Ankeny

The noninstrument-rated private pilot was conducting a visual flight rules (VFR) cross-country flight while receiving VFR flight following services from air traffic control. Radar data and voice
communication information indicated that the airplane was in cruise flight as the pilot deviated around convective weather near his destination. The controller issued a weather advisory to the pilot concerning areas of moderate to extreme precipitation along his route; the pilot responded that he saw the weather on the airplane's NEXRAD weather display system and planned to deviate around it before resuming course. About 3 minutes later, the pilot stated that he was around the weather and requested to start his descent direct toward his destination. The controller advised the pilot to descend at his discretion. Radar showed the airplane in a descending right turn before radar contact was lost at 2,900 ft mean sea level. There were no eyewitnesses, and search personnel reported rain and thunderstorms in the area about the time of the accident. The distribution of the wreckage was consistent with an in-flight breakup. Examination of the airframe revealed overload failures of the empennage and wings. No pre-impact airframe structural anomalies were found, and the propeller showed evidence of rotation at the time of impact. Further, there was no evidence of pilot impairment or incapacitation. Review of weather information indicated that the pilot most likely encountered instrument meteorological conditions as the airplane descended during the last several minutes of flight. During this time, it is likely that the pilot became disoriented while attempting to maneuver in convective, restricted visibility conditions, and lost control of the airplane. The transition from visual to instrument flight conditions would have been conducive to the development of spatial disorientation; the turning descent before the loss of radar contact and the in-flight breakup are also consistent with a loss of control due to spatial disorientation.

The instrument-rated private pilot was returning to his home airport after flying to another location to attend a meeting. At the departure airport, the pilot filed an instrument flight rules flight plan, had it activated, and then departed for his home airport. After reaching his assigned altitude, the pilot requested clearance directly to his destination with air traffic control, and he was cleared as requested. Before arriving at his airport, he requested off frequency to get the NOTAMs and weather conditions for his destination. The weather conditions at the arrival airport included a 200-ft overcast ceiling and 5 miles visibility with light rain and mist. The pilot then requested the instrument landing system (ILS) approach for landing. An air traffic controller issued vectors to the ILS final approach course and cleared the pilot to change off their frequency. Witnesses at the airport reported hearing and seeing the airplane break out of the clouds, fly over the runway about 100 ft above ground level (agl), and then disappear back into the clouds. Two witnesses stated that the engine sounded as if it were at full power and another witness stated that he heard the engine "revving" as if flew overhead. Shortly after the airplane was seen over the airport, it struck a line of 80-ft tall trees about 3,600 ft north-northwest of the airport and subsequently impacted the ground and a large tree near a residence. The published missed approach procedures required the pilot to climb the airplane to an altitude of 2,000 ft mean sea level (msl), or about 900 ft agl, while flying the runway heading. Upon reaching 2,000 ft msl, the pilot was required to begin a left turn to the northwest and then continue climbing to 3,300 ft msl. An examination of the airplane, the engine, and other airplane systems revealed no anomalies that would have precluded the airplane from being able to fully perform in a climb during the missed approach. It is likely that the pilot lost airplane control after initiating a missed approach in instrument meteorological conditions. Although it is possible that the pilot may have experienced spatial disorientation, there was insufficient evidence to conclude that spatial disorientation contributed to the accident.

The pilot departed his home airport at 0502 and landed at another airport where he picked up employees of a marketing company to fly them to an out of state meeting. The accident occurred at 2003 shortly after taking off on the return trip to fly the employees back home. Shortly before departure a fourth passenger was added to the flight after his commercial flight was cancelled. A person who worked for the fixed base operator at the departure airport stated the pilot looked tired or just ready to go home. The pilot received his clearance for the IFR flight prior to takeoff. The pilot misread the clearance back to the controlled and was corrected. Radar data showed the pilot initially flew the assigned south-southwest heading prior to the airplane turning right to a westerly heading. The controller queried the pilot and issued a heading to intercept the VOR. The pilot corrected the heading and shortly thereafter the airplane once again began a right turn back toward the west. The airplane continued to climb throughout the heading changes. Radar data showed the airplane then began another left turn during which time it entered a spiraling rapid descent. According to weather data, the airplane was in instrument meteorological conditions when this occurred. The airplane impacted the terrain in an open cornfield. Weight and balance calculations indicate the airplane was at least 383 pounds over gross weight. Post accident inspection of the airplane and engines did not reveal any preexisting failure/malfunction.

The twin-engine airplane was destroyed by impact with terrain about 2.5 miles northeast of the airport while returning to the airport with an engine problem. A witness reported that the FAR Part 135 on-demand passenger flight had been scheduled for a 0900 departure, but because the flight had not been confirmed, a pilot was not scheduled to fly the flight. The accident pilot arrived at the airport about 1005. A witness reported that the pilot was not in the office for more than two minutes when he "grabbed the status book," walked straight to the airplane, and boarded. A lineman serviced both engines at 0930 with oil, but failed to put the dipstick back in the right engine oil filler tube. Witnesses reported that they did not see the pilot perform a preflight. The pilot was unaware that the dipstick was left on the right wing of the airplane. The pilot taxied the airplane forward about 5 feet and abruptly stopped and shut down both engines. The pilot got out of the airplane. The lineman reported that he approached the pilot and asked what was wrong. The lineman reported that the pilot closed the oil flap door on the right engine, and said that the oil flap door had been left open. The pilot restarted the engines and departed about 1008. About three minutes after takeoff, the pilot informed departure control that he needed to return to the airport due to an oil leak. The pilot reported over the Unicom radio frequency that he was returning because he was having trouble with the right engine. Radar track data indicated that about 1013, the airplane's position was about 1.5 miles directly north of the airport about 1,800 feet msl, heading south at 126 knots calibrated airspeed (CAS). The airplane continued to fly south directly to the airport. The radar track data indicated that instead of landing on runway 18, the airplane flew over the airport, paralleling runway 18. About 1014, the airplane's position was over the airport at an altitude of about 1,460 feet msl (550 feet above ground level), heading south at about 97 knots CAS. The airplane continued to fly south past the airport, entered a left turn, and turned back to the north. The last radar return was recorded about 1016. The airplane's position was approximately 1.5 miles east of the approach end of runway 18 at an altitude of about 1,116 feet msl (344 feet agl), heading north at about 99 knots CAS. The impact site was located about 2.5 miles north of the last radar return. A witness, located about 1/4 mile from the accident site, observed the airplane flying "really low." He reported, "The motor on the plane wasn't cutting out or sputtering." Another witness reported, "The plane lifted up over power lines then went across a field about 50 to 80 ft off ground." The airplane impacted a harvested cornfield in a Page 2 of 11 CHI06FA026 steep nose-down attitude, and traveled 45 feet before stopping. The inspection of the airplane revealed that the landing gear was down, flaps were found in a 20-degree down position, and neither propeller was feathered. The post accident inspection of the airplane's engines and airframe revealed no preexisting anomalies that could be associated with a pre-impact condition.