CEN23LA128

The pilot’s decision to fly the airplane in which he had no experience in strong, gusting wind, which resulted his failure to maintain proper airspeed and his exceedance of the airplane’s critical angle of attack and a subsequent aerodynamic stall.

The pilot reported that the airplane’s engine lost all power shortly after takeoff at an altitude of 400 to 500 above ground level (agl). The airplane then entered an aerodynamic stall, descended, and impacted the ground before coming to rest inverted. The pilot had just purchased the airplane and did not have any flight time in the accident make and model airplane. The previous owner was present when the accident occurred. He stated that he did not believe that the accident was a result of a loss of engine power. He noted that the engine runup was normal and the wind was 35 to 40 knots with gusts at the time of the accident. He saw the airplane after takeoff and it appeared to be bouncing around because of the wind. It then stalled and fell to the ground. He could not hear the engine noises due to the wind. A postaccident examination, which included an engine run, did not reveal any preimpact anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. Based on the available evidence, the accident was likely the result of the pilot’s decision to fly the airplane in which he had no experience in strong, gusting wind. This led to exceedance of the airplane’s critical angle of attack and an aerodynamic stall that the pilot had insufficient altitude to recover from.

On March 10, 2023, about 1045 mountain standard time, a Zenith Zodiac 601XL airplane, N969WD, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Cuchara Valley Airport (07V), La Veta, Colorado. The pilot and passenger received minor injuries. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight. The pilot reported that he had just purchased the airplane and was in the process of flying the airplane to Texas. The pilot did not have any flight time in the accident make and model of airplane. He reported that the airplane was configured with 4 fuel tanks consisting of 2 tanks in each wing. The outboard fuel tanks were empty due to weight and balance considerations. The inboard tanks were filled before the flight and the right inboard fuel tank was selected. The pilot reported that, shortly after takeoff from runway 24 and when the airplane was about 400 to 500 ft agl, the airplane’s engine lost all power, and he placed the airplane in a glide. When the airplane was about 100 ft agl, the airplane stalled and impacted the ground and came to rest inverted. The fuselage and wings sustained substantial damage. The previous owner who had just sold the airplane to the pilot was present when the accident happened. He said that he did not believe the accident was the result of a loss of engine power and that the wind at the time was about 35 to 40 knots with gusts. He tried to persuade the pilot to delay taking the airplane until another day when wind was more favorable but said the pilot and his passenger were determined to leave that day. They performed a runup to 4,000 rpm, checked the ignitions, and all temperatures and pressures were normal. The pilot and passenger then took off. When the airplane was about 400 ft agl, it looked like the airplane was getting bounced around by turbulence and was going side to side. The airplane then stalled and went into the ground. The previous owner was about ¼ mile away and could not hear engine sounds due to the wind. The airplane remained at the accident site until a postaccident examination was performed, which included several engine runs at idle speeds. The engine runs were limited to idle speeds because the airplane’s wooden propeller had splintered, and the engine was run without a propeller installed. The postaccident examination and engine run did not reveal any anomalies that would have precluded normal operation.