Approach and Landing
An aircraft conducting a business flight under Part 91 was cleared by air traffic control for the instrument landing system (ILS) approach to runway 24, which measured 4,897 feet. The flightcrew subsequently reported the runway in sight, canceled their instrument flight rules (IFR) clearance, and conducted a visual flight rules (VFR) approach in VFR conditions. Despite reported winds favoring a landing to the east onto the opposite runway (runway 6), and the captain indicating to the first officer an intention to land to the east, the final approach and landing were made to runway 24, resulting in a six-knot tailwind. During the approach, the captain maintained an airspeed approximately 30 knots higher than the correct airspeed for the aircraft's weight. This caused the aircraft to touch down about 1,500 feet further down the runway than normal and at a much higher speed.
Go-Around and Collision
The captain delayed initiating a go-around until prompted by the first officer's query about whether they were going around. During the delayed go-around, the aircraft lifted off the runway surface but, prior to departing the paved overrun, it impacted a localizer antenna platform. The platform's highest non-frangible structure was located approximately 304 feet beyond the runway end and about two feet lower than the terrain at the departure end. The aircraft continued airborne over downsloping terrain for approximately 400 more feet before colliding with the terrain and a commercial storage building at an elevation about 80 feet lower than the terrain at the runway end. The localizer antenna platform was situated outside the designated runway safety area and met all applicable FAA siting requirements.
Medical and Operational Information
The captain had type 2 diabetes, managed with oral medication and blood sugar monitoring, but he had not disclosed this condition to the FAA. Post-accident toxicology testing indicated an elevated average blood sugar level over the previous months; however, due to the lack of medical records, the investigation could not determine whether the captain's diabetes or its treatment were factors in the accident. The accident aircraft was managed by a corporation solely owned by the captain, at the request of the two aircraft owners, who were not pilots and lacked professional aviation experience. The purpose of the accident flight, according to one owner, was to transport a businessman to a meeting and also to convey one owner's wife to visit family. The businessman was reportedly interested in becoming a third owner. The owner stated that the captain had indicated the passenger would pay expenses directly related to the flight (permitted under Part 91) and also an 'hourly fee' (prohibited under Part 91), but no documentation supported these claims for this or previous flights.
Probable Cause
The official probable cause of the accident was the captain's delayed decision to execute a balked landing (go-around) during the landing roll. Contributing factors included the captain's improper decision to land with a tailwind, his excessive airspeed on final approach, and his failure to attain a proper touchdown point during landing.