Narrative:

I initiated a hot-air balloon flight from mgy. WX conditions were clear, temperature approximately 55 degrees F, winds from the south at approximately 3 KTS. The flight was for a flight review and the passenger was an experienced commercial balloon pilot. An experienced ground crew of 5 people was on hand to help with the flight. During the preflight briefing, I launched a helium filled pilot balloon and told them that our flight would probably be fairly fast above 500 ft, but well within my past flying experience and personal comfort levels. Anticipated direction of travel and potential landing areas were determined to be suitable. Takeoff was uneventful, but by about 10 mins into the flight, we noticed by the movement of flags that the wind was beginning to pick up on the surface. I decided to end the flight early and selected an area clear of obstacles and suitable for retrieval. The upwind edge of the landing field was bordered by a large power line, a 69000 volt primary feeder with a static line on top of approximately 100 ft poles. These lines were observed both by myself and the passenger, and I set up an approach that I believed would allow us to adequately clear the lines. As we approached the lines, we began to descend at a rate that placed us in jeopardy of not clearing the lines. I applied heat with both burners, but we continued to be forced down into lines, striking first the static line at about basket ht and then settling onto the first conductor of the primary, causing an arc through the basket cables and what I believe to have been the ionized air caused by the burner flame. The breaker on the primary opened without injury to either myself or my passenger. The heat added to the envelope before the strike, coupled with a reverse push of the static line against the basket lifted us over the line and allowed a relatively controled landing in the intended field. Estimated speed at the time of impact was approximately 400 FPM. Examination of the balloon after landing indicated relatively minor damage to the envelope fabric. The nomex scoop was burned away by the burner flame and some damage was done to one or two panels of balloon fabric. More extensive damage was done to the basket, due to the high current being conducted through the metal basket support cables and the burner frame. There did not appear to have been any fire related to the power line contact or any damage to the fuel system. I believe several factors contributed to this incident. The direct cause was failure to allow sufficient clearance between the power line and the balloon to allow for unforeseen conditions. Both my passenger and I believe what we experienced was a low-level windshear. Secondarily, although I have flown in similar conditions on numerous occasions during my 14 yrs of ballooning and despite the fact that I was current with respect to takeoffs and lndgs, I had not done a morning flight in over a yr, and have had relatively little flying time in the last 90 days. Morning flts are markedly different than evening balloon flts, with much less predictable wind conditions. I believe in retrospect that I did not give these differences sufficient weight in my decision-making process. Based on what occurred, the landing field selected may have been inappropriate for the potentially unpredictable conditions. I believe the root cause of this incident was insufficient recent experience to handle the conditions presented by this flight. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter was flying a cameron V90 during a flight check. Even though the aerostar suffered $10000 damage, this was deemed to be an 'incident' by the FAA and no action was taken. There was damage to the envelope, skirt, basket cables and 'U' tubes, the burner and the instruments were 'fried.' the reporter believes that there was arcing through ionized air that caused most of the damage. The landing site was deemed to be proper, in a city park near the police station, and to be caused by low-level windshear. There were no injuries. The reporter landed at his target landing spot.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CAMERON V90 HOT AIR BALLOON PLT HIT PWR LINES ON A FLT REVIEW.

Narrative: I INITIATED A HOT-AIR BALLOON FLT FROM MGY. WX CONDITIONS WERE CLR, TEMP APPROX 55 DEGS F, WINDS FROM THE S AT APPROX 3 KTS. THE FLT WAS FOR A FLT REVIEW AND THE PAX WAS AN EXPERIENCED COMMERCIAL BALLOON PLT. AN EXPERIENCED GND CREW OF 5 PEOPLE WAS ON HAND TO HELP WITH THE FLT. DURING THE PREFLT BRIEFING, I LAUNCHED A HELIUM FILLED PLT BALLOON AND TOLD THEM THAT OUR FLT WOULD PROBABLY BE FAIRLY FAST ABOVE 500 FT, BUT WELL WITHIN MY PAST FLYING EXPERIENCE AND PERSONAL COMFORT LEVELS. ANTICIPATED DIRECTION OF TRAVEL AND POTENTIAL LNDG AREAS WERE DETERMINED TO BE SUITABLE. TKOF WAS UNEVENTFUL, BUT BY ABOUT 10 MINS INTO THE FLT, WE NOTICED BY THE MOVEMENT OF FLAGS THAT THE WIND WAS BEGINNING TO PICK UP ON THE SURFACE. I DECIDED TO END THE FLT EARLY AND SELECTED AN AREA CLR OF OBSTACLES AND SUITABLE FOR RETRIEVAL. THE UPWIND EDGE OF THE LNDG FIELD WAS BORDERED BY A LARGE PWR LINE, A 69000 VOLT PRIMARY FEEDER WITH A STATIC LINE ON TOP OF APPROX 100 FT POLES. THESE LINES WERE OBSERVED BOTH BY MYSELF AND THE PAX, AND I SET UP AN APCH THAT I BELIEVED WOULD ALLOW US TO ADEQUATELY CLR THE LINES. AS WE APCHED THE LINES, WE BEGAN TO DSND AT A RATE THAT PLACED US IN JEOPARDY OF NOT CLEARING THE LINES. I APPLIED HEAT WITH BOTH BURNERS, BUT WE CONTINUED TO BE FORCED DOWN INTO LINES, STRIKING FIRST THE STATIC LINE AT ABOUT BASKET HT AND THEN SETTLING ONTO THE FIRST CONDUCTOR OF THE PRIMARY, CAUSING AN ARC THROUGH THE BASKET CABLES AND WHAT I BELIEVE TO HAVE BEEN THE IONIZED AIR CAUSED BY THE BURNER FLAME. THE BREAKER ON THE PRIMARY OPENED WITHOUT INJURY TO EITHER MYSELF OR MY PAX. THE HEAT ADDED TO THE ENVELOPE BEFORE THE STRIKE, COUPLED WITH A REVERSE PUSH OF THE STATIC LINE AGAINST THE BASKET LIFTED US OVER THE LINE AND ALLOWED A RELATIVELY CTLED LNDG IN THE INTENDED FIELD. ESTIMATED SPD AT THE TIME OF IMPACT WAS APPROX 400 FPM. EXAMINATION OF THE BALLOON AFTER LNDG INDICATED RELATIVELY MINOR DAMAGE TO THE ENVELOPE FABRIC. THE NOMEX SCOOP WAS BURNED AWAY BY THE BURNER FLAME AND SOME DAMAGE WAS DONE TO ONE OR TWO PANELS OF BALLOON FABRIC. MORE EXTENSIVE DAMAGE WAS DONE TO THE BASKET, DUE TO THE HIGH CURRENT BEING CONDUCTED THROUGH THE METAL BASKET SUPPORT CABLES AND THE BURNER FRAME. THERE DID NOT APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN ANY FIRE RELATED TO THE PWR LINE CONTACT OR ANY DAMAGE TO THE FUEL SYS. I BELIEVE SEVERAL FACTORS CONTRIBUTED TO THIS INCIDENT. THE DIRECT CAUSE WAS FAILURE TO ALLOW SUFFICIENT CLRNC BTWN THE PWR LINE AND THE BALLOON TO ALLOW FOR UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS. BOTH MY PAX AND I BELIEVE WHAT WE EXPERIENCED WAS A LOW-LEVEL WINDSHEAR. SECONDARILY, ALTHOUGH I HAVE FLOWN IN SIMILAR CONDITIONS ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS DURING MY 14 YRS OF BALLOONING AND DESPITE THE FACT THAT I WAS CURRENT WITH RESPECT TO TKOFS AND LNDGS, I HAD NOT DONE A MORNING FLT IN OVER A YR, AND HAVE HAD RELATIVELY LITTLE FLYING TIME IN THE LAST 90 DAYS. MORNING FLTS ARE MARKEDLY DIFFERENT THAN EVENING BALLOON FLTS, WITH MUCH LESS PREDICTABLE WIND CONDITIONS. I BELIEVE IN RETROSPECT THAT I DID NOT GIVE THESE DIFFERENCES SUFFICIENT WT IN MY DECISION-MAKING PROCESS. BASED ON WHAT OCCURRED, THE LNDG FIELD SELECTED MAY HAVE BEEN INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE POTENTIALLY UNPREDICTABLE CONDITIONS. I BELIEVE THE ROOT CAUSE OF THIS INCIDENT WAS INSUFFICIENT RECENT EXPERIENCE TO HANDLE THE CONDITIONS PRESENTED BY THIS FLT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR WAS FLYING A CAMERON V90 DURING A FLT CHK. EVEN THOUGH THE AEROSTAR SUFFERED $10000 DAMAGE, THIS WAS DEEMED TO BE AN 'INCIDENT' BY THE FAA AND NO ACTION WAS TAKEN. THERE WAS DAMAGE TO THE ENVELOPE, SKIRT, BASKET CABLES AND 'U' TUBES, THE BURNER AND THE INSTS WERE 'FRIED.' THE RPTR BELIEVES THAT THERE WAS ARCING THROUGH IONIZED AIR THAT CAUSED MOST OF THE DAMAGE. THE LNDG SITE WAS DEEMED TO BE PROPER, IN A CITY PARK NEAR THE POLICE STATION, AND TO BE CAUSED BY LOW-LEVEL WINDSHEAR. THERE WERE NO INJURIES. THE RPTR LANDED AT HIS TARGET LNDG SPOT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.