History of the flight
The aircraft departed another airfield 30 minutes prior and joined the downwind leg of a left-hand circuit for landing on Runway 36 at Cromer (Northrepps) Airstrip. The pilot assessed the windsock and considered the light tailwind component would be offset by the runway's 1.8% uphill gradient. The final approach appeared normal, but at a very late stage the pilot realized the aircraft would land too far along the runway. Upon touchdown, the pilot retracted the flaps and applied full power to convert the landing into a touch-and-go. The aircraft became airborne again but then appeared to sink. A loud bang was heard, and the aircraft came to rest in a field beyond the end of the runway.
The pilot secured the aircraft and helped the two passengers exit through the cabin door. Both passengers sustained serious injuries; the pilot received minor injuries. The aircraft sustained serious damage to the propeller, engine, wings, landing gear, fuselage, and tail. No fire occurred. All three emergency services attended the scene.
Ground marks and the wreckage trail indicated that during the touch-and-go the aircraft struck a low bank just beyond the threshold of Runway 18. It then flew approximately 125 m across a field, struck another low bank which removed all the landing gear, and came to rest about 50 m into a second field beyond the runway.
Aircraft and airfield information
The aircraft was a Piper PA-28-180 Cherokee, registration G-AWET, manufactured in 1968. It was powered by one Lycoming O-360-A4A piston engine. The flight was private, with one pilot and two passengers.
Cromer (Northrepps) Airfield is unlicensed and has a single grass runway 493 m in length. The pilot estimated the surface wind as 135°/5 kt, equating to a tailwind of 3.5 kt. The temperature was 13°C, the QNH pressure setting was 1017 hPa, and the grass was damp.
Performance data
For a reported landing weight of 968 kg, the aircraft flight manual gives a landing distance required (LDR) of 504 m. This figure includes safety factors for field length, tailwind, and a dry grass surface. No factor is given for a damp grass surface. The CAA's General Aviation Safety Sense Leaflet Number 7c advises that wet grass on a firm subsoil increases the LDR by 35%.
The pilot could not recall the speed achieved after becoming airborne again, nor how far along the runway the aircraft had touched down. He was not aware of hearing the stall warning. He confirmed that the engine had produced full power during the touch-and-go.
From the aircraft flight manual, the factored LDR for the landing on Runway 36, downwind into the runway upslope, was 27 m greater than would have been required for a landing in the opposite direction, assuming the same wind conditions. Had the aircraft made an approach to land on Runway 18 instead, the aircraft's ground speed would have been approximately seven knots slower during the final approach and the LDR would have been less than the length of the runway.
Pilot's report
In a straightforward and candid report, the pilot stated that the accident was a result of his misjudgement, together with a possible increase in the tailwind during the latter stages of the final approach. He had landed at this airfield about ten times before.