Payson, AZ, USA
N777KL
Lipscomb Lancair 235
The airplane stalled during an aborted landing, entered a spin, and impacted the ground. Multiple pilot witnesses stated that the airplane made two approaches that culminated in go-arounds. On the third approach, the airplane landed hard about 1,500 feet down the runway. The airplane bounced into the air, landed back on the runway, bounced up once more, and then they heard the engine power up to abort the landing. The airplane climbed to about 100 feet and the witnesses saw the airplane's nose pitch up and the angle of attack continue to increase as the airplane flew down the runway at a slow airspeed. The left wing dropped, the airplane rotated into a spin, and then it impacted the ground. An inspection of the airplane revealed no mechanical anomalies. The pilot purchased the accident airplane 2 days prior to the accident. A review of the pilot's medical application indicated that he had not flown in the last 6 months. A review of his logbooks revealed that the pilot had no flight time in the accident airplane make and model. The broker who sold him the airplane, asked the pilot to fly with someone that was familiar with the accident airplane make and model before flying it solo. The day of the accident, the pilot informed the broker that he wanted to taxi test it. On the second high-speed taxi test, the airplane became airborne. The broker attempted to contact the pilot after the airplane departed the airport environment. The airplane returned about an hour later, and flew two circuits around the airport below traffic pattern altitude. It was on the third approach that the airplane landed hard, bounced into the air, and climbed to an altitude of about 150 feet in a wings level attitude, before the pilot lost control of it.
HISTORY OF FLIGHT On December 28, 2002, at 1510 mountain standard time, an experimental Lipscomb Lancair 235, N777KL, collided with flat terrain during an aborted landing on runway 24 at Payson Airport (PAN), Payson, Arizona. The pilot/owner operated the airplane under the provisions of 14 CFR Part 91. The airplane was destroyed. The private pilot, the sole occupant, was fatally injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the local area flight, and no flight plan had been filed. The flight departed PAN about 1420, and was scheduled to terminate at PAN. The broker for the sale of the airplane, a mechanic and friend of the pilot/owner, reported that the pilot purchased the airplane on December 26, 2002. On the day of the accident, the broker taxied the airplane to the ramp prior to the accident pilot's arrival. Once the pilot arrived, the broker showed him the airplane for familiarity purposes. The pilot told the broker that he wanted to taxi test the airplane. The broker asked him not to fly the airplane until he (the pilot) had someone that was familiar with the Lancair fly with him. The pilot promised that he wouldn't fly the airplane, and assured the broker that he only wanted to taxi test it. The accident pilot then took the airplane out to the runway, and the broker saw him do one high-speed taxi test on the runway. On the second high-speed taxi test, the airplane became airborne. The broker made several unsuccessful attempts to radio the pilot after the airplane departed the airport environment. The broker waited for the airplane to return. The airplane arrived back at the airport about an hour later. The airplane flew two circuits over the airport below traffic pattern altitude. On the third approach, which appeared normal to the broker, the airplane touched down "a little firm and maybe fast," and bounced into the air. The airplane flew past the broker, and he heard the engine power up. The airplane climbed to an altitude of about 100 to 150 feet in a wings level attitude. He then saw the left wing drop, the airplane made a 90-degree left turn, rolled inverted, and impacted the ground. Another witness stated that he and his family were about 10 to 15 minutes out of PAN when they heard someone on the universal communications (UNICOM) radio frequency attempting to contact a pilot. The person on UNICOM informed them to be on the lookout for an experimental airplane that was not communicating with anyone, but was in the area. The witness stated that they saw the airplane, and continued with their landing. Once they landed they taxied to the refueling pit. They were speaking to some of the airport people when they saw the accident airplane. The witness stated that the airplane made two approaches that culminated in go-arounds. On the third approach, the airplane landed hard about 1,500 feet down the runway. The airplane bounced into the air, landed back on the runway, bounced up once more, and then they heard the engine power up to abort the landing. The airplane climbed to about 100 feet and the witnesses saw the airplane's nose pitch up and the angle of attack continue to increase as the airplane flew down the runway at a slow airspeed. The left wing dropped, the airplane rotated into a spin, and then it impacted the ground. Other ground witnesses reported that the pilot had trouble maintaining pitch control. One witness stated that the "pitch attitude was all over the place. Nose up, nose down . . . nose up, nose down." Another witness stated that while he was out flying, he had a near miss with the accident airplane. PERSONNEL INFORMATION A review of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airman records revealed the pilot held a private pilot certificate with a single engine land airplane rating. His most current third-class medical certificate, issued on November 27, 2001, had the limitation that the pilot must wear corrective lenses. On his most current medical application he reported a total flight time of 800 hours, with no flight time recorded for the past 6 months. An examination of the pilot's logbook indicated an estimated total flight time of 445.3 hours. The pilot's last logged flight was May 5, 2002. According to the spouse, the pilot had sold his Mooney earlier in the year, and wanted to get back into flying. The pilot wanted to purchase an experimental airplane, and found the accident airplane, which he purchased on December 26, 2002. The pilot logged 68.1 total flight hours during 2002. The pilot had no recorded Lancair flight time. AIRCRAFT INFORMATION The airplane was an experimental Lipscomb Lancair 235, serial number 146. A review of the airplane's logbooks revealed a total airframe time of 137 hours at the last condition inspection. The condition inspection was completed on June 1, 2002. A Textron Lycoming O-235-L2C engine, serial number L-22177-15, was installed on the airplane. An engine total time was not recorded at the last condition inspection. Total time on the engine recorded on May 2, 2001, (condition inspection), indicated an engine total time of 2,015.6 hours, and 114.0 hours since overhaul. According to the previous owner of the airplane, he flew the airplane from Lawrence, Kansas, to Payson on November 18th, with no mechanical anomalies noted. MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATION The Pima County Forensic Science Center in Tucson, Arizona, conducted an autopsy on the pilot on June 10, 2002. The FAA Bioaeronautical Sciences Research Laboratory, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, performed a toxicological analysis from samples obtained during the autopsy. The results of the analysis of the specimens were negative for carbon monoxide, cyanide, volatiles, and tested drugs. A review of the pilot's most recent application for airman medical certificate, dated November 27, 2001, revealed that he had type II diabetes, and was using prescription medication; Glipizide and Glucophage. The pilot's FAA airman medical file contained a letter from his personal physician, in which the physician indicated that the pilot's diabetes was "controlled" with the following medications: Glucotrol (Glipizide), Glucophage, Actos. The letter was dated December 7, 2001. TESTS AND RESEARCH An FAA airworthiness inspector examined the airplane at Air Transport, Phoenix, Arizona. She noted damage to the lower portion of the rudder where it contacted the elevator and tail sections. She further stated that rudder had broken free of the tail section and was retained by the rudder cables. The top hinge of the rudder was loose at the hinge point. She also reported that there is no safety mechanism at the top of the hinge to retain the rudder in place. The system is held in place by a pin and bushing. She stated that a determination could not be made as to whether the pin was in place prior to the accident. There were no further discrepancies noted with the airplane. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The wreckage was released to the pilot's spouse on February 6, 2003.
the pilot's failure to maintain an adequate airspeed during an aborted landing that resulted in an inadvertent stall/spin. A contributing factor in the accident was the pilot's lack of familiarity with the airplane.
Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database
Aviation Accidents App
In-Depth Access to Aviation Accident Reports
