Cessna 152 Safety Record

FAILURE OF THE PILOT-IN-COMMAND TO APPLY RIGHT RUDDER WHILE APPLYING POWER DURING THE TOUCH-AND-GO LANDING. CONTRIBUTING TO THE ACCIDENT WAS THE PILOT-IN-COMMAND'S LACK OF TOTAL EXPERIENCE.

THE STUDENT PILOT'S IMPROPER RECOVERY FROM A BOUNCED LANDING RESULTING IN THE COLLAPSE OF THE NOSE GEAR AND THE SUBSEQUENT NOSE OVER. A FACTOR WAS AN IMPROPER FLARE.

COMPANY MANAGEMENT'S DISPATCH OF AN AIRPLANE WITH KNOWN DEFICIENCIES, THEIR FAILURE TO CORRECT THE DEFICIENCIES, AND THE STUDENT PILOT'S INADVERTENT ENTRY INTO A STALL. FACTORS WHICH CONTRIBUTED TO THE ACCIDENT WERE: CHAFED WIRING, FOULED SPARK PLUGS, A MAGNETO INDUCED PARTIAL POWER LOSS, AND AN UNIDENTIFIED INSTRUCTOR'S FAILURE TO PROVIDE PROPER ASSISTANCE TO THE STUDENT PILOT.

the pilot's inadequate preflight planning for a departure from a short field and his failure to attain a proper climb rate, resulting in an in-flight collision with a 5 foot pole located on rising terrain, 20 feet above the airport elevation.

THE PILOT IN COMMAND'S FAILURE TO REFUEL RESULTING IN FUEL EXHUSTION. FACTORS WERE: THE LACK OF SUITABLE TERRAIN FOR THE FORCED LANDING, AND DARK NIGHT LIGHT CONDITIONS.

THE CFI'S INADEQUATE SUPERVISION OF THE FLIGHT, THE IMPROPER RECOVERY FROM THE BOUNCED LANDING BY THE CREW, AND THE LACK OF TOTAL EXPERIENCE IN GIVING DUAL INSTRUCTION BY THE CFI. FACTORS WHICH CONTRIBUTED TO THIS ACCIDENT WERE: THE DUAL STUDENT'S IMPROPER USE OF THE FLIGHT CONTROLS, THE CFI'S FAILURE TO ISSUE PROCEDURES/DIRECTIVES TO THE STUDENT, AND THE CFI'S FAILURE TO MAINTAIN DIRECTIONAL CONTROL OF THE AIRPLANE.

THE STUDENT PILOT'S MISJUDGING THE LANDING FLARE ALTITUDE AND HIS IMPROPER RECOVERY FROM A BOUNCED LANDING. FACTORS RELATING TO THIS ACCIDENT ARE THE STUDENT PILOT'S LACK OF TOTAL EXPERIENCE AND FAILURE TO RAISE THE FLAPS.

THE STUDENT PILOT'S FAILURE TO MAINTAIN DIRECTIONAL CONTROL DURING FLARE/TOUCHDOWN. THE PROXIMITY OF THE RAVINE AND TREES TO THE RUNWAY WAS A RELATED FACTOR.

A FAILURE OF THE PILOT TO MAINTAIN DIRECTIONAL CONTROL OF THE AIRPLANE DURING A GO-AROUND MANEUVER, SUBSEQUENT IMPROPER REMEDIAL ACTIONS AND AN INADVERTENT STALL. A FACTOR IN THIS ACCIDENT WAS THE PILOT'S LACK OF TOTAL AERONAUTICAL EXPERIENCE.

INADEQUATE SUPERVISION AND DELAYED REMEDIAL ACTION BY THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR. THE STUDENT PILOT'S FAILURE TO MAINTAIN DIRECTIONAL CONTROL AND HIS INEXPERIENCE IS A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR.

THE FAILURE OF DUAL STUDENT TO MAINTAIN AN ADEQUATE AIRSPEED DURING THE GO AROUND INITIATION, AND, THE INADEQUATE SUPERVISION OF THE FLIGHT BY THE INSTRUCTOR.

THE PILOT'S FAILURE TO RECOVER FROM A BOUNCED LANDING AND TO MAINTAIN AIRCRAFT CONTROL WHICH RESULTED IN THE AIRPLANE NOSING OVER. IMPROPER LANDING FLARE IS A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR.

INADEQUATE VISUAL LOOKOUT BY THE PILOT OF THE LANCAIR 320, N69WD, THAT PRECLUDED HIM FROM RECOGNIZING A COLLISION HAZARD AND TAKING ACTION TO AVOID A MIDAIR COLLISION WITH THE CESSNA 152, N80203. IN ADDITION, THE LOCAL CONTROLLER FAILED TO ADVISE THE PILOT OF THE LANCAIR THAT THERE WAS ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC (A SCOUT) IN THE PATTERN, CALLED TRAFFIC (A CESSNA 172) THAT WAS PROBABLY NOT VISIBLE TO THE PILOT OF THE LANCAIR, AND FAILED TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE LANCAIR PILOT HAD SIGHTED THE WRONG AIRPLANE. RAIN AND FOG WERE FACTORS IN THE ACCIDENT.

THE PILOT-IN-COMMAND'S FAILURE TO MAINTAIN AIRSPEED WHILE MANEUVERING AT LOW ALTITUDE. A FACTOR WHICH CONTRIBUTED TO THE ACCIDENT WAS THE PILOT'S FAILURE TO MAINTAIN AN ADEQUATE ALTITUDE FROM WHICH A RECOVERY WOULD HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE.