On 16 May 2016, the pilot of a Maule MT-7-235 aircraft, registered VH-DRS, conducted a private flight from Greenfields airstrip (near Noosa), Queensland, with two passengers on board. The aircraft departed Greenfields airstrip at about 1220 Eastern Standard Time (EST) and returned to Greenfields at about 1545 EST.
On final approach to land, the pilot noticed they were getting low on the approach path and at about 500 ft, they increased the power to regain their approach path. The pilot subsequently assessed that the aircraft was too high and lowered the nose to re-intercept the approach path. The pilot flared the aircraft for landing, the aircraft landed heavily and bounced into the air. As the aircraft landed again, the nose wheel touched down first (before the main landing gear) with sufficient force that the nose wheel strut fractured. The nose landing gear and propeller then dug into the ground and the aircraft rotated over its nose and slid a short distance inverted before coming to rest. The pilot and one passenger were uninjured, the other passenger sustained minor injuries, and the aircraft sustained substantial damage
The pilot commented that conducting a go-around could have prevented an unstable approach and initial bounce from escalating to an accident. Flight Safety Foundation (FSF) Approach-and-landing accident reduction (ALAR) briefing note 6.1 emphasises the need to be ‘go-around-prepared’ or ‘go-around-minded’ because the execution of a go-around is an infrequent manoeuvre. FSF ALAR briefing note 7.1 provides further information on unstable approaches and how to develop personal lines of defence.
Aviation Short Investigations Bulletin - Issue 50
Read report
What happened
On 16 May 2016, the pilot of a Maule MT-7-235 aircraft, registered VH-DRS, conducted a private flight from Greenfields airstrip (near Noosa), Queensland, with two passengers on board.
The aircraft departed Greenfields airstrip at about 1220 Eastern Standard Time (EST) and flew to Gympie ALA, where the aircraft was refuelled. The aircraft then departed from Gympie and flew north towards Maryborough before returning to Greenfields along a coastal route.
The aircraft joined the circuit at Greenfields on the downwind leg for runway 09. The pilot turned on to the final approach at about 800 ft above ground level, with an airspeed of about 70 kt. The pilot noticed they were getting low on the approach and at about 500 ft, they increased the power to regain their approach path. The pilot subsequently assessed that the aircraft was too high and lowered the nose to re-intercept the approach path.
The pilot flared the aircraft for landing, the aircraft landed heavily and bounced into the air. As the aircraft landed again, the nose wheel touched down first (before the main landing gear) with sufficient force that the nose wheel strut fractured. The nose landing gear and propeller then dug into the ground and the aircraft rotated over its nose and slid a short distance inverted before coming to rest.
The pilot and one passenger were uninjured, the other passenger sustained minor injuries, and the aircraft sustained substantial damage (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Accident site showing damage to VH-DRS
Source: Aircraft owner
Pilot comments
The pilot provided the following comments:
- they taxied the full length of the strip before departure from Greenfields and noted the grass surface was in good condition
- they had flown about five flights, totalling about 20 hours in the last 12 months
- the pilot’s previous flight was about 4 to 5 weeks prior to the accident flight
- the pilot had not operated the Maule aircraft with more than one passenger on board prior to the accident flight
- the pilot thought that the higher all-up-weight of the aircraft with an extra passenger on board contributed to a higher sink rate on final than they expected
- the pilot commented that they should have performed a go-around, rather than continuing with the landing manoeuvre.
ATSB comment
Currency versus proficiency
At the time of the accident the pilot was current for passenger-carrying operations, having conducted at least three take-offs and three landings in the last 90 days. However, it was more than one month since their last flight, which was also a local area scenic flight. The take-off and landing phases of flight are critical phases of flight, since the aircraft is operating closer to the stall speed and with less height to recover from a control problem, relative to cruise flight. The requirement for three take-offs and three landings in the last 90 days is a regulatory requirement of currency, but this does not guarantee proficiency. When flying infrequently, proficiency in take-offs and landings can be improved by dedicating a portion of the flight to practicing circuits. The United States Federal Aviation Administration safety briefing September/October 2010 described this as ‘imbuing the quantity of all your flying, however limited, with quality.’
Safety message
Go-around
The pilot commented that conducting a go-around could have prevented an unstable approach and initial bounce from escalating to an accident. General aviation pilots should set their own criteria for when to conduct a go-around manoeuvre, so that they can recognise and respond to the conditions in a timely manner. This will assist pilots to develop a mindset, which the Flight Safety Foundation (FSF) refers to as ‘go-around-prepared’. FSF Approach-and-landing Accident Reduction (ALAR) briefing note 6.1 emphasises the need to be ‘go-around-prepared’ or ‘go-around-minded’ because the execution of a go-around is an infrequent manoeuvre. FSF ALAR briefing note 7.1 provides further information on unstable approaches and how to develop personal lines of defence.
