Friday, March 22, 2019

Ground Collision: Sonex, N322JS and Cessna 172G Skyhawk, N4240L, accident occurred November 19, 2018 at Corona Municipal Airport (KAJO), Riverside County, California

Additional Participating Entity:
Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Riverside, California

N322JS Aviation Accident Final Report - National Transportation Safety Board:  https://app.ntsb.gov/pdf


N322JS Investigation Docket - National Transportation Safety Board: https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms


https://registry.faa.gov/N322JS


Location: Corona, CA

Accident Number: GAA19CA068A
Date & Time: 11/19/2018, 1350 PST
Registration: N322JS
Aircraft: Silveira Jonathan A SONEX
Aircraft Damage: Substantial
Defining Event: Ground collision
Injuries: 2 None
Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General Aviation - Personal 

Analysis 


The pilot in the low-wing airplane reported that, while in the traffic pattern at the nontowered airport, he made continuous reports on the common traffic advisory frequency (CTAF). He added that, on final, he observed a high-wing airplane positioned adjacent to the runway he was approaching. He added that, on short final, "the runway was clear," and he heard no radio transmissions. The low-wing airplane impacted the high-wing airplane on the runway. The low-wing airplane yawed right and came to rest nose down in front of the right wing of the high-wing airplane.


The pilot receiving instruction in the high-wing airplane reported that, after performing a run-up, she and the flight instructor taxied to and held short of the departure runway. She added that, during the taxi, she and the instructor did not hear radio transmissions on the CTAF from other aircraft in the traffic pattern. Before departure, they visually cleared final and base and reported their departure intentions on the CTAF. They lined up on the runway for a short-field takeoff, held the brakes, and applied full power. She released the brakes and about 3 to 5 seconds into the takeoff roll, they heard a loud noise, and the airplane was pushed left. Despite reporting not hearing the other pilots on the CTAF, all the pilots reported that they used the same frequency.


The low-wing airplane sustained substantial damage to the left wing. The high-wing airplane sustained substantial damage to the right wing and empennage.


Two witnesses in the other airplane reported that, while taxiing, they heard the pilots in the high-wing airplane transmit that they were "taking the runway" and departing. They observed the high-wing airplane line up on the runway but did not see any aircraft on base or final. Several moments later, they looked back and saw the high-wing airplane still on the runway and the low-wing airplane on final. One of the witnesses made a call on the CTAF warning the low-wing airplane pilot that another airplane was on the runway but heard no response. He made another call to the low-wing airplane pilots to suggest that they perform a go-around, and then they observed the low-wing airplane land on top of the high-wing airplane.


The pilots of the low- and high-wing airplanes reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with their airplanes that would have precluded normal operation. 


Probable Cause and Findings


The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:

The pilot’s failure to see and avoid the airplane on the runway while landing and the pilot receiving instruction’s and flight instructor's failure to properly scan the approach before pulling onto the runway during takeoff.

Findings


Personnel issues

Monitoring other aircraft - Pilot (Cause)
Monitoring environment - Pilot of other aircraft (Cause)

Environmental issues

Aircraft - Effect on operation (Cause)

Factual Information


History of Flight


Takeoff

Miscellaneous/other

Landing

Ground collision (Defining event)

Pilot Information


Certificate: Private

Age: 54, Male
Airplane Rating(s): Single-engine Land
Seat Occupied: Left
Other Aircraft Rating(s): None
Restraint Used: 4-point
Instrument Rating(s): None
Second Pilot Present: No
Instructor Rating(s): None
Toxicology Performed: No
Medical Certification: Class 3 With Waivers/Limitations
Last FAA Medical Exam: 07/19/2018
Occupational Pilot: No
Last Flight Review or Equivalent: 09/01/2018
Flight Time:  (Estimated) 219 hours (Total, all aircraft), 17 hours (Total, this make and model), 165 hours (Pilot In Command, all aircraft), 20 hours (Last 90 days, all aircraft), 1 hours (Last 30 days, all aircraft) 

Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information


Aircraft Make: Silveira Jonathan A

Registration: N322JS
Model/Series: SONEX
Aircraft Category: Airplane
Year of Manufacture: 2004
Amateur Built: Yes
Airworthiness Certificate: Experimental
Serial Number: 0322
Landing Gear Type: Tailwheel
Seats: 2
Date/Type of Last Inspection: 09/14/2018, Condition
Certified Max Gross Wt.: 1250 lbs
Time Since Last Inspection:
Engines: 1 Reciprocating
Airframe Total Time: 1139.9 Hours
Engine Manufacturer: Jabiru
ELT: C91A installed, not activated
Engine Model/Series: 3300A
Registered Owner: Stemple, Jasper F.
Rated Power: 120 hp
Operator: On file
Operating Certificate(s) Held: None

Meteorological Information and Flight Plan


Conditions at Accident Site: Visual Conditions

Condition of Light: Day
Observation Facility, Elevation: KAJO, 533 ft msl
Distance from Accident Site: 0 Nautical Miles
Observation Time: 2156 UTC
Direction from Accident Site: 289°
Lowest Cloud Condition: Clear
Visibility: 10 Miles
Lowest Ceiling: None
Visibility (RVR):
Wind Speed/Gusts: 7 knots /
Turbulence Type Forecast/Actual: None / None
Wind Direction: 260°
Turbulence Severity Forecast/Actual: N/A / N/A
Altimeter Setting: 29.99 inches Hg
Temperature/Dew Point: 22°C / 7°C
Precipitation and Obscuration:  No Obscuration; No Precipitation
Departure Point: Corona, CA (AJO)
Type of Flight Plan Filed: None
Destination: Corona, CA (AJO)
Type of Clearance: None
Departure Time: 1343 PST
Type of Airspace: Class G

Airport Information


Airport: CORONA MUNI (AJO)

Runway Surface Type: Asphalt
Airport Elevation: 533 ft
Runway Surface Condition: Dry
Runway Used: 25
IFR Approach: None
Runway Length/Width: 3200 ft / 60 ft
VFR Approach/Landing: Full Stop; Traffic Pattern

Wreckage and Impact Information


Crew Injuries: 1 None

Aircraft Damage: Substantial
Passenger Injuries: 1 None
Aircraft Fire: None
Ground Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Explosion: None
Total Injuries: 2 None
Latitude, Longitude: 33.897500, -117.600278 (est)

https://registry.faa.gov/N4240L

N4240L  Aviation Accident Final Report - National Transportation Safety Board:  https://app.ntsb.gov/pdf


N4240L Investigation Docket - National Transportation Safety Board: https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms


Location: Corona, CA

Accident Number: GAA19CA068B
Date & Time: 11/19/2018, 1350 PST
Registration: N4240L
Aircraft: Cessna 172
Aircraft Damage: Substantial
Defining Event: Ground collision
Injuries: 2 None
Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General Aviation - Instructional 

Analysis 

The pilot in the low-wing airplane reported that, while in the traffic pattern at the nontowered airport, he made continuous reports on the common traffic advisory frequency (CTAF). He added that, on final, he observed a high-wing airplane positioned adjacent to the runway he was approaching. He added that, on short final, "the runway was clear," and he heard no radio transmissions. The low-wing airplane impacted the high-wing airplane on the runway. The low-wing airplane yawed right and came to rest nose down in front of the right wing of the high-wing airplane.

The pilot receiving instruction in the high-wing airplane reported that, after performing a run-up, she and the flight instructor taxied to and held short of the departure runway. She added that, during the taxi, she and the instructor did not hear radio transmissions on the CTAF from other aircraft in the traffic pattern. Before departure, they visually cleared final and base and reported their departure intentions on the CTAF. They lined up on the runway for a short-field takeoff, held the brakes, and applied full power. She released the brakes and about 3 to 5 seconds into the takeoff roll, they heard a loud noise, and the airplane was pushed left. Despite reporting not hearing the other pilots on the CTAF, all the pilots reported that they used the same frequency.

The low-wing airplane sustained substantial damage to the left wing. The high-wing airplane sustained substantial damage to the right wing and empennage.

Two witnesses in the other airplane reported that, while taxiing, they heard the pilots in the high-wing airplane transmit that they were "taking the runway" and departing. They observed the high-wing airplane line up on the runway but did not see any aircraft on base or final. Several moments later, they looked back and saw the high-wing airplane still on the runway and the low-wing airplane on final. One of the witnesses made a call on the CTAF warning the low-wing airplane pilot that another airplane was on the runway but heard no response. He made another call to the low-wing airplane pilots to suggest that they perform a go-around, and then they observed the low-wing airplane land on top of the high-wing airplane.

The pilots of the low- and high-wing airplanes reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with their airplanes that would have precluded normal operation. 

Probable Cause and Findings

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:
The pilot’s failure to see and avoid the airplane on the runway while landing and the pilot receiving instruction’s and flight instructor's failure to properly scan the approach before pulling onto the runway during the takeoff.

Findings

Personnel issues
Monitoring environment - Instructor/check pilot (Cause)
Monitoring environment - Student pilot (Cause)
Monitoring other aircraft - Pilot of other aircraft (Cause)

Environmental issues
Aircraft - Effect on operation (Cause)

Factual Information

History of Flight

Takeoff
Miscellaneous/other
Ground collision (Defining event)

Pilot Information


Certificate: Private
Age: 27, Female
Airplane Rating(s): Single-engine Land
Seat Occupied: Left
Other Aircraft Rating(s): None
Restraint Used: 3-point
Instrument Rating(s): Airplane
Second Pilot Present: Yes
Instructor Rating(s): None
Toxicology Performed: No
Medical Certification: Class 1 With Waivers/Limitations
Last FAA Medical Exam: 10/05/2017
Occupational Pilot: No
Last Flight Review or Equivalent: 05/12/2018
Flight Time:  (Estimated) 291 hours (Total, all aircraft), 33 hours (Total, this make and model), 155 hours (Pilot In Command, all aircraft), 20 hours (Last 90 days, all aircraft), 20 hours (Last 30 days, all aircraft)

Flight Instructor Information

Certificate:  Airline Transport; Flight Instructor; Commercial
Age: 26, Male
Airplane Rating(s): Multi-engine Land; Single-engine Land
Seat Occupied: Right
Other Aircraft Rating(s): None
Restraint Used: 3-point
Instrument Rating(s): Airplane
Second Pilot Present: Yes
Instructor Rating(s): Airplane Single-engine
Toxicology Performed: No
Medical Certification: Class 1 Without Waivers/Limitations
Last FAA Medical Exam: 04/25/2018
Occupational Pilot: Yes
Last Flight Review or Equivalent: 06/01/2018
Flight Time:  (Estimated) 1750 hours (Total, all aircraft), 13 hours (Total, this make and model), 1300 hours (Pilot In Command, all aircraft), 130 hours (Last 90 days, all aircraft), 50 hours (Last 30 days, all aircraft)

Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information

Aircraft Make: Cessna
Registration: N4240L
Model/Series: 172 G
Aircraft Category: Airplane
Year of Manufacture: 1966
Amateur Built: No
Airworthiness Certificate: Normal; Utility
Serial Number: 17254309
Landing Gear Type: Tricycle
Seats: 4
Date/Type of Last Inspection:  Unknown
Certified Max Gross Wt.: 2300 lbs
Time Since Last Inspection:
Engines: 1 Reciprocating
Airframe Total Time:
Engine Manufacturer: Continental
ELT: Installed, not activated
Engine Model/Series: O-300 SER
Registered Owner: Zarlinga, Victor
Rated Power: 145 hp
Operator: On file
Operating Certificate(s) Held: None

Meteorological Information and Flight Plan

Conditions at Accident Site: Visual Conditions
Condition of Light: Day
Observation Facility, Elevation: KAJO, 533 ft msl
Distance from Accident Site: 0 Nautical Miles
Observation Time: 2156 UTC
Direction from Accident Site: 289°
Lowest Cloud Condition: Clear
Visibility:  10 Miles
Lowest Ceiling: None
Visibility (RVR):
Wind Speed/Gusts: 7 knots /
Turbulence Type Forecast/Actual: None / None
Wind Direction: 260°
Turbulence Severity Forecast/Actual: N/A / N/A
Altimeter Setting: 29.99 inches Hg
Temperature/Dew Point: 22°C / 7°C
Precipitation and Obscuration: No Obscuration; No Precipitation
Departure Point: Corona, CA (AJO)
Type of Flight Plan Filed: Unknown
Destination: Corona, CA (AJO)
Type of Clearance: None
Departure Time: 1350 PST
Type of Airspace: Class G

Airport Information

Airport: CORONA MUNI (AJO)
Runway Surface Type: Asphalt
Airport Elevation: 533 ft
Runway Surface Condition: Dry
Runway Used: 25
IFR Approach: None
Runway Length/Width: 3200 ft / 60 ft
VFR Approach/Landing: None 

Wreckage and Impact Information

Crew Injuries: 2 None
Aircraft Damage: Substantial
Passenger Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Fire: None
Ground Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Explosion: None
Total Injuries: 2 None
Latitude, Longitude:  33.897500, -117.600278 (est)

3 comments:

James Russell said...

This reads like a conflicting reports between two parties (pilots). How will NTSB sort out this situation?

I thought that if the local airport could record CTAF transmissions would be a useful tool to have. I thought that was probably a pipe dream but another article mentions that a local airport was considering adopting/buying such a system (in non-towered airports). I also read that sometimes they transmit on the wrong frequency. How would that happen?

James Russell said...

okay I tried this a few minutes ago and it did not take.

This sounds like conflicting reports (He/she said). How would NTSB sort this one out?

I think it would be a good idea for non-towered airports have some means of recording local CTAF transmissions. It would help collaborate one of their comments.

Evidently that is not a farfetched idea because it has been reported that a local airport had purchased such a syste.

Anonymous said...

@James Russell, the radio recording technology exists and is not that expensive. Websites such as LiveATC.net rely on enthusiasts to monitor and record radio communications as well. KAJO is not recorded by LiveATC. The NTSB will take into account the fact that the crew witnessing the event did not hear transmissions from the landing aircraft. Per regulations, a landing aircraft has the right of way over surface aircraft. However, it is also the responsibility of the landing aircraft to see and avoid an impending collision. My guess is the blame will be shared between the two parties, with the majority going to the operator of the landing Sonex.