What happened
On May 29, 2019, a Cessna 172S was conducting a proficiency check to renew a Single Engine Piston (SEP) rating at the Genk/Zwartberg aerodrome. During the flight, a flight examiner initiated a simulated engine failure at 1,000 feet. As the aircraft transitioned to a best glide speed, the crew encountered convective weather, including updrafts and downdrafts.
While the pilot suggested aborting the forced landing due to the inability to reach the intended landing point, the examiner instructed the pilot to continue the approach, even selecting additional flaps. The aircraft touched down on the runway centerline, but the impact resulted in a tail strike. Although the crew performed a go-around and initially believed the damage was minor, a subsequent inspection 96 flight hours later revealed that the aft section bulkhead had sustained structural damage and required replacement.
The investigation
AAIU(Be) investigated the event after the discovery of the structural damage. The inquiry examined the flight's history, the meteorological conditions, and the roles of the crew members. The investigation noted that the aircraft was within weight and balance limits and that the pilot had completed required refresher training prior to the check. However, the investigation also looked into the lack of a clear agreement regarding Pilot-in-Command (PIC) authority during the examination and the absence of standardized guidelines for conducting simulated emergency maneuvers.
Findings
- The primary cause of the tail strike was the decision to continue an unstable, powerless approach that carried a high risk of undershooting the runway.
- Local convective currents contributed to the difficulty of maintaining the glide path.
- A lack of clear communication regarding the designation of the Pilot-in-Command during the check flight increased operational risk.
- The absence of a standardized Flight Examiner Manual (FEM) led to a lack of uniformity in how simulated emergencies are managed.
- Risk was further increased because the initial visual inspection failed to detect the internal bulkhead damage, and the airfield was not notified of the strike, preventing a runway debris check.
Safety action
- The AAIU(Be) recommended that the Belgian Civil Aviation Authority (BCAA) clarify the designation of the Pilot-in-Command during check flights to ensure both parties agree on authority before takeoff.
- Recommendations were made to EASA to incorporate specific guidelines into the projected Flight Examiner Manual, including standardized pre-flight briefings and formalized risk assessments for performing simulated emergency landings.