27 Mar 2009: CESSNA 180G — Richard E. Wallace

27 Mar 2009: CESSNA 180G (N98FC) — Richard E. Wallace

No fatalities • Wendover, UT, United States

Probable cause

A loss of directional control during landing as a result of the binding in one main landing gear brake assembly due to incorrect maintenance procedures. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's failure to correctly reconfigure the airplane during an attempted rejected landing.

— NTSB Determination

Accident narrative

On March 27, 2009, about 1645 mountain daylight time, a Cessna 180G, N98FC, nosed over after departing the side of the runway at Wendover Airport, Wendover, Utah. The private pilot and his passenger were not injured, but the airplane, which was owned and operated by the pilot, sustained substantial damage. The local 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal pleasure flight, which was initiated at the same airport about 15 minutes prior to the accident, was being operated in visual meteorological conditions. No flight plan had been filed.

According to the pilot, his first landing was a stop-and-go, followed by a closed pattern to a second planned stop-and-go. On his second landing, immediately after touching down on the main landing gear, the airplane veered sharply to the right. The pilot therefore applied opposite rudder, but the airplane continued toward the right edge of the runway. Because the airplane was heading toward rough terrain off the right side of the runway, the pilot elected to execute a go-around. He therefore pushed the throttle full forward, and attempted to get the airplane to lift off, but he did not push the carburetor heat to the off position or reposition the flaps from their setting of 40 degrees. Although the airplane lifted off momentarily, as the pilot continued the go-around, the landing gear contacted several mounds of loose dirt and brush off the side of the runway. According to the pilot, this contact caused the airplane to decelerate, so he decided to abort the go-around attempt. He therefore pulled the power to idle and attempted to land on the rough terrain. During that sequence, the airplane impacted a mound of dirt and nosed over onto its back.

Although the pilot reported that he had not applied any braking action while the airplane was on the runway, a post-accident inspection of the runway surface revealed a thin skid mark from near the point of touchdown to where the airplane departed the runway. Also, at the location where the airplane departed the side of the runway onto the loose dirt surface, there was a clear skid mark created by the right tire, but none from the left tire.

An on-scene inspection of the right main landing gear wheel by a local law enforcement official determined that the wheel, which was no longer contacting the ground because the airplane was in the inverted position, could only be rotated with the application of considerable hand force. Three days after the accident, an Airworthiness Inspector from the Federal Aviation Administration's Salt Lake City Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) also inspected the right wheel assembly. During that inspection he confirmed that the wheel was hard to turn by hand, and that the resistance to free movement was the result of the pressure being applied to the brake rotor by the new brake pads that were installed about three to four flight hours prior to the accident.

According to the FSDO Inspector, during his post-accident interview with the mechanic that installed the pads, it was determined that after the installation of the pads, the wheel was not jacked off the ground so that free movement of the rotor and wheel could be established. Instead, the determination of free movement was made based upon the fact that no resistance was noted when the airplane was pushed out of the hangar by hand. At the time the airplane was rolled out of the hangar the brake rotor was at ambient temperature.

The inspector also noted that although there was no requirement for a shim to be placed between the two halves of the brake caliper upon initial reassembly, such shims are available, and one should have been installed in this situation in order to reduce the amount of resistance present without pilot brake application.

Contributing factors

  • cause Malfunction
  • factor Pilot
  • cause Maintenance personnel
  • cause Incorrect service/maintenance
  • Contributed to outcome

Conditions

Weather
VMC, wind 060/07kt, vis 10sm

Loading the flight search…

What you can do on Flight Finder

  • Search flights between any two airports with live fares.
  • By aircraft — pick a plane model (e.g. Boeing 787, Airbus A350) and see every route it flies from your origin.
  • Route map — click any airport worldwide to explore its destinations, or draw a radius to find nearby airports.
  • Global aviation safety — aviation accident database, 5,200+ records since 1980, with map and rankings by aircraft and operator.
  • NTSB safety feed — recent U.S. aviation accidents and incidents from the official NTSB CAROL database, updated daily.

Frequently asked questions

How do I search flights by aircraft type on FlightFinder?

Pick an aircraft model — Boeing 737, Airbus A320, A380, Boeing 787 Dreamliner and more — enter your origin airport, and FlightFinder shows every route that plane flies from there with live fares.

Which aircraft types can I filter by?

We support Boeing 737/747/757/767/777/787, the full Airbus A220/A319/A320/A321/A330/A340/A350/A380 family, Embraer E170/E175/E190/E195, Bombardier CRJ and Dash 8, and the ATR 42/72 turboprops.

Is FlightFinder free to use?

Search and schedules are free. Pro ($4.99/month, $39/year, or $99 one-time lifetime) unlocks the enriched flight card — on-time stats, CO₂ per passenger, amenities, live gate & weather — plus My Trips with push alerts.

Where does the route data come from?

Live schedules come from Amadeus, AeroDataBox and Travelpayouts. Observed routes (which aircraft actually flew a given city pair) are crowdsourced from adsb.lol ADS-B data under the Open Database License.