What happened
On October 3, 2018, a Cessna 152, operated by Aero Club de Portugal, was performing a training flight from Cascais (LPCS) to Santa Cruz (LPSC). The flight was conducted by a private pilot acting as pilot in command (PIC), accompanied by a safety pilot (SP) to assist with proficiency training.
Upon arrival at Santa Cruz, the crew observed a windsock that was hanging limp, providing no wind indication. During the approach to runway 35, the safety pilot noted that the aircraft was not properly configured and the approach was unstable. The aircraft remained below the estimated visual glide path, prompting the safety pilot to suggest a full-stop landing instead of the planned touch-and-go due to concerns regarding remaining runway length.
The pilot in command performed a long flare, touching down in the final third of the runway, approximately 99 meters from the end. During the landing roll, a conflict arose between the occupants regarding aircraft control; the safety pilot claimed control while the PIC continued to apply rudder and braking inputs. The simultaneous and often opposing use of pedals and brakes caused both tires to lock. The aircraft failed to stop within the paved surface, overran the runway through the clearway, and struck the aerodrome boundary fence before coming to rest near a cane field. The impact caused substantial damage to the nose gear, engine mount, propeller, fuel, and braking systems.
The investigation
The GPIAAF investigation examined the flight dynamics, the condition of the aerodrome infrastructure, and the cockpit management between the two pilots. The investigators analyzed the aircraft's trajectory, the meteorological conditions, and the maintenance of aerodrome aids. The investigation also reviewed the regulatory oversight of dual-pilot flight records and the responsibilities of the aircraft operator.
Findings
- The aircraft was subject to an unstable approach with improper configuration and a glide path below the estimated visual reference.
- There was a lack of effective coordination and a breakdown in command authority, characterized by simultaneous and opposing control inputs (rudder and braking) from both the PIC and the SP.
- The aircraft failed to dissipate sufficient energy due to the ineffective use of braking systems and the presence of a tailwind component of 5 to 7 knots.
- The windsock at the aerodrome was in a degraded state, failing to provide necessary wind information, which raised questions regarding the effectiveness of recent infrastructure inspections.
- Discrepancies were noted in the documentation of dual-pilot flight records, which did not align with current legislation.
Safety action
- The GPIAAF issued safety recommendation PT.SIA 2020-08 to the Director of Santa Cruz aerodrome, recommending an assessment of the effectiveness of scheduled infrastructure inspections and the implementation of NOTAMs to communicate any deficiencies in aeronautical aids to the aviation community.