Piper PA28 Landing Gear Accident During Examiner Supervision (F-GGBA)

Incident Overview and Flight Details On 26 February 2015 at 15:53 local time, a Piper PA28 registered F-GGBA was heavily damaged after landing with its landing gear retracted at Marie-Galante aerodrome (971). The flight was a private general aviation operation conducted as a simulated Private Pilot Licence (PPL) test to support the renewal of an examiner's authorization. The aircraft departed Pointe-à-Pitre (971) for Fort-de-France (972) but diverted to Marie-Galante to complete required maneuvering exercises. ## Crew and Operational Context The flight was operated by two pilots, both aged 56 and holding airline pilot licences. The supervisor, acting as the candidate, was a pilot-inspector with 7,786 total flight hours, including 30 hours on the PA28, primarily on fixed-gear versions. The supervised examiner, whose FE-PPL authorization had expired on 31 August 2014, had 19,680 total flight hours and approximately 300 hours on the PA28. The supervised examiner had requested a simulated test after a real candidate's test was postponed. ## Contributing Factors The supervisor stated that he forgot to extend the landing gear during a simulated engine failure exercise from the aerodrome vertical, attributing the omission to attention focused on the environment and failure management. He also cited excessive workload and mutual overconfidence as contributing factors. The supervised examiner believed the gear had been extended and was surprised upon touchdown. He noted that the gear lever and indicators were located behind the throttle quadrant, requiring a leftward lean from the right seat to view them, and that their visibility was reduced by rear sunlight. The aircraft was equipped with a gear-not-extended alarm, which the examiner described as very weak on that aircraft, and neither pilot recalled hearing it. The briefing did not specify which pilot was the pilot-in-command, creating ambiguity. ## Regulatory and Safety Lessons European regulation 1178/2011 allows the supervisor to act as the candidate during an examiner skills assessment, but does not specify who serves as pilot-in-command. The DSAC's internal procedures permit a simulated test in a two-seat aircraft as an exceptional measure, with the evaluator acting as the candidate. The BEA concluded that the unusual context of the flight created a workload overload and reduced vigilance, leading to the gear omission and failure to detect it. The report emphasized that when a supervisor acts as a fictitious candidate, the associated risks should be addressed in a briefing.