Nanchang CJ6-A N594T

Summary

On 19 April 2014 at about 18:10 local time, a Nanchang CJ6-A registered N594T was involved in an accident near Flushing, Michigan, United States. 2 people were on board and 2 died. The aircraft was substantially damaged. The NTSB has published a probable cause for this accident; it is quoted in full below.

Date

19 April 2014 at 18:10

Classification

Accident

Location

Flushing, Michigan, United States

Coordinates

43.0436, -83.9289

Aircraft

Nanchang CJ6-A

Registration

N594T

Category

Airplane

Year built

1983

Engines

1

Operator

Not recorded

Operating rule

Part 91: General Aviation

Purpose of flight

Personal

Phase of flight

Not recorded

Route

Caro → Fowlerville

Aircraft damage

Substantial

Weather

VMC

Light

Day

NTSB number

CEN14LA202

2 people died.

The pilot’s failure to maintain adequate airspeed during an off-airport forced landing after a loss of engine power due to carburetor icing and his exceedance of the airplane’s critical angle-of-attack, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall. Contributing to the accident was the pilot’s delayed application of carburetor heat while operating in conditions conducive to carburetor icing. Contributing to the severity of both occupants’ injuries was the lack of adequate restraint.

Quoted verbatim from the NTSB record. This site does not paraphrase or interpret it.

Read the full NTSB narrative

The private pilot was conducting a personal cross-country flight with a pilot-rated passenger on board. A witness reported hearing the engine "sputter" and seeing the propeller slow as the airplane began descending toward an open field with the landing gear extended. Another witness, who was watching the airplane fly eastbound at low altitude, reported that it suddenly pitched down and impacted terrain in an approximate 45-degree, nose-down attitude, indicative of a stall. Based on the evidence, it is likely that the pilot was conducting a forced landing to the field due to a loss of engine power and subsequently failed to maintain adequate airspeed and exceeded the airplane's angle-of-attack, which resulted in the aerodynamic stall. An examination of the dry, flat field showed that it was an adequate emergency forced landing area. A postaccident examination of the airframe, engine, and propeller revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. Weather conditions at the time of the accident were conducive to carburetor icing at glide and cruise power. Although the carburetor heat control was found in the "on" position, it is possible that the pilot delayed the application of carburetor heat, which likely resulted in the formation of carburetor ice and the loss of engine power. An examination of damage to the airplane's structure showed that both the front seat and rear seat cockpit areas remained substantially intact and had provided a protective shell around both occupants during the crash sequence. Both pilot seats were equipped with a five-point lap belt and shoulder harness system. Evidence at the scene showed that the front seat pilot had been ejected from his seat during the crash sequence and had impacted the front cockpit instrument panel; however, he remained inside the cabin area. Examination of the front seat's lap belt and shoulder harness system latch, which was found unfastened, did not allow for a determination of whether the latch was unfastened, was fastened and failed, or whether it separated at the time of impact. The passenger in the rear seat remained restrained by his lap belt during the crash sequence; however, he impacted the rear cockpit instrument panel due to the failure and complete separation of his shoulder harness fitting. It is likely that the lack of adequate restraint for both occupants contributed to the severity of their injuries.

Quoted verbatim from the NTSB record.