WPR24FA112

The non-pilot-rated passenger in the front seat reported that he was in the process of purchasing the weight-shift-control aircraft from the pilot seated in the rear seat. The pilot was providing the passenger with instruction to gain flight experience and to familiarize him with the flight characteristics of the aircraft. Before departure, the pilot briefed the passenger that they would take off and fly in the local area then return to the airport to practice touch-and-go takeoffs and landings. The pilot briefed that the passenger would fly the approach and that the pilot would perform the landing. The passenger reported that the flight was about 45 minutes and they had performed one touch-and-go. During the second approach, on the final leg of the airport traffic pattern, the passenger was on the controls, the pilot called out “my airplane” and took the flight controls. The aircraft drifted to the right of the runway centerline and overflew the unimproved desert surface that consisted of brush and mesquite trees. The pilot increased the engine power and maneuvered the aircraft to the left toward the runway. During the descending left turn back to the runway, the aircraft’s approach speed was fast, and the aircraft collided with a 10-ft tall mesquite tree, subsequently impacting the ground about 85 ft to the right of the runway surface. The passenger reported that the engine sounded strong, and there were no observable aircraft malfunctions before the collision with the tree. The nearest weather reporting facility, 5 miles from the accident site, recorded calm wind at the time of the accident. Postaccident examination of the aircraft revealed no anomalies with the airframe or engine that would have contributed to a loss of control.

The weight-shift-control aircraft was stored in a mobile trailer. However, no aircraft maintenance records were found in the trailer, and there were no aircraft maintenance logbooks available to the investigation. On March 17, 2024, about 0942 mountain standard time, an experimental amateur-built light-sport weight-shift control Air Creation Twin, N4425L, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Gila Bend Municipal Airport (E63), Gila Bend, Arizona. The pilot sustained fatal injuries and the passenger sustained minor injuries. The aircraft was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 instructional flight. According to the passenger, who was seated in the front seat, he intended on purchasing the aircraft and received flight instruction from the pilot. He and the pilot had flown the weight-shift-control aircraft the day before the accident and planned a subsequent flight the next morning. Before departure, the pilot briefed the passenger that they would take off and fly in the local area, then return to the airport to practice touch-and-go takeoffs and landings. The pilot briefed that the passenger would fly the approach and that the pilot would perform the landing. After departing, they had flown around the local area for about 45 minutes to increase the passenger’s flight experience and understanding of the flight characteristics of a weight-shift control aircraft. The passenger stated that after the local flight, they returned to E63 and focused on takeoffs and landings on runway 04. During the second approach, the passenger heard the pilot state, “my airplane” and the passenger then relinquished the flight controls. The passenger reported hearing the engine spool up, stating that it “sounded strong.” The passenger recalled that the aircraft turned to the right and flew over the dirt area parallel to the right side of runway 04. The aircraft’s descent rate was arrested and continued to drift to the right, over brush and vegetation. The aircraft turned left, the approach speed was fast and while headed back to the runway, the delta wing struck a mesquite tree. The aircraft descended and impacted the ground near taxiway E. It came to rest on its right side, oriented on a northwesterly heading about 158 ft southeast of the runway 04 centerline. An autopsy of the pilot was performed by the Maricopa County Medical Examiner, Phoenix, Arizona, which listed the cause of death as multiple blunt force injuries. Toxicology testing performed at the FAA Forensic Sciences Laboratory identified losartan, amlodipine, labetalol, homoamphetamine, and tadalafil in heart blood and liver tissue. Losartan is a prescription medication commonly used to treat high blood pressure. Amlodipine is a prescription medication that can be used to treat high blood pressure and certain types of coronary artery disease. Labetalol is a prescription medication that can be used to treat high blood pressure, especially as added therapy inpeople who do not respond adequately to combinations of other medications. Homoamphetamine is a chemical that has been identified as a metabolite or breakdown product of labetalol. Tadalafil is a prescription medication commonly used to treat erectile dysfunction, as a sexual enhancement aid, and to treat symptoms of an enlarged prostate. Losartan, amlodipine, and labetalol are not generally considered impairing. Tadalafil is not typically impairing, although the FAA states that pilots who use it on an as-needed basis should wait 24 hours after use, before flying, to monitor for side effects. . A review of the pilot’s logbook revealed that his last recorded flight was December 5, 2015, in the accident aircraft. The pilot received his private pilot certificate on February 21, 2015, and did not hold a flight instructor rating. The logbook was in the pilot’s flight bag, and no additional record of pilot experience was located. The initial point of impact was a 10 ft mesquite tree located about 88 ft south of the main wreckage, and about 85 ft east of the runway 04 asphalt surface. The mesquite tree was largely intact and contained witness marks comprised of missing branches with 45° cut signatures. The height of the tree was about 10 ft, and the width was about the same. The initial witness mark began on the south side of the tree, about 7 ft in height and the signatures continued throughout the treetop from south to north. The mesquite tree was located perpendicular to and just before taxiway E. The main wreckage was found consistent with it having impacted the ground nose-down and coming to rest on its right side. The nose-gear and control pedals were found about 5 ft south of the main wreckage, consistent with the nosewheel impacting the ground first. The main wreckage consisted of the delta-wing, the engine, fuel cell and the carriage. Postaccident examination of the aircraft revealed that it had sustained substantial damage to the forward carriage keel frame and wing keel. The wing keel was fracture-separated at the hang point. The seat frame showed impact signatures on the right side and was fracture-separated from the carriage frame. The nosewheel was fracture-separated from the lower carriage frame. Flight control continuity was confirmed from the cockpit to delta wing. The left wing reflex cables, battens, pockets, and leading edge stiffeners were present and unremarkable except for the three inboard battens, which sustained damage consistent with impact. The right wing reflex cables, battens, pockets and leading edge stiffeners were present and unremarkable. The sail remained intact and unremarkable up to the inboard second batten pocket. The sail had forward, aft, and lateral tears near the aft section and a separated reflex cable. The damage was consistent with the inboard No. 2 batten separating from its pocket and the trailing edge of the sail. Three of the four propeller blades were fracture-separated about midspan. The fourth bladerevealed tip damage with chordwise striations. The propeller hub remained intact and unremarkable. The right-side rear flying wire was attached to the right crossbar and right downtube. The wire was taut and wrapped twice around the flange, which did not rotate as expected. The fuel system remained intact and unremarkable; the fuel cell was about 1/3 full. The aircraft was equipped with a 2-cycle carbureted engine. Because the passenger indicated that the engine operated normally, and propeller signatures were consistent with engine operation at the time of impact, an examination of the engine was not completed. Postaccident examination of the aircraft revealed no evidence of any preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation.