ARLINGTON, WA, USA
N4100U
Cessna 150D
N45WA
Allen-Wayne Pitts S-1E
The solo student pilot of a Cessna taxied onto runway 34 after visually checking for other airplanes in the traffic pattern and transmitting his intentions to take off. Meanwhile, the commercial pilot of a Pitts was on final approach to the same runway after transmitting that he was turning base to final onto the same runway. As the Cessna was climbing through about 30 feet above the ground after takeoff, the Pitts overtook it and descended into the tail of the Cessna. The Pitts continued downward and impacted the runway on its main landing gear, while the Cessna flipped inverted and fell onto the runway. Both pilots stated that they did not see each other prior to the collision, nor did they hear each other over the radio. No preimpact mechanical or electrical malfunctions were found. The Pitts pilot stated that he was watching a red airplane complete a landing rollout on the runway while the Pitts was on final approach to the same runway, and that he never saw the Cessna prior to the accident. The Pitts did not have a landing light installed.
On April 6, 1997, at 1400 Pacific daylight time, N45WA, a home built Allen-Wayne Pitts S-1E airplane, operated by the owner/pilot, collided in flight with N4100U, a Cessna 150D, registered to Sky Valley Aviators, at the Arlington Municipal Airport in Arlington, Washington. The Pitts S-1E was approaching to land while the Cessna 150D was climbing out after takeoff from the same runway. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and no flight plan had been filed by either pilot. The commercial pilot of the Pitts S-1E, the sole occupant, was on a personal flight and received minor injures. The student pilot of the Cessna 150D, the sole occupant, was on an instructional flight (supervised solo) and received minor injuries. The Pitts S-1E was substantially damaged, while the Cessna 150D was destroyed and caught fire after impact. Both flights were conducted under 14 CFR 91. According to ground witnesses and pilot statements (attached), the student pilot taxied onto runway 34 after visually checking for other airplanes in the traffic pattern and announcing his intentions to take off over the airport's common traffic advisory frequency (CTAF). Meanwhile, the pilot of the Pitts S-1E was on final approach with the intention of performing his second touch-and-go landing on runway 34. As the Cessna 150D was climbing through about 30 feet above the ground after takeoff, the Pitts S-1A descended into the tail of the Cessna 150D. The Pitts continued downward and impacted the runway on its main landing gear. The Cessna was observed to pitch up, "flip over," and impact the runway in an inverted attitude. Both pilots stated that they did not see each other prior to the collision, nor did they hear each other over the CTAF. Witnesses stated that they heard the Pitts S-1A pilot announce "turning base to final," for a landing, and other witnesses heard the student pilot announce his intentions to take off from the same runway. No preimpact mechanical malfunctions were reported by either pilot. The student pilot further stated that he had made three take-offs and landings with his father prior to the accident. The student's father was also his flight instructor. His father then got out of the airplane and told his student to take off and land again; it would have been the student's second supervised solo flight. The student stated that he taxied to the active runway and looked out for other airplanes in the traffic pattern. He also performed a 360-degree turn on the taxiway to spot other traffic. He stated that he saw a "... tow plane on final and another airplane on final..." and he waited for both to land. Then he looked again and observed a "... Cessna on base, but he was far enough away..." He stated that he made a "radio call" announcing that he was departing from the active runway, and he began his takeoff. Right after liftoff, the student pilot "... felt a real sharp hit..." and then became "upside down." After he impacted the runway, a fire erupted, so the student pilot extricated himself from the airplane. The student pilot reported that he had logged a total of 30.9 hours of flight time, including 16.6 hours during the previous 90 days. He carried an FAA Third Class Medical Certificate dated January 9, 1997, and a solo flight endorsement dated March 24, 1997. The commercial pilot who was in the Pitts stated that he had departed from Paine Field in Everett and had been performing aerobatic maneuvers prior to the accident. He then entered the traffic pattern for some touch-and-go landings on runway 34 at the Arlington Municipal Airport. He stated that he observed three airplanes in the pattern, including his airplane, and that he was the third one in sequence to land for his second touch-and-go. The Pitts pilot stated that he "... announced his downwind and his turn from base to final" over the CTAF. He further stated: The first airplane in the pattern, the red airplane, landed on [runway] 34. The second airplane (a tow plane) landed in the grass adjacent to [runway] 34. When the Pitts (i.e. the third airplane) was on final approach, the red airplane was still on the runway. The red airplane went all the way to the end of the runway. When the red airplane left the runway, the Pitts descended for landing. While the Pitts descended, the Pitts collided with the Cessna 150. The commercial pilot reported that he had logged a total of 1,282 flight hours, including 38 hours in the Pitts and 10.9 total flight hours during the previous 90 days to the accident. He carried an FAA Second Class Medical Certificate dated March 17, 1997, with the limitation that he "must wear corrective lenses." The Safety Board reviewed numerous ground eyewitness statements submitted to the Arlington Police Department (attached). According to one eyewitness: "I heard the Pitts Special call turning final. The Cessna pulled onto the runway in front of the Pitts and accelerated for takeoff. The Pitts overtook the Cessna and as the Cessna rotated off the ground, the Pitts was hit in the lower front cowling (overtaking) the Cessna." Another witness stated that he saw "...the [Cessna] taking off when the [Pitts] came down right under it and [then] pulled up and [chopped the Cessna's tail off]." Another witness stated: "I was watching the Pitts land when I noticed the Cessna taking off in front of it. The [Pitts] overtook and collided with the Cessna. Neither pilot appeared to see the other (the Pitts pilot would not be able to see if another plane commenced a take off during his final approach)." Three other witnesses stated that they were monitoring the CTAF and heard the Pitts pilot announce that he was turning onto final approach. These witnesses did not recall hearing the Cessna pilot announce his intentions over the radio. Another witness, the CFI who was the Cessna pilot's father, had a hand-held airport transceiver and stated that he heard his son announce his intentions to take off. The Safety Board inspected both airplane wreckages at the accident site about 2 hours after the accident. The inspection revealed that the Pitts radio was tuned to the proper CTAF frequency and was able to operate with not problems noted. The Cessna's radio was also tuned to the proper CTAF frequency, and its radios were too damaged to be functionally tested. An examination of the Pitts revealed that it did not have a landing light installed on it, and that its forward visibility is reduced by the length of its engine cowling and the configuration of its wings. The Safety Board also documented the wreckage distribution along the accident runway (diagram attached). An antenna and rotating beacon from the Cessna's tail were among the first items found; they were located about 1,075 feet from the initial takeoff point of the Cessna. The two airplanes came to rest about 350 feet beyond this debris. An examination of the Cessna 150 empennage revealed black rubber transfer marks on the top surface of the Cessna right horizontal stabilizer. An examination of the Pitts revealed paint transfer marks on its left main landing gear, and additional damage on the leading edges of its top left wing.
The failure of the student pilot to perform an adequate visual lookout prior to taking off from the runway, and the failure of the commercial pilot of the other airplane to perform an adequate visual lookout while on final approach for landing on the same runway. A factor contributing to the accident was the commercial pilot's diverted attention.
Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database
Aviation Accidents App
In-Depth Access to Aviation Accident Reports
