What aircraft was involved and where did it happen?

The accident on 2016-08-02 involved a Cessna C172 SP (180 cv), registration F-GMLA, at Ambert - Le Poyet (63), FR.

What was the probable cause of the accident?

The accident was caused by a left-wing stall during the flare, followed by an ineffective go-around due to improper pitch management and insufficient monitoring by the instructor.

Cessna 172 crashes following roll excursion during go-around

A flight training accident involving a Cessna 172 SP resulted in the destruction of the aircraft after a sudden roll during landing led to a failed go-around and subsequent collisions.

What happened

On August 2, 2016, a Cessna 172 SP (registration F-GMLA) was performing a navigation flight from Le Puy - Loudes to Ambert - Le Poyet. The aircraft was occupied by an instructor, a student pilot, and two passengers.

During the final approach to runway 02, the aircraft was flying at a speed of approximately 60 to 65 knots with 20° flaps. As the aircraft reached the flare stage just above the runway threshold, it experienced a sudden left roll, deviating approximately 30° from the centerline. The instructor took control and initiated a go-around. However, the aircraft failed to climb effectively. The aircraft flew at an altitude of approximately one meter over the grass beside the runway, striking barbed-wire fences and a post. After crossing a road, the aircraft finally came to a stop after colliding with a barrier outside the airfield perimeter. All four occupants escaped without injury, but the aircraft was destroyed.

The investigation

The investigation examined the flight parameters, the aircraft's performance, and the crew's actions. Investigators noted that the aircraft was operating near its maximum takeoff weight of 1,158 kg and that the high temperature and airfield altitude resulted in a high density altitude of approximately 3,700 ft.

Technical checks of the engine following the accident revealed no power anomalies. The investigation also reviewed the flight manual, which recommends a 30° flap configuration and a 61-knot approach speed for short runways, whereas the crew was using 20° flaps. The instructor's testimony indicated that during the roll, he was not firmly gripping the control wheel, and during the go-around, he perceived a lack of engine power.

Findings

The sudden left roll during the flare was likely caused by the onset of a left-wing stall.
The instructor's excessive pitch input during the go-around likely caused the engine to enter a low-power regime, rendering the go-around ineffective.
The instructor's level of monitoring during the landing phase was insufficient to prevent the roll excursion.
The choice of the destination airfield may not have been appropriate for the student's skill level, given the short runway, offset threshold, and descending gradient.
The use of 20° flaps instead of the recommended 30° for short-field operations contributed to the difficulty of the maneuver.