The pilot was on an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan and was on a return flight after retrieving a company airplane.
Radar data revealed that while on the approach path to land, about three miles from the airport in Auburn, California, the Cessna 172 descended to 25 feet above the ground, then hit powerlines and came to rest on a rooftop.
The airplane sustained substantial damage to both wings, the fuselage, and empennage. The pilot was seriously injured in the crash.
A law enforcement officer reported that as the pilot was being transported to the hospital, he stated that he was disoriented during the approach. The officer added that the visibility during the time of the accident was less than ¼ of a mile.
Probable Cause: The pilot’s failure to maintain altitude during an instrument approach, which resulted in an impact with power lines.
To download the final report. Click here. This will trigger a PDF download to your device.
This December 2021 accident report is provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. Published as an educational tool, it is intended to help pilots learn from the misfortunes of others.
After reading all of the preceding comments, I don’t see unnecessary rudeness at the pontifications of Mr. Potter, who by his own admission has neither the experience nor the skill to be a pilot. I readily understand the frustration that others feel, when a totally unqualified poster makes unsupportable statements. Suffice to say, becoming a pilot takes work and study. Becoming an instrument rated pilot takes a lot more work and study. And flying in IMC, especially alone in a small single, is a very high work load endeavor for even the most qualified of pilots.
Unlike Mr. Potter, I have logged several thousand hours over 51 years of flying, almost all of that in small piston singles, 49 of those with an IR. The vast majority of my instrument experience is without an autopilot, so hand flown. As a CFII, I had students who lost control under circumstances similar to what the accident pilot incurred, fortunately at altitudes which permitted me to recover control of the airplanes. So unlike Mr. Potter, I can readily understand how a pilot, even with the appropriate credentials, can lose situational awareness, become disoriented, and lose control.
Mr. Potter, and others with similar lack of training and experience, should avoid fulminating about things of which they have no knowledge.
I won’t second guess why the accident pilot crashed well short of the runway. If he said he became disoriented, I can readily accept that. I hope he has recovered from his injuries.
A very tragic event; I hope he’s fully recovered by now.
The bottom line: The only objective information we have is the very limited narrative & sparse data provided on the NTSB Form 6120.
It’s human nature for the rest of us to “fill in the blanks” and come up with a verdict based primarily on uninformed conjecture.
All we know for a fact is a 32-yr old male CFI flew an airworthy airplane into power lines & crashed into a house after becoming “disoriented” in IMC. A lot of excellent pilots have experienced spacial disorientation.
References to what the Other Pilot did or didn’t do are just ‘noise’.
Did they plan to fly as a formation and brief it accordingly? Apparently not; they certainly didn’t communicate with each other as a formation. If they had, would the outcome be different?
The accident pilot was on a separate IFR clearance to an airport with one RNAV(GPS) approach; but which “option” was he planning …LPV, LNAV/VNAV, LNAV…circling? It’s Class G airspace; did he decide to duck under & try to scud run his way to the airport?
We can certainly pass judgment on his ADM skills…but we know nothing about his actual flying experience, currency, proficiency, stick & rudder skills… overall attitude and “thought process”.
He taught at a flight school with an FAA-approved Part 141 syllabus. Was he a rebellious, undisciplined, FAR-violating, rogue pilot? Highly unlikely.
We know his employer uses some kind of flight risk assessment tool. Did he use it before this flight? Did he fall victim to all/some of the “Five Hazardous Attitudes”?
Given this was the NTSB’s final report, we’ll never know exactly what was going on in the cockpit …unless he decides to “come up on freq” and tell us his story.
It is always disappointing when these GAN discussions go sideways: Let’s hope the shelf life on this one is short.
Geez Boys and Girls, can’t we all “Just Get Along”???? As long as humans fly airplanes, and adverse weather gets involved, airplanes are gonna crash!
I am very disappointed at the rude responses that have been posted here. If you don’t agree, then you don’t agree. Nothing is to be gained by being rude and obnoxious.
As licensed pilots, I thought we were better than that.
Thanks Tom.
Regards/Jim
So, Mr. James Brian Potter, You’re not a licenced pilot, and interpreting Your words, You’ve had followed Your’s own limitations. That’s commendable. But I wonder if is it a job of the administration to judge the owns limitations of everyone (one by one), to achieve a greater safety in GA? Aren’t the regulations already existing enough and, concerning the pilots, aren’t they much superior to those applicable to the road drivers?
Fair enough. My politics are against more gov’t regulations. However, it seems that regs alone aren’t sufficient to prevent preventable loss of life and property. Clearly, the vast majority of licensed GA pilots are competent and fly safely for years. But it’s the ‘bad apples’ which always spoil the whole barrel. My friend Mark has been a licensed commercial pilot and CFI for decades. When I fly with him for fun, he exhibits scrupulous attention to detail, and has a good fast memory and recall for rapid-fire replies from ATC and the local tower. I marvel at that. However, he also points out the antics of GA ‘idiots’ making mistakes or deliberately ignoring ATC instructions. One memorable one was out of Palomar airport in Escondido, CA. The tower told the departing aircraft to turn right. Instead, the pilot changed his mind and turned left and crashed head-on to another airplane coming in for landing. Multiple deaths from that one and I saw it out my apartment window. That’s like following a car in the middle of town with its right turn signal on which brakes and starts to turn right, then abruptly changes mind and swings hard left to another store. Such maneuvers are inconsiderate and can be deadly, and local cops sometimes issue tickets for reckless driving when the witness such behavior. Getting a moving violation citation costs a fine and raises insurance premiums, which should discourage repeated bad behavior. Would such policing work for GA?
So what’s your solution to that fraction of GA pilots are dangerously casual, inconsiderate and incompetent? How does the GA community and/or gov’t solve this problem? For weeks now the news has featured a GA accident literally daily for all kinds of reasons, particularly ‘fuel management’ (not understanding the tank switches) and bad weather in VFR conditions. Please offer your constructive comments here.
Thanks/Regards/Jim
Per the report, the accident pilot was following another flight to their home airport after having retrieved the other airplane. The first pilot barely made it in while the weather was deteriorating. Then the accident pilot followed probably knowing the first pilot landed, maybe creating an insidious expectation that the accident pilot will make it home also. That could lead to spending too much time looking for the runway and missing the level off at MDA. Primary to safety in IMC operations, minimum altitudes absolutely cannot be missed. Power and pitch have to be increased at the appropriate lead point followed by trim. Then you are safe to continue looking the appropriate amount of time for the runway.
Things that move can and will crash – cars, aircraft, boats, presidents on a bicycle.!!
This unfortunate pilot /cfi, just failed to fly the approach, being about 600 ft below the glideslope 2.5 miles out…no reason given why.?
The other aircraft in the ‘flight of 2’ landed ok earlier, but stated that the conditions were deteriorating and expected the crash pilot to divert…
Lincoln, KLHM, is only a few miles west on the valley floor with nothing to hit on a low approach.
Sounds like a disgruntled former student pilot to me. My guess would be that some CFI told this guy to stick to bicycle riding.
Nope. Neither case. Just prudent avoidance. As the Wise Man once said: “Know thyself.” I know my limitations, and respected them.
Regards/J
What planet does this person come from ?
One of these days an Important Person is going to get killed ? Are you kidding me ?
First of all sir, all lives are important, secondly flying a GA aircraft is safer than driving a car, thirdly, we are all very glad that your degreed engineer self was unable to handle ATC communication while at the same time flying the airplane. We are all very happy not to have you sharing the skies with us. So butt out and don’t preach to those of us who can handle more than one task at a time. Better still keep your narrow minded opinions to yourself.
Butt out? Nope. I live on the same planet you do.
How about addressing the points I raised about better self-regulation rather than criticize me personally?
Regards/J
It’s high time you pilots come up with constructive answers and solutions to the human factors involved in the horrendous almost daily GA crash reports around the country. Decades ago, laws and regulations were promulgated for safety in highway transportation, e.g., speed limits, pavement markings, traffic signals, seat belt laws, vehicle crash-resistance, et.al. Granted, car and truck accidents occur with daily regularity around the country, but aircraft incidents almost invariably result in occupant death and trashing of expensive airplanes giving rise to rising insurance rates. A poster on Juan Brown’s service said it succinctly but I can’t get permission to repeat it here: essentially that sole piloting a modern aircraft is literally too complicated for high probability takeoff to landing success. Too many variables and parameters about the machine and weather for the average human cerebral computer to effectively handle when the goo hits the fan and things go terribly wrong, then bang, fire and smoke — and grieving friends and family.
Something’s gotta give here, folks. One of these days an Important Person is going to lose his/her life, and that will trigger the Feds to clamp down on GA. That’s what it takes. There’s an analogy here to gun regulations. Second amendment proponent that I am, clearly something needs to be done to keep firearms out of the hands of the nut element. That day is rapidly approaching. Were the NRA, for example, to embrace and mitigate this problem — self-regulation — gov’t regulations might be forestalled. How about the AOPA stepping up to this plate and getting self-regulation started?
I am not a licensed piolet although I have had some flight training. I’m a senior-aged degreed engineer having handled significant responsibilities in my career. However, I concluded I couldn’t guarantee to myself that I could handle machine-gun verbal info stream from ATC, trim adjustment, flap degrees, and precise speed thresholds on a densely populated airfield chart. Nope. Too complicated for me. But I’m not a risk-taker, and others are.
Save the GA industry and hobby by instigating some EFFECTIVE self-regulation before the gov’t does it for you, and you won’t like that one bit.
Regards/J
Then stay home in bed wearing your crash helmet. Then you’ll be safe.
You obviously don’t have any “skin-in-the-game” nor experience. Your comments are irrelevant and derelict.
— another senior-aged multi-degreed engineer with experience and a polar opposite opinion from yourself