Overloaded Airplane, Continued VFR Into IFR Conditions Cited In WV Accident | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-11.25.24

Airborne-AffordableFlyers-11.26.24

Airborne-Unlimited-11.20.24

Airborne Holiday

Airborne Holiday

Wed, Jan 27, 2010

Overloaded Airplane, Continued VFR Into IFR Conditions Cited In WV Accident

Airplane Was More Than 300 Pounds Over Gross Weight

The NTSB has released its factual report on a January, 2009 accident in West Virginia that killed a pilot and five passengers on a cross-country flight from  Lake in the Hills, Illinois to Huntington, WV.

According to the NTSB report, on January 30, 2009 at 1336 EST, a Piper PA-34-200T, N8047C, was destroyed when it struck high-tension power lines and collided with terrain while maneuvering for landing at the Huntington Tri-State Airport (HTS), Huntington, West Virginia. The certificated private pilot, a certificated student pilot, and four passengers were fatally injured. Instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) prevailed, and no flight plan was filed for the flight which departed Lake in the Hills Airport (3CK), Lake in the Hills, Illinois, about 1000.

According to a friend of the pilot, the purpose of the flight was to look at airplanes for sale at Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina, and Clearwater, Florida. The friend had been asked to go along, but could not due to a scheduling conflict. On the day of the accident, the friend noticed there were six people on the airplane instead of the planned five, asked about weight and balance, and the pilot assured him that he had completed the proper calculations. The friend further advised the pilot to obtain a weather briefing and file a flight plan before departure. The pilot assured his friend that he would obtain a briefing and file a flight plan from the airplane using his cellular telephone. According to the fixed base operator, the airplane was "topped off" with 68.3 gallons of fuel prior to departure.

The accident airplane approached HTS from the southwest and the pilot contacted air traffic control shortly after 1300 by transmitting a "mayday" call. The pilot advised the controller, "I'm flying VFR, low on fuel, and need to land." The controller asked the pilot if he was capable of instrument flight, and the pilot responded, "ah, yes."

During the next 30 minutes, the controller attempted to vector the airplane for an airport surveillance radar (ASR) approach, provide VFR vectors when the pilot announced he had "ground contact," and ultimately, a no-gyro ASR approach. At no time did the accident airplane acquire or maintain any of the altitudes or headings assigned by the controller.

The pilot was largely unresponsive to the controller's requests and instructions, and on occasion, other pilots on the frequency would relay the instructions, also with no response. The controller issued several low altitude alert warnings, and at one point asked the pilot to "maintain any heading. Level your wings, and maintain any heading." When asked again if he was capable of instrument flight, the pilot replied, "No." When radar contact was lost, the airplane was 4 miles southwest of the airport, on a heading of about 120 degrees.

File Photo

The pilot held a private pilot certificate with ratings for airplane single engine and multiengine land, as well as glider. The pilot's logbook was not recovered; therefore his total flight experience could not be determined. His most recent FAA second class medical certificate was issued on December 17, 2008, and the pilot reported 2,200 total hours of flight experience on that date. The pilot did not possess an instrument rating.

Weight and balance calculations were performed using weight and balance documents recovered at the site, the actual weights of the occupants, and the baggage recovered at the scene. Calculations revealed the airplane weighed about 4,902 pounds at takeoff, with a center of gravity at 98.40 inches aft of datum. The zero fuel weight was calculated at 4,343.9 pounds, at 99.02 inches aft of datum. The manufacturer's center of gravity range at maximum gross weight was 90.6 to 95 inches aft of datum. The manufacturer's maximum allowable gross weight was 4,570 pounds.

FMI: www.ntsb.gov

Advertisement

More News

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (11.29.24): Estimated (EST)

Estimated (EST) When used in NOTAMs “EST” is a contraction that is used by the issuing authority only when the condition is expected to return to service prior to the e>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (11.29.24)

Aero Linx: International Business Aviation Council (IBAC) IBAC promotes the growth of business aviation, benefiting all sectors of its industry and in all regions of the world. As >[...]

ANN FAQ: Contributing To Aero-TV

How To Get A Story On Aero-TV News/Feature Programming How do I submit a story idea or lead to Aero-TV? If you would like to submit a story idea or lead, please contact Jim Campbel>[...]

Airborne 11.27.24: CAP Tragedy, Gulfstream Milestone, Van Celebrates His 85th

Also: ANN/Airborne Holiday Schedule, UT NG Gets New Apaches, UK Airport Reopening, Laser v Helo A Civil Air Patrol search and rescue training flight over steep and rugged terrain e>[...]

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (11.30.24)

“This revolutionary mission concept includes the capability to explore diverse locations to characterize the habitability of Titan's environment, to investigate how far prebi>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2024 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC