Indio, CA, USA
UNREG
Powrachute Sky Rascal
The non-certificated pilot reported that he waited for the wind to subside before taking off. The pilot said that when the wind subsided, he departed, but during the initial climb, the powered parachute encountered either a downdraft or a gust of wind and collided with a set of powerlines. The powered parachute was subsequently consumed by fire after becoming entangled in the wires. The pilot reported no mechanical malfunctions or failures with the aircraft that would have precluded normal operation.
On March 29, 2012, about 1835 Pacific daylight time, an unregistered Powrachute Sky Rascal experimental powered parachute sustained substantial damage following a collision with powerlines during initial climb near Indio, California. The non-certificated pilot, the sole occupant of the aircraft, received serious injuries. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the local flight, which was being operated in accordance with 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91, and a flight plan was not filed. The aircraft departed a private strip about 2 minutes prior to the accident. In a telephone interview with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigator-in-charge (IIC), the non-certificated pilot reported that he waited for the wind to subside down before taking off. The pilot stated that after taking off either a downdraft or a gust of wind blew him into a set of powerlines, in to which the aircraft became entangled. The pilot revealed that he eventually jumped to the ground, but was not sure if the aircraft was on fire or not when he jumped. The pilot reported no mechanical failures or malfunctions with the aircraft. When asked if he was a licensed pilot, he said he wasn’t, and when asked why he had not registered the aircraft, he replied that he didn’t think that he needed to, as it was exempt, but that he could not remember "how that worked." Subsequent attempts to interview the pilot during the course of the investigation were not successful, as he was moved to an assisted living facility due to the extent of his injuries. Additionally, the Pilot/Operator Aircraft Accident/Incident Report, NTSB Form 6120.1, was not obtained during the investigation, due to the pilot’s incapacitated condition. According to a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airworthiness inspector, after the aircraft was inspected to determine if it was in compliance with Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 103, the regulation that governs ultralight vehicles, it was discovered that the stock 5 gallon fuel tank had been replaced with a 10 gallon tank, and that the stock 407 engine had been replaced with a heavier 503 engine, which put the weight of the aircraft outside of the FAR 103 limits. The aircraft would then be required to be certificated. When the inspector confronted the accident pilot about the modifications, the pilot stated that he was unaware of them and blamed the individual who sold him the aircraft. According to the inspector, when the previous owner was interviewed he stated that he had made no modifications to the aircraft, and that the only thing he changed prior to its sale was the propeller. At 1852, the automated weather reporting system at the Jacqueline Cockran Regional Airport (TRM), which was located about 8 nautical miles south-southeast of the accident site, reported wind calm, visibility 10 miles, sky clear, temperature 25 degrees Celsius (C), dew point 4 degrees C, and an altimeter setting of 29.81 inches of mercury.
The operation of an airplane by a non-certificated pilot. Contributing to the accident was the non-certificated pilot's failure to maintain clearance from powerlines during initial climb in gusty wind conditions.
Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database
Aviation Accidents App
In-Depth Access to Aviation Accident Reports
