F-GBFG Field Takeoff Incident at Les Herbiers

Incident Overview On 25 October 2012 at 17:05 local time, a Reims Aviation F172M registered F-GBFG, operated by Société Les Herbiers (85), was involved in an incident during a field takeoff. The aircraft was piloted by a single person. The left main landing gear fairing was destroyed. ## Flight Sequence Ten days after a forced field landing at the same location, a different pilot attempted a takeoff facing west from the field, which had a slight downward slope to the left. During the takeoff roll, the aircraft drifted slightly left. After rotation, the left main landing gear struck a wooden fence post. The pilot continued the takeoff and landed at La Roche-sur-Yon aerodrome. ## Preparations and Context Following the earlier field landing, two companies were contacted to dismantle the aircraft, but neither could do so within three weeks. The operator therefore arranged for the aircraft to take off from the field. A DSAC agent assessed the field and clearances, requesting modifications for a safe takeoff and prefectural authorization. On the day of the takeoff, the requested modifications were completed in the presence of the DSAC agent and pilot: the fence, perpendicular to the takeoff axis, was removed over approximately 20 meters, and a mound was leveled with agricultural equipment. The ground was compacted and the grass flattened. A foot inspection of the intended runway strip was conducted. A mechanic checked the aircraft's general condition and removed passenger seats to reduce weight. Approximately 40 liters of fuel were added for the flight to La Roche-sur-Yon. ## Pilot Experience and Testimony The pilot held a CPL(A) license and FI(A) instructor qualification, with 14,780 total flight hours, including 4,320 on single-engine aircraft and 44 hours in the preceding three months, 17 of which were on type. He was contacted by the operator a few days before the planned takeoff. With the assistance of four people, including a company manager, he performed performance calculations using a 1.30 multiplier for takeoff distance on a wet grass runway, as required by regulations. He also conducted tests three days earlier with the same type of aircraft on a grass runway. The pilot stated he decided to maintain a high pitch attitude at second throttle setting to reduce takeoff distance. This resulted in a steep nose-up attitude that prevented him from seeing the fence. He later considered this decision unnecessary given the available length. He heard the impact of the landing gear with the fence, continued the takeoff, and flew to La Roche-sur-Yon. He noted that field preparation delays (fence and mound) led him not to insist on widening the fence opening further, and that weather conditions did not permit a takeoff the following day. ## Meteorological Conditions Estimated conditions were: wind from 080° at 6 knots, visibility greater than 10 km, no significant clouds, temperature 18°C, QNH 1008 hPa. ## Regulatory Aspects Under Article D132-2 of the French Civil Aviation Code, a pilot may be authorized, upon request and under their own responsibility, to take off from the location of a field landing. Authorization is issued by the competent prefect based on a favorable opinion from local air navigation services, considering the aircraft type, field condition, and clearances. In practice, DSAC agents provide this opinion, but without clear criteria, leading to varying assessments. The regulation does not specify which risks should be considered in the opinion. ## Findings and Conclusion The pilot's decision to maintain a high pitch attitude to reduce takeoff roll distance prevented adequate external visual surveillance, detection of the trajectory deviation (likely due to the field's slight cross-slope), and avoidance of the fence post. The high pitch attitude combined with a tailwind component likely reduced the aircraft's climb capability. The fence was removed over approximately 20 meters, comparable to some runway widths, sufficient but limiting trajectory deviations, which are difficult to detect in a field without ground references. Time pressure to take off in the afternoon due to deteriorating weather likely discouraged removing the fence over a wider area. ## Recommendations The BEA recommended to the DGAC: 1) Revise Article D132-2 of the Civil Aviation Code to reflect current DSAC missions regarding field takeoff authorizations, and establish internal DGAC procedures and technical criteria for opinions to the prefect. 2) Develop a guide for clubs or companies outlining administrative formalities and safety measures before considering a takeoff after a field landing.