Phoenix, AZ, USA
N2166K
CESSNA 172
The flight instructor and the student pilot, accompanied by a passenger-observer, were conducting the instructional flight in one of their flight school's airplanes. The student pilot, who had a total flight time of 4 hours and for whom this was his fourth flight, was handling the controls. During the takeoff roll, his overcorrections caused the airplane to veer right and then left. After crossing the centerline from right to left and when the airplane was heading toward the left edge of the 100-ft-wide runway, the flight instructor took the controls but was unable to maintain airplane control. He attempted to lift off, and the airplane became airborne momentarily, but the nose dropped, the airplane banked right, and it then struck the runway. The airplane nosed over inverted and came to a stop. The pilots reported no preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
HISTORY OF FLIGHTOn April 4, 2013, about 0930 mountain standard time, a Cessna 172S, N2166K, was substantially damaged when it impacted airport terrain during an attempted takeoff from Deer Valley Airport (DVT), Phoenix, Arizona. The certified flight instructor (CFI), the student pilot, and the passenger-observer were uninjured. The instructional flight was operated under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed. According to information provided by the CFI and the responding inspector from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Flight Standards District Office, the purpose of the flight was to practice takeoffs and landings. The student pilot was seated in the left seat, and the CFI was in the right seat. During the takeoff roll on runway 7R, the student pilot was handling the controls. After power application, he initially overcorrected with right rudder, and the airplane began to veer right. The CFI then verbally instructed the student to correct back to the left, which he did. However, again the student pilot overcorrected, and the airplane veered towards the left side of the runway, while continuing to accelerate. About the time that the airplane crossed the runway centerline from right to left, the CFI took physical control of the airplane, and as it approached the left runway edge, the CFI attempted to lift off. After liftoff, the nose "dropped," the airplane banked to the right, and struck the runway. About the same time the CFI reduced power on the engine. The airplane came to rest inverted. All occupants evacuated the airplane, and there was no fire, or any indications of a fuel spill. PERSONNEL INFORMATIONGeneral According to information provided by Westwind School of Aeronautics (WSA), the CFI, the student pilot, the passenger, and the airplane were all associated with the flight training program at WSA, which was based at DVT. Student Pilot Examination of the student pilot's logbook indicated that he had a total flight experience of about 4 hours, all of which was in the accident airplane make and model. The logbook indicated that his first instructional flight was conducted 6 days before the accident flight, and that the accident flight was his fourth flight. Certificated Flight Instructor FAA records indicated that the CFI obtained his flight instructor certificate in February 2013, and obtained his commercial certificate in August 2012. Both were valid for airplane single engine only. His most recent FAA first-class medical certificate was issued in December 2011. According to information provided by the flight school, the CFI had a total flight experience of about 308 hours, all of which was in single-engine airplanes. He had performed as a flight instructor for a total of about 57 hours, including 39 hours in the accident airplane make and model. AIRCRAFT INFORMATIONFAA records indicated that the airplane was manufactured in 2005, and was registered to a corporation based in Phoenix. It was equipped with a Lycoming IO-360 series engine. According to information provided by the flight school, the airplane had accumulated a total time in service of about 3,271 hours at the time of the accident. The most recent inspection was accomplished on March 15, 2013, and the airplane had been operated about 13 hours since then. METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATIONThe DVT 0953 automated weather observation included wind from 230 degrees at 3 knots, visibility 10 miles, clear skies, temperature 24 degrees C, dew point 1 degree C, and an altimeter setting of 30.05 inches of mercury. AIRPORT INFORMATIONFAA records indicated that the airplane was manufactured in 2005, and was registered to a corporation based in Phoenix. It was equipped with a Lycoming IO-360 series engine. According to information provided by the flight school, the airplane had accumulated a total time in service of about 3,271 hours at the time of the accident. The most recent inspection was accomplished on March 15, 2013, and the airplane had been operated about 13 hours since then. WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATIONThe airplane came to rest adjacent to the south (right) side of runway 7R, about 1,450 feet from where the takeoff roll began. Site information provided by the responding FAA inspector indicated that the ground scars extended about 300 feet. The airplane veered off the left side of 7R just prior to taxiway B3, and then traversed off the right side of the runway about 150 feet beyond the left-excursion. Paint transfer marks and airplane damage were consistent with the airplane first striking the right wing and tailplane on the runway. Propeller slash marks were evident in the runway pavement. The lower section of the nose gear was fracture-separated from the strut. The nose was crushed up and aft, and the aft fuselage was crumpled slightly. Both wings, as well as the horizontal and vertical stabilizers, sustained crush damage and denting. The propeller tips exhibited significant curling. Examination of the airplane did not detect any pre-impact anomalies with any of the flight control systems, and the pilots did not report any mechanical problems or deficiencies with the airplane.
The student pilot's excessive directional control inputs during the takeoff roll and the flight instructor's delayed and ineffective corrective actions, which resulted in the loss of airplane control.
Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database
Aviation Accidents App
In-Depth Access to Aviation Accident Reports
