GATESVILLE, TX, USA
N80737
Globe GC-1B
During the takeoff initial climb, the airplane stalled, the pilot recovered, and the airplane entered a secondary stall, oscillated and hit the ground with the gear retracted. The pilots on board the airplane and witnesses stated that the accident was caused by 'an accelerated stall.' During the maintenance flight check, the private pilot/mechanic planned to familiarize the commercial pilot with the airplane for subsequent maintenance flights. The commercial pilot had flight time in tail wheel aircraft; however, he had never flown this make and model. Prior to the flight, the pilots agreed that the private pilot would be the PIC. The private pilot briefed that the commercial pilot would perform the takeoff roll and once the airplane was airborne then he would take the controls. The flight proceeded as briefed. The private pilot reported having 14 hours total time in this make and model of airplane and that he did not have a current medical certificate.
On April 28, 1997, at 1830 central daylight time, a Globe GC-1B, N80737, privately owned and operated under Title 14 CFR Part 91, impacted the terrain following a loss of control during takeoff at the Gatesville City-County Airport, Gatesville, Texas. The private pilot/mechanic and a commercial pilot/flight instructor received minor injuries and the airplane sustained substantial damage. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the maintenance check/familiarization flight, and a flight plan was not filed. The local flight was originating at the time of the accident. Telephone interviews, conducted by the investigator-in-charge, revealed that the private pilot, who operated the fixed base operation (FBO) at Gatesville, had purchased the airplane for resale. Subsequently, the airplane was purchased by the current owner in 1996 and the FBO personnel continued to perform the maintenance on the airplane. The FBO performed the annual inspection of the airplane on January 7, 1997. At that time, the owner authorized the annual inspection work and signed a form stating that "Permission is granted for operation of the aircraft, including flight testing, to determine satisfactory performance." Following the installation of an electric fuel pump, 2 air venturies for operation of the flight instruments, and the replacement of a side window, the private pilot decided to perform a maintenance flight check during which he would familiarize the commercial pilot with the airplane. The owner reported that he was "not aware of this flight until after the accident and that the private pilot did not receive explicit permission to fly the aircraft; however, another pilot, who worked part time at the FBO, was authorized by the owner and his insurance company to perform maintenance flight checks." According to the private pilot, this pilot was not always available and he wanted the commercial pilot to be familiar with the airplane for maintenance and ferry flights. The commercial pilot was doing some flight instructing for the FBO and would be available to ferry the airplane back and forth to Austin, Texas, where the current airplane owner lived. The commercial pilot had previous flight time in tail wheel aircraft; however, he had never flown the Globe. Prior to the flight, the private pilot and the commercial pilot agreed that the private pilot would be the pilot-in-command (PIC). See the enclosed statements. As PIC, the private pilot briefed that the commercial pilot would perform the takeoff roll on runway 17 and once the airplane was airborne, the private pilot would take the controls and the commercial pilot would retract the gear. During the initial climb at 25 to 50 feet AGL, the private pilot stated "I have the controls." The commercial pilot stated "You have the controls." The commercial pilot commenced to perform the gear retraction procedures. At full power, the private pilot felt the airplane was "slow and mushy and he applied aft elevator, pulled too much, and the airplane stalled, recovered, and stalled a second time." The airplane oscillated and hit the ground with the gear retracted. The pilots and witnesses reported that the airplane struck a terrace, bounced into the air approximately 3 to 4 feet and dropped to the ground. The left wing struck a tree and the airplane spun 180 degrees before sliding to a stop. Witnesses (pilots) and the pilots on board the airplane reported that the wind was calm and the weather was not a factor. The pilots and witnesses further stated that the accident was induced by an "accelerated stall." The private pilot stated that he had 14 hours total time in this make and model of airplane, and 5 hours in N80737. He stated that he was "not current in any aircraft and did not have a current medical certificate." He further stated that the commercial pilot was "current in tail wheel airplanes and with the FAA flight [currency] requirements." The commercial pilot reported that he had given the private pilot a biennial flight review on March 26, 1997, in a PA-28-140 airplane, and endorsed the review on the FAA Form 8500-9 (copy enclosed). At the time of the flight review, the private pilot held a current third class medical certificate (copy enclosed). The commercial pilot also reported that the private pilot had 31.5 hours total time in the make and model of airplane involved in the accident. The airplane was examined by the private pilot, an FAA inspector, and the owner. Damage was reported to the wings, the left flap, and the firewall. Numerous attempts, albeit unsuccessful, were made by the investigator-in-charge to obtain a Pilot/Operator Report (NTSB Form 6120.1/2) from the private pilot/mechanic.
Inadvertent stall. A factor was the pilot's lack of total experience in the make and model of aircraft.
Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database
Aviation Accidents App
In-Depth Access to Aviation Accident Reports
