworthiness certificate
Standard, Normal
Departed
KUAO · Aurora, OR
Destination
KOTH · North Bend, OR
Flight plan
IFR
Airport
KOTH · Southwest Oregon Regional, runway 31, 4,470 × 150 ft, asphalt

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
49
Injuries
None
Certificates
Commercial, Flight engineer
Airplane ratings
Multi-engine land, Single-engine land
Instrument ratings
Airplane
Medical
Class 2, Without waivers/limitations
Last flight review
June 28, 2010
Seat
Left
Flight hours
3,850 total · 51 in this make and model

Weather

Conditions
Visual (VMC) · Day
Wind
300° at 10 knots, gusting 18
Visibility
10 statute miles
Lowest ceiling
3,500 ft overcast
Temperature
45 °F, dew point 34 °F
Altimeter
30.21 inHg

Docket · 2

The files NTSB released with the investigation on March 11, 2011, on NTSB’s docket system: statements, records, photos and specialists’ reports. 278 KB 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.