ASN Wikibase Occurrence # 228786
This information is added by users of ASN. Neither ASN nor the Flight Safety Foundation are responsible for the completeness or correctness of this information.
If you feel this information is incomplete or incorrect, you can submit corrected information.
| Date: | Saturday 7 September 2019 |
| Time: | 10:15 |
| Type: |  Piper PA-28-181 Archer II |
| Owner/operator: | Breda Aviation |
| Registration: | PH-LAG |
| MSN: | 28-8090296 |
| Fatalities: | Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 3 |
| Aircraft damage: | Destroyed |
| Category: | Accident |
| Location: | Breda Airport, Noord-Brabant -
 Netherlands
|
| Phase: | Take off |
| Nature: | Training |
| Departure airport: | Breda International Airport (EHSE) |
| Breda International Airport (EHSE) | |
| Investigating agency: | Dutch Safety Board |
| Confidence Rating: |  Accident investigation report completed and information captured |
A Piper PA-28-181 Archer II crashed during a touch and go at Breda International Airport.
At 09:32 hours local time the aircraft took off from runway 25 for the instruction flight. The instructor was sitting on the right front seat, the student on the left front seat and the passenger in the back seat on the left side. The student performed the takeoff and after leaving the circuit, he flew in northerly directions where manoeuvres such as turns, steep turns and stalls were exercised for 30 minutes. After these exercises the student flew back to the airport for some touch-and-go’s. According to the statement made by the instructor, it was agreed that the student would enter the circuit area, where he would fly the standard circuit and continue the final leg up until an altitude of 100 feet. At that altitude the instructor stated he would take over the controls and land the aircraft, followed by a takeoff. The student would also hold the yoke to feel the instructor controlling the aircraft during the touch-and-go. The instructor did not make arrangements with the student as to when he would take over the controls again. According to the student’s statement, he was of the opinion that he would make the touch-and-go and that the instructor would take over if necessary.
As instructed, the student entered the circuit and followed it until turning to final of runway 25. After turning to final leg, the student selected flaps to 40 degrees and adjusted the attitude of the aircraft. Because the aircraft flew higher than planned, the instructor instructed the student to reduce power in order to reach the correct altitude with an airspeed of 75 kts. The student followed this instruction and at an altitude of 100 feet the instructor took over the controls. The instructor closed the throttle and lowered the nose of the aircraft to keep the demanded airspeed. The student was still holding the yoke, as agreed.
According to the instructor, the aircraft touched the runway further as planned, around intersection T1 with an airspeed of around 60 kts. At that moment, the instructor felt that the student pulled the yoke, resulting in a nose-up attitude of the aircraft that became airborne again. The instructor selected 10 degrees of flaps, deselected carburettor heat and selected full power.
When the aircraft became airborne it had reached the final part of the runway at low altitude, floating to the left side of the runway. Realizing that the aircraft would not become airborne normally, the instructor tried to avoid some buildings present on the left side of the runway, just outside the airfield. He succeeded, but the aircraft then banked heavily to the right, after which the right wing hit the ground. Ultimately, the aircraft made a 180 degree-turn and came to a rest in the sideway of a road, just outside the borders of the airport. The student suffered minor injuries. The aircraft was damaged beyond repair.
The student stated that during the flight he experienced that the instructor let him control the aircraft more than the other instructors used to do. The student also stated that he was of the opinion that he himself made the landing and that, after the aircraft hit the runway and became airborne again with a nose-up position, the instructor took over the controls. The student saw that the instructor tried to gain airspeed, but that the aircraft did not accelerate. During these attempts, he heard the stall warning almost constantly. During the touch-and-go, the student held the yoke continuously.
CONCLUSIONS
The accident was the result of trying to take off during a touch-and-go, with a speed close to the stall speed. This was the result of a high angle of attack during the takeoff roll. As a result of the high angle of attack and the relative low airspeed, the drag could not or hardly be compensated by the engine power during the touch-and-go.
Despite the signals that the aircraft was unable to takeoff normally, the flight instructor continued the takeoff roll. When the aircraft became airborne at low altitude it did not gain altitude, banked and struck the ground with its right wing. The aircraft crashed just outside the aerodrome boundary.
The high nose attitude during the takeoff roll was caused by an aft held position of the yoke. The simultaneous steering inputs on the yoke of both the flight instructor and the student contributed to the nose’s high attitude. The lack of clear communication and clear instructions led to a situation where it was unclear how the tasks in the cockpit were divided. Instruction by another instructor led to a way of instruction the student was not used to.
The weight and balance of the aircraft were within the limits. The mass of the aircraft just below the maximum and the CG laying afterwards, had a negative effect on the flight characteristics of the aircraft.
The technical examination of the aircraft did not reveal any malfunctions that could have contributed to the accident.
Following the accident, the flight school took measures to prevent instructors from instructing on aircraft types with which they have limited experience.
Accident investigation:
 |
|
Sources:
https://www.omroepbrabant.nl/nieuws/3064082/Vliegtuigongeluk-op-Breda-International-Airport-loopt-goed-af-geen-gewonden
https://www.bndestem.nl/roosendaal/vliegtuig-van-baan-geschoten-op-breda-international-airport-drie-inzittenden-ongedeerd~a8a3015f/
https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8972910 (photo)
Location
Images:
Photo: Aviation Safety Network/H.Ranter
Revision history:
| Date/time | Contributor | Updates |
|---|---|---|
| 07-Sep-2019 09:34 | anon | Added |
| 07-Sep-2019 09:50 | harro | Updated [Aircraft type, Total occupants, Phase, Source, Embed code, Narrative] |
| 07-Sep-2019 10:21 | RobertMB | Updated [Time, Aircraft type, Registration, Cn, Operator, Nature, Departure airport, Destination airport, Source, Narrative] |
| 07-Sep-2019 10:22 | RobertMB | Updated [Aircraft type] |
| 07-Sep-2019 10:24 | RobertMB | Updated [Cn, Source] |
| 07-Sep-2019 16:42 | harro | Updated [Narrative, Photo] |
| 07-Sep-2019 16:43 | harro | Updated [Embed code] |
| 27-Jul-2020 17:00 | harro | Updated [Source] |
| 10-Feb-2022 10:46 | harro | Updated [Damage, Narrative, Category, Accident report] |
| 12-Jun-2022 01:13 | Ron Averes | Updated [Location] |
| 13-Jun-2022 00:19 | Ron Averes | Updated [Location] |
| 08-Oct-2023 19:39 | Ron Averes | Updated [[Location]] |
Corrections or additions? ... Edit this accident description
The Aviation Safety Network is an exclusive service provided by:
Quick Links:
| ASN Home | Send Correction / Feedback |
| FSF Home | Disclaimer | Copyright |
| Contact Us | Privacy Policy |
| Press / Media |
CONNECT WITH US:
©2024 Flight Safety Foundation