Cessna 182R N9393H

Summary

On 14 January 2023 at about 18:15 local time, a Cessna 182R registered N9393H was involved in an accident near Las Animas, Colorado, United States. 3 people were on board and nobody was injured. The aircraft was substantially damaged. The NTSB has published a probable cause for this accident; it is quoted in full below.

Date

14 January 2023 at 18:15

Classification

Accident

Location

Las Animas, Colorado, United States

Nearest airport

Bent County Airport (7V9)

Coordinates

38.0540, -103.2385

Aircraft

Cessna 182R

Registration

N9393H

Category

Airplane

Year built

1981

Engines

1

Operator

Not recorded

Operating rule

Part 91: General Aviation

Purpose of flight

Instructional

Phase of flight

Not recorded

Route

Pueblo → Unknown

Aircraft damage

Substantial

Weather

VMC

Light

Day

NTSB number

CEN23LA082

Nobody was injured.

The student pilot’s loss of control during approach for landing and the flight instructor’s inadequate supervision of the approach and delay in ensuring a go-around was performed at the onset of a stall warning.

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

Read the full NTSB narrative

The airplane was on a visual approach for landing during an instructional flight when the stall warning sounded as it approached the runway threshold. The flight instructor told the student pilot to add engine power to avoid a hard landing. She added engine power, the airplane veered left, and then bounced on the runway while the stall warning continued to sound. The flight instructor then told her to add full engine power. She added full engine power and the airplane continued to veer left and did not climb. The airplane settled into a field adjacent to the runway and sustained substantial damage to the left horizontal stabilizer. The application of engine power at a low airspeed would have necessitated greater control input to counter torque effects from the added power. The stall warning annunciation during the approach to landing was consistent with an unstabilized approach, during which an immediate go-around should have been instructed to the student pilot or performed by the flight instructor. The flight instructor stated that the airplane should have attained a climb rate and attributed the lack of climb rate to an engine problem. The student pilot, however, attributed the lack of airplane climb rate to its low airspeed and high angle of attack during the go-around. A postaccident engine examination and engine run revealed no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the engine that would have precluded normal operation.

Quoted verbatim from the NTSB record.