• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
General Aviation News

General Aviation News

Because flying is cool

  • Pictures of the Day
    • Submit Picture of the Day
  • Stories
    • News
    • Features
    • Opinion
    • Products
    • NTSB Accidents
    • ASRS Reports
  • Comments
  • Classifieds
    • Place Classified Ad
  • Events
  • Digital Archives
  • Subscribe
  • Show Search
Hide Search

Delayed go-around proves fatal for pilot

By NTSB · March 29, 2024 ·

Review of automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) data revealed that the Cessna 172 departed Athens Ben Epps Airport (KAHN) in Georgia.

According to the ADS-B data, witness reports, and a video from an off-airport security camera, the airplane flew a straight-in approach to Runway 33 at Lumpkin County-Wimpy’s Airport (9A0) in Dahlonega, Georgia.

Two witnesses stated that the airplane approached “fast” with the flaps retracted. ADS-B data showed that the groundspeed was about 85 knots.

The airplane touched down on the runway and bounced twice on its nose landing gear. When the airplane was toward the end of the runway, the engine noise increased, and the airplane began a climbing left turn to clear trees, which was followed by the sound of impact.

The airplane wreckage was found in a residential yard beyond the end of the runway. The pilot died in the crash.

The weather reporting station nearest to the accident site, about 20 nautical miles southeast, reported winds from 290° at 13 knots, gusting to 22 knots. Given the runway orientation, wind from 290° would have resulted in a left quartering headwind for the pilot’s straight-in approach.

Witnesses at the airport reported “calm,” “very light,” or “little to no” wind about the time of the accident, with one noting that the pilot may not have known that “the winds blowing earlier in the day had died down.”

No evidence indicated that the pilot received a weather briefing before the flight.

The pilot obtained his private pilot certificate about one year before the accident and had accumulated about 94 hours of total flight experience at the time of the accident.

Probable Cause: The pilot’s delay in initiating a go-around and his failure to maintain airplane control during the initial climb, which resulted in the exceedance of the airplane’s critical angle of attack and an aerodynamic stall.

NTSB Identification: 104801

To download the final report. Click here. This will trigger a PDF download to your device.

This March 2022 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.

About NTSB

The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent federal agency charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation accident in the United States and significant events in the other modes of transportation, including railroad, transit, highway, marine, pipeline, and commercial space. It determines the probable causes of accidents and issues safety recommendations aimed at preventing future occurrences.

Reader Interactions

Share this story

  • Share on Twitter Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook Share on Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit Share on Reddit
  • Share via Email Share via Email

Become better informed pilot.

Join 110,000 readers each month and get the latest news and entertainment from the world of general aviation direct to your inbox, daily.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Curious to know what fellow pilots think on random stories on the General Aviation News website? Click on our Recent Comments page to find out. Read our Comment Policy here.

Comments

  1. Michael Price says

    November 16, 2024 at 1:30 pm

    The FAA Report is inaccurate. I was there in a motorglider because that day and the next were special days with mountain “wave” which allows gliders to fly long distances but is extremely dangerous to general aviation pilots unfamiliar with mountain wave. The effect causes extreme sink which is what killed Craig. Unfortunately I had changed frequencies to KAVL and did not hear him announcing an approach or would have warned him away.

    Winds at FL180 above Lumpkin were blowing 85 knots that day and 90 knots the next day which allowed gliders out of Shiflet to set a record altitude at Mt Mitchell the next day. The vertical wind sink on the downwind and on the approach from the direction of Athens was about 10-14 knots down (note that a C172 climb rate at max RPM is 7 knots so do the math). He had no choice when he realized that he was not going to make the threshold but to speed up and take the flaps out. His only chance once contact was made with the runway was to accept the bad landing with a likely insurance claim and call it a day but unfortunately he was not aware that a go-around would take him right into the downwind sink and force him into the terrain. If he had not delayed the go around the outcome would have been the same. Perhaps an aerobatic or turboprop could have outclimbed or achieved level flight but certainly not a C172/182.

    On wave days at Dahlonega no one flies except one guy with a turboprop who seems to understand the wave. It is too near the foot of the Appalachians with rotor directly overhead and extreme sink on the downwind and approach on wave days. If winds at 8000 ft are over 40 knots from the Northwest do not land or take off from there unless you have access to air charting tools like Skysight which predict the exact locations of the sink around Lumpkin.

  2. James Brian Potter says

    April 1, 2024 at 5:31 am

    His mind was behind the realtime curve. Cato said it: “He who hesitates is lost.” And so it is. RIP pilot.
    /J

  3. Scott Patterson says

    April 1, 2024 at 4:49 am

    It happens. With a friend, PIC in a C172, started to porpoise and did nothing. I took the yoke and throttle after the third strike. Took control on another occasion when ATC cleared him for immediate departure and he balked.and moved slowly.

  4. JimH in CA says

    March 30, 2024 at 10:09 am

    I have difficulty understanding why this pilot tried to land at 85+ kts…!!
    – this was his ‘home’ field , so he’d landed here a lot.
    – he had flown this aircraft dozens of times, so he knew the performance of the aircraft.
    – with the 180 HP, O-360, this Cessna should be able to climb at 1,000 fpm and 70kts.

    So, did this low time pilot have some sort of ‘brain fade’ , totally screwing up a landing and then pulling up into a stall on an attempted go-around.?
    He had a 4 point harness, which should have lessened any injury. But the shoulder straps have to keep the pilot from impacting the yoke and glareshield.!

© 2025 Flyer Media, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy.

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Comment Policy
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Writer’s Guidelines
  • Photographer’s Guidelines