Redmond, OR, USA
N1627B
Luscombe 11A
The pilot/owner, who was sitting in the left seat, was taking instruction for the purpose of developing his proficiency to a point where the instructor pilot would endorse his log book for pilot-in-command operation of a tailwheel aircraft. The pilot had completed four landings on the first day he flew this aircraft, and had done one other landing on the day of the accident. On his second attempt, while trying to execute a three-point (full-stall) landing, he inadvertently allowed the main gear to touch the runway first, and then the aircraft bounced back into the air. It then touched down in a three-point attitude, but began to veer off to the left. The pilot corrected to the right, but as he tried to make the correction, the aircraft continued to turn toward the right edge of the runway. Ultimately he put in full left rudder and a significant amount of left brake in an attempt to get the aircraft realigned with the runway, but these inputs were not sufficient to correct the situation. As the aircraft got near the right edge of the runway, the flight instructor came on the controls in and attempt to regain control of the aircraft, but it departed the side of the runway and encountered soft terrain. Because the left main gear tire had gone flat as the aircraft was sliding sideways on the runway surface, when that wheel encountered the soft terrain, the aircraft rocked up onto the left main gear strut, and the wing contacted the ground. There were no brakes on the side of the aircraft that the instructor was sitting on. In his written report to the NTSB, the pilot stated that when the aircraft first veered to the left, he might have overcorrected. There was no indication that there had been any anomaly in the tail wheel steering or flight control systems.
On November 13, 2004, approximately 1315 Pacific standard time, the wing of a Luscombe 11A, N1627B, impacted the terrain during the landing roll at Roberts Field, Redmond, Oregon. The two occupants, a private pilot and a flight instructor, were not injured, but the aircraft, which is owned and operated by the private pilot, sustained substantial damage. The local 14 CFR Part 91 instructional flight, which departed the same location about 75 minutes earlier, was being operated in visual meteorological conditions. No flight plan had been filed. According to the private pilot/owner, who was sitting in the left seat, this was his second flight in this aircraft. Both flights had been for the purpose of developing his proficiency to a point where the instructor would endorse his log book for pilot-in-command operation of tailwheel aircraft. The pilot stated that he had completed four landings on the first day he flew, and had done one other landing on the day of the accident. On his second attempt, while trying to execute a three-point (full-stall) landing, he inadvertently allowed the main gear to touch the runway first, and then the aircraft bounced back into the air. It then touched down in a three-point attitude, but began to veer off to the left. The pilot corrected to the right, but as he tried to make the correction, the aircraft continued to turn toward the right edge of the runway. Ultimately he put in full left rudder and a significant amount of left brake in an attempt to get the aircraft realigned with the runway, but these inputs were not sufficient to correct the situation. As the aircraft got near the edge of the runway, the flight instructor came on the controls in an attempt to regain control of the aircraft, but it departed the side of the runway and encountered soft terrain. Because the left main gear tire had gone flat as the aircraft was sliding sideways on the runway surface, when that wheel encountered the soft terrain, the aircraft rocked up onto the left main gear strut, and the wing contacted the ground. According to the private pilot, there were no brakes on the side of the aircraft that the instructor was sitting on. In his written report to the NTSB, the pilot stated that when the aircraft first veered to the left, "I might have overcorrected." According to the FAA Inspector who looked at the aircraft after the accident, there was no indication that there had been any anomaly in the tail wheel steering or flight control systems.
The student pilot's failure to maintain directional control during the landing roll. Also causal were the instructor's inadequate supervision and remedial action. Factors include soft terrain just off the side of the runway.
Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database
Aviation Accidents App
In-Depth Access to Aviation Accident Reports
