CEN19FA140

The non-instrument-rated pilot's decision to fly into instrument meteorological conditions, which resulted in spatial disorientation, a loss of control, and a subsequent impact with terrain.

The non-instrument-rated commercial pilot departed from the operator's airstrip and was planning to conduct a visual flight rules (VFR) aerial application flight in an airplane that was not equipped for instrument flight rules (IFR) flight. Shortly after departure in visual meteorological conditions, the pilot contacted the operator and reported that he observed fog that was "rolling in."  The pilot reported that he was flying above the fog layer.  The pilot stated that he was going divert to a local airport, instead of returning to the operator's airstrip, and terminate the flight. No further communication was received from the pilot. Data obtained from two onboard units that contained airplane track data showed that, during the last several minutes of the flight, the airplane entered two spiraling turns. The second spiraling turn included a rapid descent from the airplane's altitude in the direction of the accident site. The airplane wreckage was discovered in a grass field about 7.5 miles southwest from the diversion airport. Two witnesses who were near the accident site heard the accident airplane flying overhead and reported that they did not hear any sounds associated with an airplane problem before the sound of the airplane's impact. An examination of the airframe and engine revealed no mechanical anomalies. The investigation was unable to determine, with the available evidence, whether the pilot had received an official weather briefing or accessed weather information before the flight. Multiple weather sources indicated low ceilings and the presence of fog, which were conducive to low IFR conditions, before and at the time of the accident for the area near the accident site. The witnesses who heard the accident airplane reported a low level of fog about the time of the accident and an area of clear visibility between the ground and fog. Fog differs from clouds in that the base of fog is at the Earth's surface, while clouds are above the Earth's surface. Given the weather data, airplane track data, and witness statements, the airplane likely flew into an area of fog just before the accident for underdetermined reasons. The IMC present at the time was conducive to the development of spatial disorientation, and the airplane's flight track was consistent with the known effects of spatial disorientation.

An automated weather observing system (AWOS) was located at ELA, which was about 7.5 miles northeast of the accident site. At 0815, the AWOS reported wind from 330° at 8 knots gusting to 14 knots, visibility 4 miles, mist, ceiling overcast at 200 ft agl, temperature 18°C, dew point 17°C, and an altimeter setting of 29.90 inches of mercury. At 0613, the National Weather Service (NWS) Aviation Weather Center issued an AIRMET for instrument flight rules (IFR) conditions that was active for the accident site at the accident time. The AIRMET stated that ceilings were below 1,000 ft and visibility was below 3 miles with precipitation and mist. An area forecast discussion (AFD) was issued at 0623 by the NWS Weather Forecast Office in Houston/Galveston, Texas. The AFD discussed low ceilings, patchy fog, IFR conditions, and marginal VFR conditions across southeast Texas during the 2 hours after the AFD's issuance. Two center weather advisories (CWA) for low IFR conditions were issued at 0736 and 0739 by the center weather service unit at the Houston Air Route Traffic Control Center as shown in figure 3. The CWAs were active for the area near the accident site and were valid until 0930. Figure 4 – Two CWAs for near the accident site, at the accident time. The accident site is marked by the red dot. It could not be determined if the pilot accessed weather information before departure and, if so, what data was retrieved. According to the operator, the airplane had no onboard weather capability. According to Leidos, neither it nor any third-party vendors using Leidos flight planning services had any contact with the accident pilot on the day of the accident or the day before the accident. However, it is possible that the pilot obtained weather information from a commercial service that did not track the activity to a particular pilot or aircraft. FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 00-6B Aviation Weather provides information for pilots about how weather systems form. This document discusses fog and states in part: Fog is a visible aggregate of minute water droplets that are based at the Earth's surface and reduces horizontal visibility to less than 5/8 statute mile (1 kilometer); unlike drizzle, it does not fall to the ground. Fog differs from cloud only in that its base must be at the Earth's surface, while clouds are above the surface. This document discusses low ceilings and states in part: Stratus is the most frequent cloud associated with low ceilings. Stratus clouds, like fog, are composed of extremely small water droplets or ice crystals suspended in air. An observer on a mountain in a stratus layer would call it fog. Stratus and fog frequently exist together. In many cases, there is no real line of distinction between the fog and stratus; rather, one gradually merges into the other. Flight visibility may approach zero in stratus clouds. Stratus over land tends to be lowest during night and early morning, lifting or dissipating due to solar heating by late morning or early afternoon. Low stratus clouds often occur when moist air mixes with a colder air mass, or in any situation where temperature-dewpoint spread is small. The pilot held a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) commercial pilot certificate and a mechanic certificate authorizing him to perform airframe and powerplant maintenance tasks. The pilot did not have an instrument rating. The operator reported the pilot had experience flying the Air Tractor AT-402, -502, and -802-series airplanes. The operator reported that the pilot did not have any actual or simulated instrument flight time. The operator described the pilot as "very competent" and "safe" in performing aerial application operations. The pilot's flight logbook was unavailable for review. The single-seat, low-wing, fixed-gear airplane was configured for aerial application operations with an aerial spray system. The airplane was equipped with an inclinometer (slip indicator) but was not equipped with any other instruments required for instrument flight, The Air Tractor AT-502A AFM stated that the operation of the airplane is restricted to day and night VFR conditions. The Travis County Medical Examiner's Office, Austin, Texas, conducted an autopsy of the pilot. His cause of the death was multiple blunt force injures. Toxicology testing performed at the FAA Forensic Sciences Laboratory detected ethanol in various pilot specimens but not in his liver specimens. After absorption, ethanol is distributed throughout the body; therefore, the toxicology results are consistent with postmortem ethanol production. The toxicology testing found no carbon monoxide in the pilot's blood specimens and no drugs in the pilot's urine specimens. The accident site was located in a remote, sparsely populated area that was about 7.75 miles northeast of the operator's airstrip and about 4.50 miles north of Garwood at an elevation of about 155 ft mean sea level. The wreckage was found on private land in a flat grass field about 250 ft directly east of the western corner of the field. The trees near the accident site did not display any evidence of impact damage. During the onsite examination of the airframe, flight control continuity was established to the extent possible, but there were some separations in the flight control system that were consistent with impact forces. All observed separations in the wreckage were consistent with overstress signatures. No preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures were noted with the airframe. An examination of the engine found rotational signatures on the compressor turbine, the power turbine vane, and the power turbine. The first-stage compressor rotor blades exhibited rolled-over material from contact with their respective shroud. The propeller shaft exhibited a torsional overload fracture. The rotational signatures and fractured shaft indicated that the engine was rotating under power at the time of the accident. No preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures were noted with the engine. On May 11, 2019, about 0810 central daylight time, an Air Tractor AT-502A airplane, N713LA, impacted a grass field while maneuvering about 6 miles southwest of Eagle Lake, Texas. The commercial pilot received fatal injuries. The airplane was destroyed by impact forces. The airplane was registered to a private individual and was operated by ANF Air Service Inc. as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 137 aerial application flight. Instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) prevailed at the time of the accident, and no flight plan was filed for the visual flight rules (VFR) flight. The flight originated from the operator's private airstrip, which was about 5.5 miles west of Garwood, Texas, at 0743. The operator (the pilot's father, who owned the operation), reported that the purpose of the flight was for the pilot to spray herbicide on several rice fields about 10 miles south of Garwood. According to the operator, the pilot used Aeroweather on his cell phone for preflight weather planning. Shortly after departure, the pilot contacted the operator using his cell phone and a Bluetooth adapter (which was connected to the pilot's flight helmet and interfaced with the cockpit intercom system) and reported that he observed fog "rolling in." The pilot also reported that he was flying above the fog layer. The pilot indicated his intention to divert to Eagle Lake Airport (ELA), Eagle Lake, Texas, instead of the operator's airstrip and terminate the flight. The operator received no further communication from the pilot. An overview of the route of flight and time, altitude, and airspeed data are shown in figure 1. Figure 1 – Route of flight based on Garmin Aera 560 GPS (red track) and SATLOC M3 (purple track) data. The airplane was equipped with a Garmin Aera 560 GPS unit. Data recovered from the device included time, airspeed, altitude, and track. Data from the last seve