No fatalities

21 Mar 2015: PIPER PA-28-235 (N8803W) — Woodstock, GA

Woodstock, GA, United States

On 21 Mar 2015, a PIPER PA-28-235 (registration N8803W) was involved in an aviation accident near Woodstock, GA. No fatalities were reported. Investigators recorded the probable cause as: The pilot's failure to attain the proper touchdown point on the short, wet, turf runway. Contributing to the accident was the pilot’s use of a high approach speed. This summary draws on records from NTSB; 12 related events involving the same aircraft type or operator are linked below.

SourcesNTSBPrimary reportUpdated 1778583330Data APIEditorial standards

On March 21, 2015, a Piper PA-28-235, N8803W, was substantially damaged during a runway excursion and nose-over after landing at Air Acres Airport, Woodstock, Georgia. The pilot and passenger were not injured.

Accident Details

On March 21, 2015, at 1807 eastern daylight time, a Piper PA-28-235, registration N8803W, experienced a runway excursion and subsequent nose-over after landing at Air Acres Airport (5GA4) in Woodstock, Georgia. The aircraft was substantially damaged, but the airline transport pilot and the passenger/owner were not injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan was filed for the personal flight conducted under Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. The flight originated from Monroe-Walton County Airport (D73), Monroe, Georgia, around 1735.

The pilot stated that the accident flight was a return trip after performing glider-tow flights at D73. While on final approach for runway 36, he detected a tailwind confirmed by smoke trails from nearby fires. He executed a go-around and returned to land on runway 18.

Approach and Landing

During the approach, the pilot reported an airspeed of 80 to 85 miles per hour and employed a slip to achieve a firm landing, intending to begin braking as soon as possible on the wet turf runway, which was 2,000 feet long. Upon actuating the brake handle, he felt no pressure. Pumping the handle gradually built pressure, and braking action was restored when approximately 300 feet of runway remained. The aircraft departed the end of the runway, traversed an embankment, nosed over, and came to rest inverted. The pilot chose not to abort the landing due to obstacles and a water treatment plant off the departure end of runway 18.

Witness Account

A witness residing midfield at 5GA4 observed the aircraft approach downwind and perform a go-around. He repositioned to the runway edge to watch the second landing attempt. On short final from the north end, the witness noted the pilot appeared to be cross-controlling into a slip, possibly to lose altitude, describing the aircraft as "too high for the approach and too fast." The aircraft touched down on its nose landing gear near midfield, bounced and ballooned into the air, continuing about 300 yards before a second touchdown. It remained in ground effect, skidding on the runway until it skidded off the departure end and nosed over.

Photographs examined revealed fresh skid marks beginning around the runway midpoint and continuing intermittently off the departure end, consistent with the witness statement.

Pilot and Aircraft Information

The pilot held an airline transport pilot certificate with multi-engine land rating and a commercial single-engine land rating. He reported 28,500 total flight hours, with 250 hours in the accident make and model. His most recent FAA second-class medical certificate was issued in March 2015.

The aircraft, manufactured in 1964, was equipped with hand-actuated brakes only. The FAA inspector who responded noted that the runway was a wet grass surface. Examination revealed substantial damage to the vertical fin and empennage, with flaps fully extended. The brake handle exhibited no pressure initially, but pressure built when pumped.

Brake System and Maintenance

The aircraft's most recent annual inspection was completed in January 2015, during which the brakes were replaced and the brake fluid system bled. All required inspections and airworthiness directives were compliant. The aircraft had accumulated 8.5 hours since the inspection, and the pilot reported brake function was "ok" during that period.

The mechanic who performed the work described the bleeding method used. A representative from the aircraft manufacturer reviewed statements from the mechanic, the FAA inspector, and the NTSB Preliminary Report, noting that the bleeding method did not conform to the manufacturer's maintenance manual, though desired results could be expected upon completion.

The brake reservoir on this model was open at the top, with the fill line well below the container top to allow air escape. After the aircraft inverted, air trapped in the reservoir moved to the highest point in the system—the brake calipers. Brake fluid leaked and was replaced by air, preventing normal brake function until the aircraft was righted and air removed.

Contributing factors

Causes

PilotEffect on operationDescent/approach/glide path — Not attained/maintained

Other contributing factors

Surface speed/braking — Not attained/maintained