 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Following an unstabilized approach to a touch and go; a C172 student pilot failed to become airborne. The instructor took aircraft control and guided the aircraft off the runway's end where some damage was sustained after striking a light.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 834910 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200905 |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601-1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
| Flight Phase | Landing Takeoff |
| Route In Use | Other VOR 27 1G5 |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Pilot Not Flying |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Commercial Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Flight Instructor |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 225 Flight Crew Total 880 Flight Crew Type 350 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Ground Event / Encounter Object Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control Inflight Event / Encounter Object Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach |
Narrative:
We were conducting VOR approach. Instructor had informed student that the approach would terminate in a touch-and-go. The student removed the view-limiting device at MDA and 1.3NM from map. Approach was slightly high; fast; and unstabilized. Airplane touched down 1;500 ft from the threshold; with 2;000 ft remaining. Immediately after touchdown; instructor called for flaps-up and full power. Student applied full power and then retracted the flaps after 4 seconds. Takeoff appeared normal but at rotation speed; student stated; 'we're stalled'. After 2 more seconds; the student pulled power to idle and applied brakes heavily. Instructor then took flight controls and tried to make the turn-off at the end of the runway. When it was apparent that this would not be feasible; instructor took airplane off departure end of the runway and into the grass. Airplane was shutdown using checklist. IFR clearance was canceled via cell phone. The only apparent damage to airplane was to the aluminum covering on the left landing gear strut where the runway end light was impacted. The light also struck the left wing strut. The propeller did not strike the runway end light. The student and instructor did not observe a change in RPM and a mechanic did not detect any damage. Obviously; a go-around should have been called at the first sign of an unstabilized approach.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Following an unstabilized approach to a touch and go; a C172 student pilot failed to become airborne. The instructor took aircraft control and guided the aircraft off the runway's end where some damage was sustained after striking a light.
Narrative: We were conducting VOR approach. Instructor had informed student that the approach would terminate in a touch-and-go. The student removed the view-limiting device at MDA and 1.3NM from MAP. Approach was slightly high; fast; and unstabilized. Airplane touched down 1;500 FT from the threshold; with 2;000 FT remaining. Immediately after touchdown; instructor called for flaps-up and full power. Student applied full power and then retracted the flaps after 4 seconds. Takeoff appeared normal but at rotation speed; student stated; 'we're stalled'. After 2 more seconds; the student pulled power to idle and applied brakes heavily. Instructor then took flight controls and tried to make the turn-off at the end of the runway. When it was apparent that this would not be feasible; instructor took airplane off departure end of the runway and into the grass. Airplane was shutdown using checklist. IFR clearance was canceled via cell phone. The only apparent damage to airplane was to the aluminum covering on the left landing gear strut where the runway end light was impacted. The light also struck the left wing strut. The propeller did not strike the runway end light. The student and instructor did not observe a change in RPM and a mechanic did not detect any damage. Obviously; a go-around should have been called at the first sign of an unstabilized approach.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.