What happened
On February 8, 2011, a Tanarg 912 ultralight pendulum aircraft, registration 79-IZ, was conducting a local flight near Saint-Paul-en-Gâtines for the purpose of passenger authorization training. The flight was operated by a private pilot, with a student pilot in the front seat and an instructor in the rear seat. The aircraft was not equipped with dual controls.
After approximately 30 minutes of flight, the instructor initiated an engine failure simulation exercise requiring a go-around. The student pilot selected a large, flat field and executed a U-shaped approach into the wind. As the aircraft reached an altitude of approximately 150 feet at a speed of 90 km/h, the instructor instructed the student to apply power for the go-around. In response, the student increased engine power while simultaneously pulling the control frame (trapeze) toward himself. This maneuver caused the aircraft to enter a sudden dive.
Despite the instructor's command to push the control frame forward to arrest the descent, the student failed to react. The Tanarg 912 struck the ground with its main landing gear and subsequently collided with a hedge. The accident resulted in two injuries (the instructor and the student) and heavy damage to the aircraft.
The investigation
The investigation focused on the flight controls and the physical actions of the crew during the critical phase of the maneuver. Investigators examined the student pilot's flight experience, noting 56 total flight hours, with 40 hours on this specific type. The instructor, an experienced pilot with 13,000 total hours, provided testimony regarding the lack of accessibility to the controls.
Investigators established that the aircraft's configuration played a significant role in the outcome. Because the Tanarg 912 lacked dual controls, the instructor could not directly manipulate the flight path. While the instructor attempted to push the control frame forward by pushing on the student's arms, the student's physical resistance prevented any corrective action.
Findings
- The primary cause of the accident was an erroneous nose-down input on the control frame by the student pilot during the go-around.
- The student pilot failed to correct the pitch error because he became physically rigid/tense on the controls.
- The lack of dual controls prevented the instructor from intervening to rectify the aircraft's trajectory.
- The student pilot noted that the stress of flying at low altitude may have contributed to his physical reaction.