Piper PA-46 (Malibu/Meridian/Mirage/Matrix/M-Class)

Shortly after takeoff from Saint Augustine Airport, while in initial climb, the airplane contacted trees and crashed in a wooded area, bursting into flames. Both occupants and their dog escaped with minor injuries. The airplane was destroyed by a post crash fire.

The airplane sustained substantial damage when it was involved in an accident near Thedford, Nebraska. The pilot and passenger were uninjured. The airplane was being operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight. The pilot reported that during landing, when the nose wheel made contact with the runway, the airplane began to veer right. He attempted to use left rudder and brake to keep the airplane on the runway, but as the airspeed decreased, directional control became harder to maintain and the airplane subsequently departed the right side of the runway. During the runway excursion, the airplane impacted a runway light, spun left and the landing gear collapsed. During a post accident examination, it was determined that the airplane sustained substantial damage to the left wing.

The pilot reported, and airport security video confirmed, that during a takeoff attempt, the right wing contacted the runway and the pilot pulled back excessively on the yoke. The airplane pitched up, stalled, and descended back on to the runway. It subsequently traveled off the end of the runway and impacted trees, before coming to rest on its side. The pilot added that in retrospect, he should have rejected the takeoff when the right wing contacted the runway. Examination of the wreckage by a Federal Aviation Administration inspector did not reveal any preimpact mechanical malfunctions, nor did the pilot report any. The inspector noted that both wings separated, and the fuselage was substantially damaged.

Following an uneventful flight from Memphis at FL260, the pilot initiated the descent to Yoakum Airport, Texas. On final approach to runway 31, the single engine airplane went out of control and crashed in an open field located about one mile southeast of the airfield. A passenger was able to get out from the cabin and was slightly injured while all four other occupants were killed.

The single engine airplane departed Nashua Airport, New Hampshire, on December 13 on a flight to Nuuk, Greenland, with an intermediate stop in Goose Bay. Due to poor weather conditions at destination, the pilot diverted to Seven Islands Airport, Quebec, where the couple passed the overnight. On the morning of December 14, the airplane departed Seven Islands Airport at 0820LT bound for Goose Bay. At about 0958LT, the aircraft crossed the final approach fix / final approach waypoint FAFKO at 2,800 feet ASL, travelling at a ground speed of 104 knots, and began the final descent. Although the descent remained steady on a 3° profile, the ground speed decreased continuously for about 60 seconds. At 1000:31, the occurrence pilot reported at waypoint SATAK, and the ground speed had increased to above 80 knots. The tower provided the pilot with updated wind information and cleared the aircraft to land on Runway 08. The pilot acknowledged the clearance at 1000:49. Soon after, the ground speed began to decrease at a rate similar to the previous rate. At 1002:47, it had decreased to 51 knots. The aircraft departed controlled flight and impacted terrain when it was about 2.5 NM southwest of the airport along the extended centreline for Runway 08. The 406 MHz emergency locator transmitter activated, and the signal was received by the Joint Rescue Coordination Centre in Halifax, Nova Scotia, at 1006. A helicopter search and rescue mission was launched from Canadian Forces Base 5 Wing Goose Bay at 1036; the helicopter arrived at the accident site 3 minutes later. Medical technicians extricated the 2 occupants, who were both seriously injured. The occupants were airlifted to a waiting ambulance and then transported to the local hospital. The pilot later died of his injuries. The aircraft was destroyed.

The pilot obtained a preflight weather briefing about 2.5 hours before departing on an instrument flight rules (IFR) cross-country flight. Automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) and weather data indicated the flight encountered low IFR (LIFR) conditions during the approach to the destination airport. These conditions included low ceilings, low visibility, localized areas of freezing precipitation, low-level turbulence and wind shear. The ADS-B data revealed that during the last minute of data, the airplane’s descent rate increased from 500 ft per minute to 3,000 ft per minute. In the last 30 seconds of the flight the airplane entered a 2,000 ft per minute climb followed by a descent that exceeded 5,000 ft per minute. The last data point was located about 1,000 ft from the accident site. There were no witnesses to the accident. A postaccident examination of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. The airplane’s flight instruments and avionics were destroyed during the accident and were unable to be functionally tested. The rapid ascents and descents near the end of the flight track were consistent with a pilot who was experiencing spatial disorientation, which resulted in a loss of control and high-speed impact with terrain. The pilot purchased the airplane about 3 weeks before the accident and received about 15 hours of transition training in the airplane, including 1 hour of actual instrument conditions during high-altitude training. The pilot’s logbook indicated he had 5.2 hours of actual instrument flight time. At the time of the pilot’s weather briefing, the destination airport was reporting marginal visual flight rules (MVFR) conditions with the terminal area forecast (TAF) in agreement, with MVFR conditions expected to prevail through the period of the accident flight. LIFR conditions were reported about 40 minutes before the airplane’s departure and continued to the time of the accident. Light freezing precipitation was reported intermittently before and after the accident, which was not included in the TAF. The destination airport’s automated surface observing system (ASOS) reported LIFR conditions with overcast ceilings at 300 ft above ground level (agl) and light freezing drizzle at the time of the accident. Low-level turbulence and wind shear were detected, which indicated a high probability of a moderate or greater turbulence layer between 3,600 and 5,500 ft mean sea level (msl) in the clouds. During the approach, the airplane was in instrument meteorological conditions with a high probability of encountering moderate and greater turbulence, with above freezing temperatures. The National Weather Service (NWS) had issued conflicting weather information during the accident time period. The pilot’s weather briefing indicated predominately MVFR conditions reported and forecasted by the TAFs along the route of flight, while both the NWS Aviation Weather Center (AWC) AIRMET (G-AIRMET) and the Graphic Forecast for Aviation (GFA) were depicting IFR conditions over the destination airport at the time of the briefing. The TAFs, GAIRMET, and Current Icing Product (CIP)/Forecast Icing Products (FIP) were not indicating any forecast for icing conditions or freezing precipitation surrounding the accident time. The pilot reviewed the TAF in his briefing, expecting MVFR conditions to prevail at his expected time of arrival. The TAF was amended twice between the period of his briefing and the time of the accident to indicate IFR to LIFR conditions with no mention of any potential freezing precipitation or low-level wind shear (LLWS) during the period. Given the pilot’s low actual instrument experience, minimal amount of flight experience in the accident airplane, and the instrument conditions encountered during the approach with a high probability of moderate or greater turbulence, it is likely that the pilot experienced spatial disorientation and lost control of the airplane.

The student pilot was enroute at an altitude about 17,700 ft mean sea level (msl) on a crosscountry flight with a passenger in his high-performance airplane. The pilot was receiving visual flight rules flight following services from air traffic control, who advised him of an area of moderate to heavy precipitation at the airplane’s 12 o’clock position. The pilot replied that he had been able to “dodge” the areas of precipitation, but that they were getting bigger. There were no further communications from the pilot. Shortly thereafter, the airplane entered a left turn that continued through 180° before the airplane began a descent from its cruise altitude. The flight track ended in an area of moderate to extreme reflectivity as depicted on weather radar and indicated that the airplane was in a rapidly descending right turn at 13,900 ft when tracking information was lost. The wreckage was scattered across a debris field about 2 miles long. Examination of the wreckage revealed lateral crushing along the left side of the fuselage and the separation of both wings and the empennage. Wing spar signatures and empennage and wing impact marks suggested positive wing loading before the wing separation and in-flight breakup. The area of the accident site was included in a Convective SIGMET advisory for thunderstorms, hail, and wind gusts of up to 50 kts. A model atmospheric sounding near the accident site indicated clouds between about 15,000 ft and 27,000 ft, as well as the potential for light rime icing from 15,500 ft to 23,000 ft. Review of the pilot’s logbook revealed that he had about 47 total hours of flight experience, with about 4 hours of instruction in simulated instrument conditions. A previous flight instructor reported that the pilot displayed attitudes of “anti-authority” and “impulsivity.” Ethanol was detected in two postmortem tissue specimens; however, based on the distribution and amount detected, the ethanol may have been from postmortem production, and it is unlikely to have contributed to the crash. Fluoxetine, trazodone, and phentermine were also detected in the pilot’s postmortem toxicology specimens. The pilot had reported his use of fluoxetine for anger and irritability. Anger and irritability are nonspecific symptoms that may or may not be associated with mental health conditions, including depression, certain personality disorders, and bipolar disorder. These conditions may be associated with impulsive behavior, increased risk taking, lack of planning, not appreciating consequences of actions, and substance use disorders. Both trazodone and phentermine have the potential for impairing effects; however, an unimpaired pilot with the pilot’s relative inexperience would have been likely to lose aircraft control during an encounter with instrument meteorological conditions (IMC). It is therefore unlikely that the pilot’s use of trazodone and phentermine affected his handling of the airplane in a way that contributed to the crash. Based on review of the pilot’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) medical certification file, no specific conclusion can be drawn regarding any underlying psychiatric condition that may have contributed to his decision to attempt and continue the flight into IMC, as that decision was consistent with his previous pattern of risk-tolerant behavior. The pilot had not formally been diagnosed with a mental health disorder in his personal medical records reviewed other than substance use disorders. The psychological and psychiatric evaluations reviewed were not for diagnostic and treatment purposes, but for evaluation for FAA medical certification, and therefore did not generate diagnoses. There is evidence that the pilot had a pattern of poor decision-making, high-risk tolerance, and impulsive behavior. The circumstances of the accident are consistent with the student pilot’s decision to continue into an area of deteriorating weather conditions, his encounter with instrument meteorological conditions and convective activity, and loss of visual references, which resulted in spatial disorientation and a loss of aircraft control. During the descent, the airplane exceeded its design limitations, resulting in structural failure and an in-flight breakup.

On July 17, 2022, about 1204 pacific daylight time, a Piper PA-46-350P airplane, N97CX, and a Cessna 172N airplane, N160RA, were destroyed when they were involved in an accident near Las Vegas, Nevada. The two pilots in the PA-46, and the flight instructor and student pilot in the Cessna 172, were fatally injured. The PA-46 was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91 personal flight, and the Cessna 172 was operated as a Title 14 CFR Part 91 instructional flight. Both airplanes were maneuvering to land at North Las Vegas Airport (VGT), Las Vegas Nevada, when the accident occurred. N97CX had been instructed by air traffic control (ATC) to fly left traffic for runway 30L and N160RA had been instructed to fly right traffic for runway 30R. The airplanes collided about 0.25 nautical miles from the approach end of runway 30R. Figure 1 shows a simplified flight path diagram for the accident flights based on Federal Aviation Administration Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Broadcast (ADS-B) data. N97CX was operating as an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight and had departed from Coeur d'Alene Airport - Pappy Boyington Field (COE), Coeur d'Alene, Idaho about 0943, destined for VGT. N160RA was operating as a visual flight rules (VFR) training flight at VGT. N160RA was in the VFR traffic pattern for runway 30R, flying a right-hand traffic pattern and communicating with the VGT local controller. N97CX was inbound from the north on an IFR flight plan from COE. At 1156:08, the Nellis Radar Approach Control air traffic controller cleared N97CX for the visual approach and instructed the pilot to overfly VGT at midfield for left traffic to runway 30L. Air traffic control responsibility for the flight was transferred from Nellis Radar Approach Control to VGT at 1158:26. At 1158:43, the pilot of N97CX contacted the VGT local controller and reported “descending out of 7,600 feet msl for landing on three zero left and ah Nellis said to cross midfield.” The VGT local controller responded, “continue for three zero left.” The pilot acknowledged and stated, “okay continue for runway three zero left nine seven charlie x-ray we will cross over midfield.” At 1200:03, the pilot of N160RA requested a “short approach.” The VGT local controller transmitted “zero romeo alpha short approach approved runway three zero right cleared for the option,” which was acknowledged by N160RA. This information is preliminary and subject to change. At 1201:36, the VGT local controller transmitted “november seven charlie x-ray runway three zero left cleared to land.” The pilot of N97CX responded “three zero left cleared to land nine seven charlie x-ray.” At 1201:57, the VGT local controller transmitted “seven charlie x-ray I think I said it right runway three zero left seven charlie x-ray runway three zero left.” At 1202:02 the pilot of N97CX transmitted “yeah affirmative runway three zero left that’s what i heard nine seven charlie x-ray”. There were no further transmissions from either airplane. Examination of N97CX revealed that the airplane impacted in a nose low, right wing down attitude. The landing gear was down, and the right main landing gear was displaced outboard. The right wing displayed an impact separation around wing station (WS) 93. The right inboard wing section remained attached to the fuselage but was canted aft. The right wing flap was fractured about midspan; the inboard section remained attached to the wing and was found in the extended position. The outboard half of the flap was found about 10 ft forward of the right wing. The right wing leading edge displayed a series of crush impressions to the leading edge about 2.5 ft outboard of the wing root. The impressions contained flakes of green primer, and cuts to the de-ice boot. The outboard right wing section remained attached to the inboard wing by the aileron control cables. The aileron remained attached to the outboard wing section but was impact damaged. The outboard leading edge was crushed up and aft. The right wingtip fairing and pitot tube were also impact separated. Longitudinal scratches were visible along the right side of the fuselage. Examination of N160RA revealed that, the airplane had impacted terrain in a left-wing and nose-low attitude before coming to rest inverted on a 304°magnetic heading. Both inboard portions of the wings sustained thermal damage in the areas surrounding the fuel tanks, and the cabin and fuselage, except for the cabin roof, were consumed by a post-impact fire. Blue paint transfer was observed on the lower surface of the separated outboard left wing and the lower surface of the left wing flap. Black de-ice boot material transfer was observed on the lower surface of the separated outboard left wing, the lower surface of the attached portion of the left wing at approximately WS 100, and for an approximate 5 ft long distance outboard of the strut attach point, along the lower leading edge. About 4 ft of the left wing, which included the left aileron, was separated from the left wing, and was found on the edge of a culvert just south of the main wreckage. The left outboard wing section aft of the forward spar was found to be separated near the aileron-flap junction. The left wing flap was found to be separated from the wing.