What happened
On June 7, 2010, a Schleicher ASW 19B glider, registration PH-582, performed an unplanned landing near Ede, Netherlands. The flight, which began at Terlet glider airfield, was an overland flight that became compromised when the pilot encountered diminishing thermal activity. As the aircraft lost altitude, the pilot identified a narrow, 300-meter field situated perpendicular to the A-12 motorway as a potential landing site.
During the approach, the pilot encountered several light poles at the start of the field. To avoid the risk of hitting wires connected to these poles, the pilot flew over them at a high speed. The aircraft descended to approximately grass height with a speed of roughly 120 km/h. During the landing roll, the tail struck the ground halfway through the field. Due to the high approach speed and the lack of braking effectiveness on the damp grass, the aircraft failed to stop within the field boundaries. The glider subsequently struck two consecutive barbed-wire fences and slid across a ditch before coming to rest in a cornfield.
The investigation
The investigation focused on the pilot's flight preparation and the execution of the landing maneuver. Investigators examined the pilot's decision-making process regarding weather forecasts and the technical aspects of the aircraft's performance during the final approach. The inquiry also reviewed the pilot's experience and the environmental conditions at the time of the incident.
Findings
Several contributing factors led to the accident. The investigation established that the pilot's flight preparation was incomplete, as he had failed to account for a weather forecast predicting weakening southern thermals and shifting winds. This lack of preparation, combined with a late decision to seek an alternative landing site, resulted in a primary focus on returning to Terlet rather than executing a safe forced landing.
Crucially, the approach speed was significantly higher than normal. While a standard approach speed under these conditions is approximately 90 km/h, the pilot maintained 100 km/h on base leg and increased to 120 km/h during the final stages of the maneuver. This high velocity, paired with the presence of obstacles that prevented using the full length of the field, made a safe stop impossible. Additional factors included the dampness of the grass, which reduced braking efficiency, and a mechanical limitation where the airbrake extension was restricted to 12 cm instead of the standard 17 cm due to the wheel brake adjustment.