CHINO, CA, USA
N88VE
Gage VARI-EZE
The pilot was conducting a sales demonstration flight for the airplane's owner. Before departing on the accident flight, the pilot performed two high speed taxi operations and one takeoff and landing. When departing on the accident flight, the pilot twice aborted the takeoff due to a canopy unlatched warning light indication. After correcting the problem, with the airplane still on the runway, the pilot took off and climbed sharply. Ground witnesses said the airplane stalled about 100 feet agl. The left wing and nose dropped and the pilot was unable to regain a positive flight attitude. The airplane crashed in a left wing and nose down attitude. The wreckage examination established continuity of the flight control system. The pilot had 1 hour of flight time in this type aircraft.
On April 7, 1996, at 1109 hours Pacific daylight time, an amateur built Gage Vari-Eze, N88VE, crashed shortly after taking off on runway 21 at the Chino, California, airport. The pilot was conducting a visual flight rules personal flight and was executing a touch-and-go landing and takeoff. The airplane, registered to a private individual, sustained substantial damage. The certificated commercial pilot, the sole occupant, received serious injuries. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed. The flight originated at Chino Airport about 1100 hours. The pilot said in a telephone interview conducted on May 17, 1996, that he was demonstrating the airplane for the owner's prospective buyer. He said that he made two high speed taxi runs down runway 03 and then down runway 21. He said that he took off on runway 03, remained in the traffic pattern, and then landed on runway 03. On landing, he rolled down to the end of the runway and exited the runway at the approach end of runway 21. The local controller cleared the pilot for takeoff on runway 21. When he started the takeoff roll, the canopy unlatch warning light illuminated. He aborted the takeoff, relatched the canopy and then began the takeoff roll. The canopy unlatch warning light illuminated again and he relatched the canopy a second time. This time, however, he saw that his left hand contacted the canopy warning light micro switch lever and that was causing the warning light to illuminate. The airplane was still on the runway and the local controller again cleared the airplane for takeoff. The airplane lifted off and when it was between 75 and 100 feet above the ground, it began to drift to the left. The pilot released some left rudder pressure, but without success. He then applied right rudder and right aileron, but was unable to arrest the left turn. He said that the airspeed indicated 100 knots. The airplane continued in a left turn and the nose pitched down. During the descent, the pilot reduced the power and was able to apply some elevator control, but not enough to stop the descent. The airplane struck the ground in a left wing and nose down attitude. The pilot said that the accident flight was the first time that he had flown the accident airplane make and model. He said that he had flown a Long-Eze on two occasions from the rear seat. The owner reported that on the last takeoff, the pilot climbed at a high angle of attack. The airplane then began to drift to the left and descent. He said that the airplane appeared to be "side slipping." The airplane struck the ground in this attitude. Another ground witness, a former U.S. Air Force pilot and a certificated aircraft mechanic, said that he was with the owner standing beneath the control tower when the airplane departed. He said that the airplane lifted off abeam their position. When the airplane was about 6 feet above the ground, the left wing dropped and raised, and then the right wing dropped and raised. The pilot landed the airplane and again took off and climbed sharply. When the airplane was about 100 feet above the ground, the left wing dropped, raised momentarily, and then dropped again. The bank angle continued until it was about 90 degrees and the airplane turned 180 degrees. The airplane maintained this attitude until it struck the ground. The owner and the ground witness said that after the accident they examined the control system. The cables to the control surfaces were intact, but the rudder cables separated from the rudder assembly. They said that the separated cables displayed ground impact overload signatures.
the pilot's excessive initial climb attitude and his failure to maintain adequate airspeed. The pilot's diverted attention to the unlatched canopy warning light, and his lack of familiarity with the aircraft were factors.
Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database
Aviation Accidents App
In-Depth Access to Aviation Accident Reports
