Concord-Buchanan Field

The pilot and four passengers were nearing the completion of a cross-county business flight. While maneuvering in the traffic pattern at the destination airport, the controller asked the pilot if he could accept a shorter runway. The pilot said he could not, so he was instructed to enter a holding pattern for sequencing; less than a minute later, the pilot said he could accept the shorter runway. He was instructed to conduct a left 270° turn to enter the traffic pattern. The pilot initiated a left bank turn and then several seconds later the bank increased, and the airplane subsequently entered a steep nose-down descent. The airplane impacted a shopping center parking lot about 1.6 miles from the destination airport. A review of the airplane's flight data revealed that, shortly after entering the left turn, and as the airplane’s bank increased, its airspeed decreased to about 59 knots, which was well below the manufacturer’s published stall speed in any configuration. Postaccident examination of the airframe and engines revealed no anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. It is likely that the pilot failed to maintain airspeed during the turn, which resulted in an exceedance of the aircraft's critical angle of attack and an aerodynamic stall.

While on an instrument approach for landing, the local tower air traffic controller observed on the BRITE radar repeater scope that the airplane passed the outer marker (OM), 600 feet below the permissible crossing altitude. The controller issued a low altitude alert to the pilot and cleared him to land. The controller also reminded the pilot that the minimum descent altitude for the Localizer Directional Aid (LDA) approach was 440 feet, and provided instructions for the missed approach. At that point the pilot reported that he had the airport in sight and acknowledged the landing instructions. The controller again cleared the pilot to land on the prescribed runway for the instrument approach, and the pilot acknowledged the landing clearance. Shortly thereafter the controller instructed the pilot to execute the missed approach as the radar track showed that the airplane was off course. The pilot was instructed to initiate a climbing left turn to the VOR. The pilot said he had the airport in sight and that he saw one of the cross runways and wanted to land. The controller told the pilot that circling to that runway was not an authorized procedure for the LDA approach and again instructed the pilot to perform the missed approach. A witness stated that he was working on a storage container, about 50 feet in height, when the airplane passed overhead. He estimated the airplane to be about 50 feet higher than the storage container. The airplane made a turn westbound and the witness looked away for a second. When he looked back the airplane was in a nose and left wing down attitude and then it impacted the ground. Another witness located on the airport's north-northeast corner also observed the airplane flying toward the airport. He reported simultaneously hearing the engine power up and observed the left wing stall prior to it impacting the ground. Both witnesses reported that they did not hear anything wrong with the engine. Examination of the airframe, power plant, and propeller revealed no mechanical anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. Internal damage signatures in the engine and propeller were consistent with the production of significant power at the time of impact. A review of the weather in the area revealed that while light rain and mist were occurring near the accident site, no meteorological phenomena existed that would have adversely affected the flight. The pilot and two passengers were killed while a third passenger, a boy aged 12, was seriously injured. He died from his injuries few hours later.

The twin turboprop airplane overran the runway, impacted two fences, and an occupied automobile after the airline transport pilot attempted to abort a takeoff. The pilot performed a rolling takeoff and was paying close attention to balancing the engine power and keeping runway centerline alignment. As the airplane accelerated, the pilot set the power above 80 percent and began an instrument scan. He then noted the airspeed indicator was reading zero with the needle resting on the peg. After a moment's hesitation, the pilot attempted to abort the takeoff by reducing the power levers to flight idle, and subsequently over the gate to ground fine. He reported to the FAA that he did not place the power controls into the reverse position. Air traffic controllers reported they observed the airplane with its nose wheel off of the ground approximately 3/4 of the way down the 4,602-foot long runway. The aircraft's left and right pitot/static systems were examined and tested after the accident, and no anomalies were noted. The pilot obtained verbal training on rejected/aborted takeoffs for the accident airplane. He obtained his type rating and 14 CFR 135 check-out in the accident airplane approximately 1 month prior to the accident. The pilot had accumulated a total of 10,867.5 hours of flight time, of which 34.7 hours were accumulated in the accident aircraft make and model. The pilot reported his total pilot-in-command flight time in the accident aircraft make and model as 20 hours, all of which were accumulated within the preceding 30 days of the accident. Examination of the airplane, the flight instruments and the pitot/static system found no explanation for the pilot reported lack of airspeed reading. The brakes were found to be fully functional. Review of the performance charts for the airplane disclosed that for the weight and ambient conditions of the takeoff, the airplane required 4,100 feet for an
accelerate-stop distance; the runway was 4,602 feet long.

Following a missed approach at the destination, the pilot requested weather information for two nearby airports. One airport was 53 miles northeast with a cloud ceiling of 900 feet, and visibility 6 miles. The pilot opted for the accident airport, 21 miles southwest, with an indefinite ceiling of zero, and visibility 1/4 mile. After completing the second missed approach, the flight proceeded to the accident airport. Radar vectors were provided to the ILS runway 36L. On the final approach, the flight veered to the right of the localizer and descended abruptly. Last recorded altitude for the flight was below the decision height. Investigation revealed no anomalies with the airport navigational aids for the approach, and the airplane's navigation receivers were found to be operational. Postmortem examinations of the pilot did not reveal any pre-existing diseases, and toxicological examinations were negative for alcohol and other drugs.

The cross country business flight was uneventful from Concord, New Hampshire to white Plains, New York under clear sky. During final approach, the pilot extended the gear but did not notice that the circuit breaker had opened and the gear was not lowered. The aircraft landed gear up and the gear doors partially open. The gear warning horn did not operate. The pilot stated that he failed to check for 3 green lights.

On 12/3/85 at approximately 0830, the aircraft was found lying inverted in a canal adjacent to the airport where it had been on 24 hour standby for medical flights. Twelve days later, the pilot's body was also found in the canal. An investigation revealed the aircraft had been taken sometime during a period when the tower was closed between 2200 pst on 12/2/85 and 0600 pst the next morning, without the knowledge or consent of the operator. Main gear tire marks were found in mud where the aircraft had continued off the departure end of the runway. Beyond the end of the runway, the aircraft hit a fence and a 5 feet dirt bank, then hit the ground after being airborne about 200 feet and came to rest in the canal. Sheriff's personnel contacted friends of the pilot, who had spent the evening with him. Base on information that they provided concerning the consumption of alcoholic beverages, the sheriff's personnel stated that the pilot would have been legally intoxicated. The overrun was presumed to have occurred during either a landing or a takeoff on 12/3/85.

The piper PA-31T was a foreign registered aircraft (Federal Republic of Germany). The owner/pilot in the left front seat held a German commercial certificate with airplane instrument, single engine land and multi-engine land ratings. The pilot in the right front seat held an American private certificate with an airplane single engine land rating. During arrival, the aircraft was cleared to enter a right traffic pattern for runway 32R and was to follow a Decathlon that was landing on the same runway. When the PA-31 aircrew called turning onto a base leg, the tower asked if they had the Decathlon in sight, but they did not reply. The Decathlon pilot was then instructed to change his approach to 32L and was cleared to land. The PA-31 was observed to overshoot the turn to the final approach course to runway 32R. Witnesses reported the aircraft made an erratic, slow speed, nose high turn at low altitude, then it entered a right turn, nose down spin, crashed and burned. Impact occurred on a ground structure. An investigation revealed no preimpact/part failure or malfunction. Fire damaged to 5 autos. All six occupants were killed.