WPR20CA142

NTSB accident investigation · N126c CCX-2000 · Heber City, UT · May 8, 2020

Accident · No injuriesClass 4 · Data collectionFinal report
Date
May 8, 2020, 10:45 local (16:45 UTC)
Place
Heber City, UT
Injuries
2 uninjured
Damage
Substantial damage
Phase of flight
Landing
Aircraft
N363EXN126c CCX-2000
Defining event
Landing-landing roll: Loss of control on ground
Weather
Visual (VMC) · Day
Status
Completed
Report
Approved by Office Director
Investigation class
Class 4 - Basic report with no Prelim publish
NTSB office
Western Pacific Region
FAA report
20200508005019A
Case key
101260

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 front seat pilot's failure to maintain directional control during the landing roll, and the rear seat pilot's delayed remedial control inputs that subsequently resulted in a ground loop. Contributing to the accident was a lack of communication by both pilot's to establish clearly defined pilot-in-command roles prior to the accident 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.

Performance/control parameters: directional controlAircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability · Not attained/maintainedN126c CCX-2000: 1 caseAll aircraft: 3,958 casesProbable cause
Use of equip/info: aircraft controlPersonnel issues › Task performance · PilotN126c CCX-2000: 1 caseAll aircraft: 9,295 casesProbable cause
Communication (personnel): lack of communicationPersonnel issues › Task performance · PassengerN126c CCX-2000: 1 caseAll aircraft: 84 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

The accident flight was a sales demonstration conducted by the rear seat pilot, an employee of the airplane manufacturer, for the front seat pilot. At the time, the rear seat pilot held a private pilot certificate and had accumulated 1,000 total flight hours in the accident airplane make and model. The front seat pilot held a commercial pilot certificate, but his most recent flight review had expired at the time of the accident flight. He reported that he had no experience in the airplane make and model. The rear seat pilot reported that during their final landing attempt with the front seat pilot on the controls, the airplane touched down normally and started to veer to the left. The front seat pilot corrected to the right and the rear seat pilot then attempted to recover the airplane with left rudder and right aileron, but the airplane ground looped to the right. According to the front seat pilot, the rear seat pilot interfered with the rudder controls during the rollout, which impeded his attempts to maintain directional control after the airplane veered to the right. The left wing and fuselage were substantially damaged. According to the rear seat pilot, at the time of the accident, the company did not have a formal policy to learn a prospective buyer's qualifications prior to a sales flight. Instead, they required a conversation with the prospective buyer about their recent flight history based on "trust and judgment." He further remarked that for the accident flight there could have been better communication, as he did not formally ascertain the front seat occupant's level of proficiency and experience. The rear seat pilot further stated that both occupants were wearing face masks, which interfered with their communication. The front seat pilot reported that they never discussed his flight experience, qualifications, or proficiency in the airplane prior to the accident flight. He was also never advised that he would assume the role of pilot-in-command. Neither pilot reported that there were any preimpact mechanical anomalies with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.

Factual narrative

The accident flight was a sales demonstration conducted by the rear seat pilot, an employee of the airplane manufacturer, for the front seat pilot. At the time, the rear seat pilot held a private pilot certificate and had accumulated 1,000 total flight hours in the accident airplane make and model. The front seat pilot held a commercial pilot certificate, but his most recent flight review had expired at the time of the accident flight. He reported that he had no experience in the airplane make and model. The rear seat pilot reported that during their final landing attempt with the front seat pilot on the controls, the airplane touched down normally and started to veer to the left. The front seat pilot corrected to the right and the rear seat pilot then attempted to recover the airplane with left rudder and right aileron, but the airplane ground looped to the right. According to the front seat pilot, the rear seat pilot interfered with the rudder controls during the rollout, which impeded his attempts to maintain directional control after the airplane veered to the right. The left wing and fuselage were substantially damaged. According to the rear seat pilot, at the time of the accident, the company did not have a formal policy to learn a prospective buyer's qualifications prior to a sales flight. Instead, they required a conversation with the prospective buyer about their recent flight history based on "trust and judgment." He further remarked that for the accident flight there could have been better communication, as he did not formally ascertain the front seat occupant's level of proficiency and experience. The rear seat pilot further stated that both occupants were wearing face masks, which interfered with their communication. The front seat pilot reported that they never discussed his flight experience, qualifications, or proficiency in the airplane prior to the accident flight. He was also never advised that he would assume the role of pilot-in-command. Neither pilot reported that there were any preimpact mechanical anomalies with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.

Aircraft

Registration
N363EX
Reported as
N126c CCX-2000
Category
Airplane
Serial number
CCX-2000-0001
Built
2017
Airframe hours
593.7
Engine
Lycoming YIO-360-EXP12, 186 horsepower, reciprocating
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Personal · Part 91
Operator
Cubcrafters, Inc.
Registered owner
N126c LLC
Airworthiness certificate
Special, Experimental (Special)
Last inspection
Annual · July 16, 2019 · 35 hours before
Departed
HCR · Heber, UT
Destination
HCR · Heber City, UT
Airport
HCR · Heber Valley, runway 22, 6,898 × 75 ft, asphalt
Equipment
ADS-B, Stall warning system, Satellite tracking device, Onboard weather, Electronic primary flight display, Electronic multifunction display, Data recorder, Auto-pilot, Angle of attack indicator

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 · 2

As NTSB recorded them. NTSB leaves out names.

Role
Pilot
Age
49
Injuries
None
Certificate
Private
Airplane ratings
Single-engine sea, Single-engine land
Medical
Class 2, With waivers/limitations
Last flight review
August 22, 2019
Seat
Rear
Restraint
4-point
Flight hours
4,750 total · 1,000 in this make and model · 4,680 as pilot in command · 125 in the last 90 days · 45 in the last 30 days · 6 in the last 24 hours
Role
Pilot-rated passenger
Age
44
Injuries
None
Certificate
Private
Airplane ratings
Single-engine land, Multi-engine land
Instrument ratings
Airplane
Medical
Class 3, Without waivers/limitations
Last flight review
August 15, 2016
Seat
Front
Restraint
4-point
Flight hours
1,420 total · 0 in this make and model · 716 as pilot in command · 22 in the last 90 days

Weather

Conditions
Visual (VMC) · Day
Wind
Calm
Visibility
10 statute miles
Lowest ceiling
None
Temperature
52 °F, dew point 23 °F
Altimeter
30.22 inHg

Docket · 4

The files NTSB released with the investigation on September 10, 2020, on NTSB’s docket system: statements, records, photos and specialists’ reports. 5.0 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.