WPR17LA181

NTSB accident investigation · Rans S9 · Athol, ID · August 4, 2017

Accident · Serious injuriesLimited investigationFinal report
Date
August 4, 2017, 09:00 local (16:00 UTC)
Place
Athol, ID
Injuries
1 serious
Damage
Substantial damage
Phase of flight
Initial climb
Aircraft
N519TBRans S9
Defining event
Initial climb: Loss of visual reference
Weather
Visual (VMC) · Day
Status
Completed · report May 28, 2020
Report
Approved by Office Director
NTSB office
Western Pacific Region
Parties
FAA
FAA report
20170804010679A
Case key
95767

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 loss of pitch attitude and ground proximity awareness, which resulted in an unintentionally steep initial climb and an overcorrection into a steep descent and ground impact.

Findings · 2

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.

Performance/control parameters: pitch controlAircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability · Not attained/maintainedTerry F Bolstad RANS S-9 CHAOS: 1 caseAll aircraft: 526 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 a witness who was part of the ground crew for this flight, this was the first flight of the experimental, amateur-built airplane. The pilot conducted a "high speed" taxi test during which the airplane became "light." He then taxied back for takeoff from the turf runway. According to the witness, the airplane accelerated well, and liftoff occurred about 300 to 400 ft down the runway. About 2 seconds after liftoff, the airplane pitched up to a "fairly nose high attitude" of about 15° to 20°. When the airplane was at an altitude of about 150 ft and less than halfway down the runway, another witness observed it descend rapidly. The airplane landed hard and sustained substantial damage; the pilot was seriously injured. Evaluation of the airplane flight control travel ranges and weight and balance information did not reveal any anomalies. The pilot reported that the engine performed normally and that he intentionally attempted a steep climb to ensure that he cleared trees at the end of the runway; however, due to the mid-wing configuration, he lost sight of the horizon in the initial climb and then had difficulty judging his pitch attitude due to the lack of a cockpit attitude indicating instrument. Ground personnel had radioed him about the excessive pitch attitude, and the pilot likely overcorrected due to his uncertainty regarding both pitch attitude and ground proximity, which resulted in the airplane impacting the ground.

Factual narrative

The airplane was equipped with a 52 Hp Rotax 503 DCDI series engine, and airplane construction was completed a few weeks before the accident. The pilot spent a few weeks conducting engine, propeller, taxi, and ground handling tests, and making minor adjustments to correct noted issues. A data sheet that documented the measured flight control travel ranges indicated that all travel ranges were in accordance with the kit manufacturer's specifications. Prior to the flight, the pilot accomplished multiple weight and balance calculations, including extreme forward and aft CG (center of gravity), as well as the test flight conditions case. The kit manufacturer's CG range was 53 to 62 inches, and the calculated CG for the accident flight was 59.7 inches. For that flight, the airplane was calculated to weigh 677 lbs. The kit manufacturer specified only two maximum takeoff weights; one for airplanes equipped with a 65hp engine (710 lbs) and one for 80/100 hp engines (810lbs). The kit manufacturer did not respond to an NTSB query regarding installation of the lower hp engine. However, the builder/pilot reported that he was told by the kit manufacturer that kit was offered with the 52 hp engine until that engine (Rotax 503) went out of production. The pilot's weight and balance calculations were verified by investigators, but the actual weights and distances were not verified by investigators. The kit manufacturer recommended that for takeoff, the airplane be flown off the ground in the "three-point attitude" (tail wheel still on the ground) instead of the typical procedure of lifting the tailwheel during the takeoff roll. Post accident, the pilot's son reported that during the final high speed taxi test, the airplane "became light" at about 55 mph; he thought this was unusual because the stall speed was cited as 41 mph, and that the airplane should have begun lifting off at a speed below 55 mph. ID05 was a private use airport, equipped with a single turf runway that measured 3,500 by 150 ft. Runway orientation was designated 3/21. Field elevation was 2,445 ft. On August 4, 2017, about 0900 Pacific daylight time, an experimental, amateur-built Rans S-9 Chaos light sport airplane, N519TB, was substantially damaged in a hard landing during an aborted takeoff from Hackney Skypark (ID05), Athol, Idaho. The commercial pilot was seriously injured. The airplane was registered to and operated by the pilot as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and no flight plan was filed for the local flight that was originating at the time of the accident. According to the pilot's son, who was part of the ground crew for the flight attempt, this was the maiden flight of the kit-built airplane. Because the winds were "very light," the pilot decided to use runway 21, which afforded multiple flat fields beyond the runway end. The airplane was fueled with about 12 gallons, and the canopy was left off (aconfiguration "approved" by the kit manufacturer) for the initial flight. The pilot conducted a "thorough pre-flight and control checks," and radio communication with the ground crew was confirmed. The elevator trim tab was set to neutral, the engine was started and warmed up, and the pilot taxied out uneventfully. He then conducted a "high speed taxi test," which included application of full power, acceleration to about 55 mph, followed by power reduction and rollout. This too was uneventful, and the pilot taxied back for his planned takeoff from runway 21. The pilot announced his departure on the radio and applied full power. According to the pilot's son, the airplane accelerated well, and liftoff occurred about 300 to 400 ft down the runway. About 2 seconds after liftoff the airplane was observed pitching up to a "fairly nose high attitude" of about 15o to 20o, as it reached an altitude of about 50 ft, prompting the son to radio to the pilot about the excessive pitch attitude. When the airplane was at an altitude of about 150 ft, and less than halfway down the runway, the other ground crew member observed it to be descending rapidly. The airplane landed hard, collapsed the main landing gear, and came to rest upright near the right edge of the turf runway. The forward and lower fuselage sustained substantial crush damage. There was no fuel leakage or fire. The ground crew helped the pilot exit the airplane. He sustained head injuries despite his shoulder harness, and was taken to the hospital for treatment. The pilot initially reported to the ground crew that he had difficulty controlling the pitch attitude of the airplane, and that the engine performed normally. In a later statement, the pilot reported that he attempted a steep climb in order to ensure that he cleared trees at the end of the runway. Due to the mid-wing configuration, he lost sight of the horizon in the initial climb, and then had difficulty judging his pitch attitude due to the lack of a cockpit attitude indicating instrument. The 0856 automated weather observation at an airport located about 12 miles south of the accident site included winds from 080o at 5 knots, visibility 10 miles, clear skies, temperature 24oC, dew point 12oC, and an altimeter setting of 29.89 inches of mercury. The pilot held a commercial certificate with airplane single-engine, multiengine, and instrument ratings. He had about 6,000 hours total flight experience, including about 2 hours in the accident airplane make and model. He had also successfully built and conducted first flights of two other make and model airplanes. His most recent flight review was completed in July 2016. At the time of the accident, he no longer held a current Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) medical certificate, and was operating under the light sport provisions via his driver's license.

Aircraft

Registration
N519TB
Reported as
Rans S9
Category
Airplane, amateur-built
Serial number
0802177
Built
2017
Airframe hours
2
Engine
Rotax 503 DCDI, 50 horsepower, reciprocating
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Personal · Part 91
Airworthiness certificate
Special, Experimental light sport (Special)
Last inspection
Condition · July 1, 2017 · 2 hours before
Departed
ID05 · Hackney, ID
Destination
ID05 · Athol, ID
Airport
ID05 · Hackney, runway 21, 3,500 × 150 ft, grass/turf

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
74
Injuries
Serious
Certificate
Commercial
Airplane ratings
Multi-engine land, Single-engine land
Instrument ratings
Airplane
Medical
Sport pilot, Unknown
Last flight review
July 16, 2016
Seat
Single
Restraint
4-point
Flight hours
6,000 total · 2 in this make and model · 5,800 as pilot in command · 12 in the last 90 days · 4 in the last 30 days · 2 in the last 24 hours

Weather

Conditions
Visual (VMC) · Day
Wind
80° at 5 knots
Visibility
10 statute miles
Lowest ceiling
None
Temperature
75 °F, dew point 54 °F
Altimeter
29.88 inHg
Observed at
COE, 12 nm away

Docket · 9

The files NTSB released with the investigation on January 15, 2020, on NTSB’s docket system: statements, records, photos and specialists’ reports. 7.2 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.