CEN12FA312

Aircraft 2 The inability of both pilots to see and avoid the other airplane, which resulted in a midair collision. Contributing to the accident was the distraction of the Air Tractor pilot by a cellular telephone conversation during the flight. --- Aircraft 1 The inability of both pilots to see and avoid the other resulting in a midair collision. Contributing to the accident was the distraction of the Air Tractor pilot by his cellular telephone conversation during the flight.

The pilot of the Grumman reported that he approached the field from the northeast with the intention of starting a spray run on the south side of the field, traveling to the southwest. Consistent with local aerial application procedures, the Grumman pilot performed a high-altitude aerial survey of the field he intended to spray before he began his first spray run; he did not observe any other airplanes operating in that area. The Air Tractor pilot departed his private airstrip with the intention of applying herbicide to a rice crop located just south of the field being sprayed by the Grumman, in a north and south application pattern. Global positioning system data recovered from the Air Tractor showed its easterly departure from the private airstrip and flight toward the field intended for application, followed by a left turn and a northerly pass over the field. The pilot of the Grumman stated that he had completed about 50% of his first spray pass when the airplanes collided and that he did not see the Air Tractor before the collision. Postaccident examination of the engine and flight control systems on both airplanes revealed no mechanical anomalies that would have prevented either pilot from maneuvering to avoid an impact. A review of both pilots’ medical records and postaccident medical and pathological examination of the Air Tractor pilot revealed no medical or toxicological issues that would have precluded either pilot from operating his airplane in a safe manner before the accident. Cellular telephone records for the pilot of the Air Tractor indicate that the pilot initiated a telephone conversation with a local farmer (for operational purposes) before his flight and he was still on the telephone with the farmer at the time of the collision. The Air Tractor pilot might have surveyed the area for traffic (in accordance with standard procedures) before he performed his initial pass over the field or scanned the area more actively during his initial pass if he had not been distracted by the telephone call. Based on the airplanes’ flight attitudes and headings at the time of impact, it would have been difficult for either pilot to see the other airplane in time to avoid the collision. In addition, it is likely that the pilot of the Air Tractor was distracted by his telephone conversation.

HISTORY OF FLIGHT On May 23, 2012, at 1049 central daylight time, an Air Tractor Inc. AT-802A airplane, N4126T, and a Grumman G-164C airplane, N996QC, collided in flight while maneuvering east of Sedgwick, Arkansas. The commercial pilot on board the Air Tractor was fatally injured, and the commercial pilot on board the Grumman received serious injuries. Both airplanes were substantially damaged. Both flights were being conducted under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 137 as aerial application flights. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident. The Air Tractor departed a private strip near Bono, Arkansas, at 1048, and was operating locally. The Grumman departed a private strip near Light, Arkansas, just prior to the collision and was also operating locally. The pilot of the Grumman reported that he approached the field from the northeast with the intention of starting a spray run on the south side of the field, traveling to the southwest. He observed several other airplanes in the area; however, he did not see the Air Tractor. He stated that upon completing 50% of his first spray pass, his airplane and the Air Tractor collided. The pilot of the Grumman added that the field he was spraying and the field that the Air Tractor was flying over were separated by two field roads and a drainage ditch approximately 100 feet wide. The Air Tractor departed a private strip with the intention of applying herbicide to a rice crop south of and bordering the field being sprayed by the Grumman. Global positioning system (GPS) data recovered from the Air Tractor depicted the Air Tractor’s flight from the time of departure from the private airstrip at 1048:07 until the time of the accident. The flight track proceeded to the east for approximately 30 seconds and then turned to the north. The GPS track depicted that, just prior to the accident, the Air Tractor was flying to the north. The altitude track for the GPS started at 55 feet (GPS altitude), with an increase in altitude to 135 feet, followed by a decrease in altitude. The last altitude recorded was 110 feet. The altitude over the target rice field started at 121 feet and descended to 113 feet. After the collision, the Air Tractor continued several hundred feet to the north, impacted terrain, and came to rest inverted. The Grumman continued several hundred feet to the west, impacted terrain, and came to rest on its left side. There were no ground witnesses to the impact, nor was radar data available. Neither pilot was receiving radar flight following services, nor were they in voice communications with one another. There was no requirement for them to be in voice communications with each other or under radar flight following. PERSONNEL INFORMATION Air Tractor Pilot The pilot of the Air Tractor, age 51, held a commercial pilot certificate with ratings for airplane single and multiengine land, instrument airplane, and rotorcraft-helicopter. He was issued a second class airman medical certificate on April 3, 2012. The certificate contained the limitations “Not valid for any class after April 30, 2013” and “must have available glasses for near vision.” On his most recent insurance application dated October 20, 2011, the pilot reported 15,674.5 hours total time; 14,128.3 hours of which were logged in agricultural operations. He reported 790 hours total time in the AT-802 and 490 hours within the previous 12 months. The pilot had successfully completed the requirements of a flight review in September of 2011. The accident report form submitted by Miles Flying Service reported that the pilot had logged 15,800 hours; 916 of which were in the accident airplane make and model. The pilot’s most recent application for an airman medical certificate, dated April 3, 2012, estimated 16,500 hours total time; 75 hours of which were in the previous 6 months. Grumman Pilot The pilot of the Grumman, age 55, held a commercial pilot certificate with airplane single and multiengine land, instrument airplane, and rotorcraft-helicopter ratings. He was issued a second class airman medical certificate on February 29, 2012. The certificate contained the limitation “Must wear corrective lenses. Not valid for any class after 2/28/2013.” The pilot reported that he had logged 17,320 hours total flight time; 11,668 hours of which were in the make and model of the accident airplane. The pilot had successfully completed the requirements for a flight review on December 2, 2011. AIRCRAFT INFORMATION Air Tractor The Air Tractor AT-802A (serial number 802A-0261), predominately yellow in color with blue striping, was manufactured in 2007. It was registered with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on a special airworthiness certificate for restricted operations. A Pratt and Whitney PT6A-65AG engine rated at 1,295 horsepower powered the airplane. The engine was equipped with a 5-blade, Hartzell propeller. The airplane was registered to and operated by Miles Flying Service, Inc., and was maintained under an annual inspection program. A review of the maintenance records indicated that an annual inspection had been completed on April 24, 2012, at an airframe total time of 3,381 hours. Grumman The Grumman G-164C (serial number 19C), predominately yellow in color, was manufactured in 1978. It was registered with the FAA on a special airworthiness certificate for restricted operations. A Garrett TPE331-10 engine rated at 940 horsepower powered the airplane. The engine was equipped with a 4-blade, Hartzell propeller. The airplane was registered to HDS Inc., operated by Kin-CO Ag Aviation, Inc., and was maintained under an annual inspection program. A review of the maintenance records indicated that an annual inspection had been completed on March 20, 2012, at an airframe total time of 4,103.3 hours. METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION The closest official weather observation station was Walnut Ridge Regional Airport (KARG), Walnut Ridge, Arkansas, located 10 nautical miles northwest of the accident site. The elevation of the weather observation station was 279 feet mean sea level. The routine aviation weather report (METAR) for KARG, issued at 1055, reported wind from 170 degrees at 8 knots, visibility 10 miles, sky condition clear, temperature 26 degrees Celsius (C), dew point temperature 8 degrees C, altimeter 29.89 inches. At 1045, the sun was at 108 degrees azimuth and 57 degrees altitude. FLIGHT RECORDERS Air Tractor The Air Tractor was equipped with a Hemisphere GPS MD Intellistar CPU (serial number 1024-11463-0011) and a Del Norte Technology Intelliflow Controller (serial number 503226). The devices were sent to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Vehicle Recorders Laboratory in Washington, D.C., for data extraction. The Del Norte Intelliflow controller was not capable of recording data. The Hemisphere GPS MD Intellistar CPU was capable of recording log and geolocation data on an internal compact flash (CF) card. The unit was disassembled and the internal CF card recovered. Log files were recovered using the vendor proprietary MapStar application. A flight track for the accident flight was recovered. Track log data included the following parameters for each recorded data point: GPS date, GPS time, latitude, longitude, and GPS altitude. Grumman The Grumman was equipped with a Hemisphere Intelliflow Controller (serial number 810756) and a Del Norte Technology GPS Measuring Unit (GMU) I/F 2 (serial number 901250). The devices were sent to the NTSB Vehicle Recorders Laboratory in Washington, D.C., for data extraction. The Hemisphere Intelliflow Controller was not capable of recording data. The Del Norte GMU was capable of recording data on an internal CF card; however, the unit was not equipped with the card. WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION The accident scene consisted of two debris fields –