What happened
On 18 January 2004, a training flight involving an instructor and a student took place near Husbands Bosont Village, Leicestershire. The flight, conducted in a SZD 50-3 Puchacz glider, registration HCD, was intended for spinning instruction. After being towed to 3,000 feet, the aircraft performed two successful spins and recoveries. However, during a third spin initiated at approximately 1,500 feet, the aircraft entered a steep, nose-down rotation. Witnesses observed the glider completing several turns without any visible attempt at recovery before it struck a field at a high angle of attack. The impact resulted in 2 fatalities, as both the student and the instructor died from their injuries.
The investigation
The AAIB examined the wreckage and the flight controls of the HCD. Investigators found no evidence of a mechanical disconnection in the primary flight controls. While a loose pen was noted in a previous flight, no such object was found in the wreckage, and the control design was considered resistant to such obstructions. The investigation also looked into the airbrake system, noting that the left airbrake was found in the extended position. Although a structural failure in the left airbrake bevel gear support was identified, evidence suggested this disbond likely occurred due to the forces of the ground impact rather than during flight.
Regarding the crew, the instructor had a known heart condition, specifically mitral regurgitation, which had been described as "severe" just days before the accident. While the instructor had met the required BGA medical declaration standards, the pathologist noted the potential for sudden cardiac arrhythmia or distraction. The student, aged 15, was in good health and had limited experience in this specific aircraft type.
Findings
- The aircraft entered a continuous, steeply nose-down spin that lasted until impact.
- The instructor may have become incapacitated or distracted by a cardiac event related to his known heart condition.
- There was no conclusive evidence of a control jam or mechanical failure that prevented recovery.
- The student, awaiting a command to recover that may not have been given, likely remained in the spin due to the high stress of the low-altitude maneuver.
- The left airbrake deployment was likely a consequence of the impact rather than a cause of the accident.