2013 SOCATA TB200 accident in La Tour d’Auvergne (F-HTEF)

Flight details and accident overview On 12 September 2013, a private general-aviation flight departed Poitiers (86) for Cannes (06) in a SOCATA TB200 registered F-HTEF. The aircraft carried a pilot and one passenger. Around 10:00 local time, the aircraft collided with terrain near La Tour d’Auvergne (63), resulting in the deaths of both occupants and the destruction of the aircraft. ## Flight progression and radar data The pilot took off at 08:37 and contacted the Limoges flight information service at 08:54. Radar records showed several heading changes as the aircraft approached Ussel (19). While flying northeast at about 3,500 ft, the pilot described the weather as “a bit rough” and thanked the controller for the “comfort” provided. The controller advised that the aircraft was heading toward the active La Courtine military zone and suggested a right turn to avoid it. The pilot replied that he was turning to rejoin his route. Radar contact was lost shortly after 09:48, with the aircraft on a heading of about 110° at 3,200 ft, roughly 5 nautical miles north of Ussel. The controller asked for the pilot’s heading; the pilot responded that he was on an east heading to rejoin his route. The controller suggested contacting the Clermont flight information service, and the pilot read back the frequency. No further radio contact was recorded with either Clermont or Limoges. ## Pilot and aircraft information The pilot was 65 years old and held a basic licence obtained in 1998, a private pilot licence in 2000, and a night-rating qualification in 2006. His flight logbook was not recovered. Known DGAC records indicated a total of 256 flight hours as of 30 July 2004, including 136 hours as pilot-in-command, and 19 flight hours between 7 August 2011 and 7 August 2012, including 17 hours as pilot-in-command and 78 takeoffs and landings. The TB200 F-HTEF was co-owned by the pilot and another co-owner. It was equipped with a Garmin 430 GPS. The pilot also carried a portable Garmin 496 GPS, which was destroyed in the accident. No useful data could be extracted from these devices. The aircraft also had radio-navigation instruments and two artificial horizons. ## Wreckage, site, and weather The wreckage was found roughly in line with the last radar positions, about 20 nautical miles east of Ussel. The aircraft struck terrain northwest of the Puy de Sancy, in a forest, at an altitude of about 4,000 ft. Examination indicated the aircraft hit trees with an attitude and bank angle close to level, at high speed, on a heading of about 200°. The flaps were retracted and the engine was producing power. A fire broke out after impact, fed by fuel from ruptured tanks. No pre-impact anomaly was identified. The Monts d’Auvergne region was under the influence of a west to northwest flow and a very humid air mass. Near the accident site, the terrain was obscured by low, thick, continuous cloud, with reduced visibility. At 08:30, shortly before departure, Poitiers observations reported wind 270° at 4 kt, visibility greater than 10 km, scattered cloud at 2,300 ft, scattered cloud at 3,000 ft, and overcast at 3,700 ft. The Limoges ATIS, which the controller suggested the pilot listen to, reported wind 280° at 4 kt, visibility 10 km, scattered cloud at 3,900 ft, broken cloud at 4,700 ft, and overcast at 5,600 ft. ## Testimony and pre-flight planning Several witnesses near the site heard the engine followed by the impact. They did not see the aircraft, which appeared to be coming from the north in the fog. The pilot had contacted a forecaster by telephone the day before the accident and several times between 07:30 and 08:15 on the morning of the accident. The forecaster stated that, from the day before, the forecast conditions approaching the Massif Central had been identified as incompatible with the planned flight to Cannes. Observations and forecasts from various aerodromes were discussed. An alternative route bypassing the terrain to the southwest had been considered, but it would have required waiting for expected fog to dissipate, anticipated around midday. The forecaster understood that this waiting option did not suit the pilot, who hoped to reach Cannes by midday. The possibility of turning back en route had been raised. The co-owner stated that the pilot was travelling to Cannes with a relative for a move. The co-owner had offered to take them the following day in another aircraft, but the pilot declined, explaining that they had to go on the planned day. The possibility of delaying the flight to the afternoon was discussed, but the pilot preferred to depart in the morning. The co-owner was undergoing IFR training, sometimes accompanied by the pilot, and was familiar with the Poitiers–Cannes route. He had helped the pilot prepare the navigation a few days earlier. The planned route, entered into both GPS units, passed over Ussel and then the Montélimar VOR. A navigation log had been prepared. The co-owner did not witness the final pre-flight preparations. He estimated the pilot had about 500 total flight hours and had made several trips in the preceding months. ## Findings and conclusion The investigation found that the pilot continued the flight as weather deteriorated on approach to the Massif Central terrain, consistent with forecasts he was aware of. Heading changes shown by the radar track and communications with the controller indicated a determination to persist along the average direction planned during flight preparation. The aircraft’s track shortly before striking trees, oriented south/southwest, may indicate an attempt to follow the terrain southward, perhaps in the hope of finding less adverse conditions that would allow crossing the terrain. The aircraft’s attitude at impact made it unlikely that the collision occurred during a stabilized turnback. The accident resulted from the pilot’s late decision to change his planned course of action. The availability of equipment facilitating navigation and flight in marginal weather may have contributed. This was also clearly the consequence of a strong determination to reach the intended destination. The BEA has published numerous reports on this type of accident, as well as REC Info No. 1/2009 and two safety studies, “Study on GPS events” and “Objective: destination 1991–1996.”