MERCED, CA, USA
N9085J
Piper PA-28-180
The purpose of the flight was to attend an airshow at the accident airport. The pilot filed an IFR flight plan and conducted a preflight inspection, including an engine run-up with no discrepancies noted. The accident airport had issued a NOTAM concerning takeoff and landing procedures on the 11,802-foot-long runway. Aircraft would be taking off and landing approximately 3,000 feet apart in three different locations identified with different colored dots. The NOTAM further stated that there would be an increase in traffic volume and the tower was a temporary tower. The pilot had been cleared to land on the orange dot. The pilot complied with this request and was once again instructed to extend his final approach to the green dot. Prior to touchdown the pilot had to correct for a left crosswind. He reported that the wind decreased in velocity and the airplane sink rate increased. He advanced the throttle, and was caught by a gust of wind on the left side. He added additional power and corrected for the crosswind condition with opposite aileron and rudder inputs, but the controls were ineffective. The aircraft collided with the runway and collapsed the landing gear. Witnesses to the accident stated that a crosswind condition existed at the time of the accident.
On September 26, 1998, at 1015 hours Pacific daylight time, a Piper PA-28-180, N9085J, collided with runway 31 and collapsed the landing gear after being instructed to extend final approach at the Castle Airport, Merced, California. The airplane, operated under the provisions of 14 CFR Part 91, sustained substantial damage. The instrument rated private pilot/owner and the non-rated passenger were not injured. Visual meteorological conditions existed for the personal flight and an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan was filed. Reported winds at the time were from 230 degrees at 13 knots. A Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspector from the Fresno, California, Flight Standards District Office was at the airport and noted that at the time of the accident a crosswind condition existed. He further noted that this was the first airshow since Castle AFB was converted into a civilian airport, and that airplanes were simultaneously landing in three different positions spaced 3,000 feet apart on the single runway. A NOTAM did exist and stated that there would be an increase in traffic volume and airplanes would be landing in predetermined spots on the runway, and that the tower was a temporary tower. The NOTAM specified that the orange dot was 3,000 feet from the threshold marker and the green dot was 6,000 feet from the threshold marker. In an interview with the FAA inspector, the pilot reported that he had filed an IFR flight plan from Brackett Field, Laverne, California, to Castle Airport for the airshow that was to take place later that day. The pilot reported that he conducted a preflight inspection and run-up with no discrepancies noted. After Stockton approach handed him off to the temporary tower established for the airshow, he was instructed to identify and follow an airplane in front of him. He reported that he had been cleared to land on the orange dot approximately halfway down runway 31. Once established on final for a midfield landing, he was instructed to land on the green dot, which was farther down the runway. The pilot stated that he was approximately 100 feet above ground level (agl) and had to correct for a strong left crosswind. On his final descent, the pilot reported that the wind decreased in velocity and his sink rate increased. He added power, and a gust of wind lifted his left wing. The pilot stated that he then added power and turned the yoke to the left and input right rudder, but his controls had no effect. The airplane continued the turn to the right and the nose pitched down. The pilot stated that he pushed the yoke forward and the airplane's left main landing gear and nose wheel impacted the ground and separated from the airplane. In the pilot's written statement, he stated that the tower had instructed him to follow any other airplane in the pattern and to report final for runway 31. The pilot stated that on final, a Bonanza made a turn to final in front of him. He reported this to the tower and was instructed to extend his final approach to the "red dot." The pilot stated that as he continued the final approach, the tower once again instructed him to extend to the "green dot." He stated that he simultaneously felt and reacted to a "strong left crosswind, which abated as I approached the touchdown point." The pilot reported that during the flare the airplane rolled to the right and he added power to regain level flight; however, the airplane impacted the ground approximately 10 yards west of the runway. According to air traffic control tower personnel, the pilot had been instructed to extend his landing due to a faster airplane on final behind him. Approximately 50 feet agl, tower personnel observed the right wing dip down and the airplane change its direction of flight towards the right edge of the runway. The pilot leveled the airplane, the nose pitched down, and the airplane impacted the ground.
The pilot's improper flare and his failure to adequately compensate for the existing crosswind conditions and maintain airplane control during landing.
Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database
Aviation Accidents App
In-Depth Access to Aviation Accident Reports
