Kinston, NC, USA
N402SJ
AIR TRACTOR INC AT-402B
The pilot had completed a full day of agriculture spraying operations, refueled, then departed to position the airplane back to his home base. The pilot informed a friend that he was going to perform a “flyover” at a drag racing strip that was along the route. Video evidence and multiple witnesses reported seeing the airplane perform an aerobatic maneuver over the drag strip. The aerobatic maneuver captured on video showed the airplane entered a pull-up maneuver while in an inverted attitude. When the airplane reached the top of the climb, a right roll was performed and for a moment, the airplane was in an upright attitude; however, nearly all forward momentum had stopped. The airplane entered a descent, impacted terrain in a nearly 90° nose-low vertical attitude, and exploded. It is likely that, at the top of the climb during the aerobatic maneuver, the airplane entered an aerodynamic stall and the entry phase of a spin, and a loss of control ensued. A postaccident examination of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of any preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failure that would have precluded normal operation. Several powerplant and propeller signatures were consistent with the engine operating at the time of impact. The pilot was the president of the agricultural operations business that operated the airplane from an airstrip at his residence. Witnesses reported that in the weeks leading up to the accident, they had observed the accident airplane (most likely piloted by the accident pilot) as it performed low-level aerobatics over the drag racing strip. Based on this information, it is likely that the pilot’s decision to perform low-level aerobatics in an airplane not approved for aerobatic flight was a repetitive behavior indicative of a hazardous attitude and poor decision-making.
HISTORY OF FLIGHTOn June 17, 2021, at 2022 eastern daylight time, an Air Tractor AT-402B airplane, N402SJ, was destroyed when it impacted terrain in Kinston, North Carolina. The commercial pilot was fatally injured. The airplane was operated by the pilot as a positioning flight conducted under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. According to a friend of the pilot, he spoke with her via mobile telephone for most of the flight. She reported that the total call time was 7 minutes long and that the pilot was using a Bluetooth device. During the call, the pilot told her that he had just finished a full day of agriculture spraying and was departing Mount Olive Airport (W40), Mount Olive, North Carolina to return to his home airstrip in Dover, North Carolina. The pilot added that he was going to perform a “flyover at the [Kinston] drag strip.” She heard the takeoff and about 3-4 minutes before the end of the call, the pilot described having an issue with a “light on the wing.” She asked him if that was a “bad thing” and the pilot stated, “no I don’t have to turn that on.” About this time, she heard the engine noise increased and became “higher in pitch.” About 10 seconds before the end of the call, she reported the pilot stated, “I’m dead” to which she responded with, “huh?” and the pilot repeated “I’m dead.” Immediately following this second comment from the pilot, she heard an impact and the call ended. She reported that the engine noise was constant until the call ended at 2022. According to the owner of the Kinston Drag Strip, several hundred people were in attendance for an evening of drag racing. He reported that the airplane “dropped over the lake” and flew so low that the water was moving from the airplane’s wing vortices. He reported that the engine noise was extremely loud. He then observed the airplane “pull up,” disappear from his view, and then he heard a crash a few moments later. An additional witness located on the drag racing strip reported the airplane “dove down” over the water northwest of the track, and then “went vertical.” He believed he observed the airplane up-side-down during the maneuver, and when the airplane reached the top of the climb, he could tell “the propeller was changing speeds when it went upside down.” He then saw the airplane descend rapidly and immediately catch fire upon impact. Multiple witnesses provided similar accounts. Videos captured by personal electronic devices showed the airplane approach the drag strip from the north at a low altitude and then enter a steep climb from an inverted attitude. As the airplane reached the top of the climb, it rolled to the right, became upright, and then descended in a nose-down attitude. The airplane impacted terrain in a near vertical left bank attitude and exploded upon impact. Figure 1 displays still screen images from the video and a drawing of the airplane from the flight manual for reference. Figure 1 - Still screen images from a video that captured the accident. A police report stated that bystanders reported that over the past few weeks, the accident airplane had overflown the drag strip a few times and was seen performing “tricks, going up and letting the plane stall and recovering.” One witness reported that on the Sunday prior to the accident, the accident airplane performed a flyover and performed “barrel rolls.” He also stated that the airplane was emitting some sort of mist or smoke during the maneuvers which he believed was for the spectators. According to the owner of the Kinston Drag Strip, he was unaware that the pilot planned to perform a flyover during the drag race event, nor was any permission given to perform a flyover. PERSONNEL INFORMATIONAccording to FAA registration records, the pilot was the president of the incorporated Part 137 agricultural operations business (Eastern Flying Service Inc.). The pilot conducted the agricultural operations with the accident airplane from a private airstrip at his residence. In addition to his pilot certificates, the pilot also held a mechanic certificate with airframe and powerplant ratings. AIRCRAFT INFORMATIONAccording to the airplane flight manual (AFM) limitations, “acrobatic maneuvers, including spins” were prohibited. The following aerodynamic stall speeds were published: Angle of Bank 0° 15° 30° 45° 60° Flaps Up (Knots) 63 64 68 76 89 Flaps Down (Knots) 55 56 59 65 77 The AFM indicated that the maximum altitude lost in the wings level stall recovery for the accident airplane model was 220 ft at 6,000lbs. AIRPORT INFORMATIONAccording to the airplane flight manual (AFM) limitations, “acrobatic maneuvers, including spins” were prohibited. The following aerodynamic stall speeds were published: Angle of Bank 0° 15° 30° 45° 60° Flaps Up (Knots) 63 64 68 76 89 Flaps Down (Knots) 55 56 59 65 77 The AFM indicated that the maximum altitude lost in the wings level stall recovery for the accident airplane model was 220 ft at 6,000lbs. WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATIONThe airplane impacted a chain link fence in an open grass area about 60 ft from the drag strip track. The airplane was destroyed upon impact, and an explosion and post-crash fire consumed a majority of the left wing; however, the remainder of the airplane sustained minimal fire damage. All flight control surfaces were located. Several flight control push pull rods were bent or had separated. All the observed separations displayed fracture features that were consistent with overload separations. Control cable continuity was traced from the cockpit to all of the flight control surfaces. The flap actuator extension jack screw measured approximately 3 inches, which corresponded to 22.5° of flaps extended (maximum flap travel was 26°). The engine and all three propeller blades were located below the forward portion of the fuselage and completely submerged in terrain. All three propeller blades remained intact and had separated from the propeller hub. One blade exhibited significant torsional bending. Each blade exhibited leading-edge gouges, and the gouges in one blade were consistent with an impact with the chain length fence. The engine sustained significant impact damage and it fractured into two pieces aft of the air inlet screen area. Internal visual examination of the power section of the engine revealed multiple signatures that were consistent with rotation at the time of impact. The examination of the airframe and engine did not reveal any evidence of preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures. ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONThe Federal Aviation Administration Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge stated the following in part: Hazardous Attitudes and Antidotes Being fit to fly depends on more than just a pilot’s physical condition and recent experience. For example, attitude affects the quality of decisions. Attitude is a motivational predisposition to respond to people, situations, or events in a given manner. Studies have identified five hazardous attitudes that can interfere with the ability to make sound decisions and exercise authority properly: anti-authority, impulsivity, invulnerability, macho, and resignation. [Figure 2-4] Hazardous attitudes contribute to poor pilot judgment but can be effectively counteracted by redirecting the hazardous attitude so that correct action can be taken. Recognition of hazardous thoughts is the first step toward neutralizing them. After recognizing a thought as hazardous, the pilot should label it as hazardous, then state the corresponding antidote. Antidotes should be memorized for each of the hazardous attitudes so they automatically come to mind when needed. Macho: “I can do it.” Pilots who are always trying to prove that they are better than anyone else think, “I can do it I'll show them.” Pilots with this type of attitude will try to prove themselves by taking risks in order to impress others. While this pattern is thought to be a male characteristic, women are equally susceptible. Antidote: Taking chances is foolish. MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATIONAccording to the autopsy performed by the Brody School of Medicine at East Carolina University Division of Forensic Pathology, Greenville, North Carolina, the cause of death was multiple traumatic injuries of the head, chest, abdomen, and both lower extremities due to plane crash. Toxicology testing performed by the FAA’s Forensic Sciences Laboratory did not discover any evidence of impairing drugs.
The pilot’s decision to conduct low-level aerobatic maneuvers in an airplane not approved for aerobatic flight, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall and spin, a loss of control, and an impact with terrain.
Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database
Aviation Accidents App
In-Depth Access to Aviation Accident Reports
