Accident Details
On January 12, 2022, about 1427 eastern standard time, a Piper J3C-65 airplane, registration N88509, was substantially damaged in an accident near Winter Haven, Florida. The airplane was being operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 instructional flight. The flight instructor and the pilot receiving instruction sustained serious injuries.
The flight instructor reported that the airline transport pilot receiving instruction had not flown a float-equipped airplane in 3 years, so the instructor considered the flights as review. During the morning 2-hour flight, the pilot receiving instruction sat in the front seat. The instructor noted that he tended to “fly too slow” after takeoff and “turn sharply,” and the instructor had to “push the nose down on several occasions.”
After lunch and refueling, the afternoon flight began with the pilot receiving instruction in the rear seat. The instructor estimated they flew about 1 hour when the accident occurred. The flight instructor did not recall the accident details but thought the pilot receiving instruction might not have been able to see the instruments well from the rear seat or was being inattentive. The pilot receiving instruction had no recollection of the flight.
Witness Account
A witness near the accident site stated he saw the accident airplane fly one low pass over the lake, circle to the right, then descend again toward the lake. The witness stated that airplanes typically land on the lake or fly a low pass, but the accident airplane made a small splash on the second pass when the right float touched the water. The airplane then “accelerated up” a couple hundred feet and started veering to the right in a “big arc.” The witness said the turn “seemed like a steep angle” and at the top of the arc, he saw “the whole top of the airplane and it just continued downward.” The witness could not hear the engine during the descent. The airplane impacted the ground in a near-vertical nose-down attitude, stayed in that position briefly, then the tail settled toward the ground.
During a postaccident interview, the flight instructor stated the witness’ description of the second pass sounded like a go-around maneuver. The instructor also said the pilot receiving instruction had been “making really steep turns and he was too slow on airspeed” and added that he did not correct it in time.
Postaccident Examination
Postaccident examination revealed the airplane came to rest in a near-vertical nose-down attitude with no ground scars or tree damage leading toward the wreckage, consistent with a near-vertical flightpath angle. The left wing sustained substantial damage. Control cable continuity from the cockpit to the ailerons, rudder, and elevator was confirmed.
The engine remained attached to the airframe with the propeller attached and canted left. Both propeller blades had leading-edge abrasion. One blade was cut to facilitate rotation. Spark plugs were visually examined and noted as normal-to-worn-out per Champion Aviation’s Check-A-Plug Guide. Rotation of the crankshaft produced compression on all cylinders, and normal valvetrain movement was observed. Borescope examination revealed no cylinder or piston damage. Both magnetos produced spark at all towers. Carbon deposits consistent with a rich mixture or automotive fuel were found. All cylinders passed a cold compression check. Fuel in the carburetor bowl was free of water or debris. No preimpact mechanical malfunctions or anomalies precluding normal operation were found.
Review of the icing probability chart in FAA Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin CE-09-35 indicated atmospheric conditions at the time were conducive to “serious icing at glide power.” The flight instructor explained that carburetor heat was used on all approaches and would have been turned off at the initiation of the go-around.