ERA16FA325

The pilot's improper landing touchdown attitude, which resulted in a propeller strike, and his inappropriate decision to abort the landing after the propeller had contacted the runway, which resulted in a loss of thrust and led to an aerodynamic stall during climb. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's lack of recent experience in the accident airplane make and model.

The private pilot rented the airplane for a personal flight, flew to another airport, and picked up the passenger. The pilot and the passenger then flew to the airport where the accident occurred. During the first landing attempt, the airplane appeared to be traveling too fast on the final approach. During the touchdown, the airplane bounced, and the pilot aborted the landing, climbed out, and joined the traffic pattern. During the second landing attempt, the airplane was again fast on the approach, and it touched down about halfway down the runway on the nose wheel, then touched down on the main landing gear, bounced, and became airborne. The airplane bounced twice more, then touched down about 400 to 500 ft before the end of the runway and stayed on the runway surface. As the airplane approached the end of the pavement, witnesses heard the engine power increase as the pilot aborted the landing, and the airplane began to climb. According to some witnesses, the engine was not producing full power. As it approached a row of trees off the end of the runway, the airplane appeared to climb steeply, cleared the row of trees, and then abruptly banked steeply to the left, pitched nose down, and descended in a steep, nose-down attitude to ground impact. Postaccident examination of the runway revealed propeller strike marks and a nosewheel tire mark about 1,747 ft from the threshold of the 2,900-ft-long runway, indicating that the pilot touched down past midfield in an improper nose-low attitude. Examination of the propeller revealed chordwise transfer marks and tip curling and polishing indicative of a propeller strike, which would have degraded the efficiency of the propeller and resulted in a loss of thrust during climb. The loss of control observed by the witnesses was consistent with the pilot attempting to climb even with the loss of thrust due to the damaged propeller, and exceeding the airplane's critical angle of attack, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall. Security camera video recordings and wind information from a nearby airport indicated that a slight tailwind existed for landing on the chosen runway, which would have slightly increased the airplane's ground speed and ground roll during the landing. However, according to the airplane's pilot operating handbook, the landing ground roll under worse case conditions (maximum gross weight and an outside air temperature of 40°C) would have been about 956 to 1,118 ft; therefore, the runway length was adequate for a safe landing if the proper touchdown point had been achieved. Although the pilot had 36 hours of flight experience in the accident airplane make and model, his most recent flight in this make and model was 10 months before the accident. Further, his most recent flight before the accident flight was in an airplane of lesser performance equipped with fixed landing gear and a fixed pitch propeller, and was about 8 months before the accident.  According to his logbook, he did not meet the Federal Aviation Administration recent experience requirements to act as a pilot in command of an airplane carrying passengers.

N40, located 2 miles southwest of Pittstown, New Jersey, was uncontrolled and had one runway in a 7/25 configuration. Runway 25 was asphalt, had a 0.3%-down gradient, and was in good condition. The runway was 2,900 ft long and 50 ft wide and was marked with non-precision markings in good condition. Electrical transmission lines crossed the approach path for runway 25, about 99 ft above ground level, 2,070 ft from the beginning of the runway, and 210 ft left of centerline. The transmission lines were equipped with spherical high visibility markers and required an 18:1 slope to clear. A 2-light precision approach path indicator (PAPI) that was installed on the left side of the runway displayed a 4.00° glidepath to provide pilots with guidance information to help acquire and maintain the correct approach slope to the runway. Postaccident examination of the PAPI revealed that it was operational and was aligned so that an airplane following its guidance would touch down within the first third of the runway. Recent Flight Experience According to 14 CFR 61.57 (Recent flight experience: Pilot in command), no person may act as a pilot in command of an aircraft carrying passengers unless that person has made at least three takeoffs and three landings within the preceding 90 days and acted as the sole manipulator of the flight controls. Further, the required takeoffs and landings must be performed in an aircraft of the same category, class, and type (if a type rating was required). Propeller Ground Clearance According to 14 CFR 23.925 (Propeller clearance), unless smaller clearances are substantiated, with the airplane at the most adverse combination of weight and center of gravity, and with the propeller in the most adverse pitch position, a propeller clearance of at least 7 inches between each propeller and the ground with the landing gear statically deflected and in the level, normal takeoff, or taxiing attitude (whichever is most critical) must be provided. In addition, for each airplane with conventional landing gear struts using fluid or mechanical means for absorbing landing shocks, there must be positive clearance between the propeller and the ground in the level takeoff attitude with the critical tire completely deflated and the corresponding landing gear strut bottomed. Review of engineering data for the M20J indicated that the propeller clearance exceeded the requirements of 14 CFR 23.925 under all conditions and that the most critical load condition for the airplane was at forward gross weight in either the level, level takeoff, normal takeoff, or taxiing attitude. Review of the dimensional data in the three-view drawing of the airplane contained in the Mooney M20J Airplane Flight Manual and Pilot's Operating Handbook (AFM/POH) indicated that when the airplane was on the ground in a level takeoff attitude, propeller clearance from the ground was 9.5 inches. Further review of the data indicated that propeller clearance could be significantly reduced if the airplane was in a nose-down attitude during landing and touched down on the nose landing gear first, rather than touching down with the main landing gear first. Go Around and Landing Information According to the M20J AFM/POH, during a go-around (balked landing), the power should be increased to full throttle, and an airspeed of 75 mph (65 knots) indicated air speed (IAS) should be established initially. After the climb is established, the wing flaps should be retracted while accelerating to 84 mph (73 knots) IAS, and then the landing gear should be retracted. During landing, the airspeed on final approach should be 81 mph (71 knots) IAS with full flaps. Touchdown should be on the main wheels first, and then during the landing roll, the nose wheel should be gently lowered. Review of the Mooney M20J Normal Landing Distances Chart contained in the POH revealed that when loaded its maximum gross weight, with an outside air temperature at 40°C (104°F) which would have been about 19°C higher than the temperature around the time of the accident, during landing, the airplane would have had a ground roll of 956 feet to 1,118 feet. Total landing distance over a 50-foot obstacle would have been 2,129 feet to 2,269 feet. According to the Airplane Flying Handbook (FAA-H-8083-3B), a normal approach and landing involves selecting a landing point that is normally beyond the runway's approach threshold but within the first third of the runway. Regarding touchdowns, the handbook states, in part: Some pilots try to force or fly the airplane onto the ground without establishing the proper landing attitude. The airplane should never be flown on the runway with excessive speed. A common technique to making a smooth touchdown is to actually focus on holding the wheels of the aircraft a few inches off the ground as long as possible using the elevators while the power is smoothly reduced to idle. In most cases, when the wheels are within 2 or 3 feet of the ground, the airplane is still settling too fast for a gentle touchdown; therefore, the descent must be retarded by increasing back-elevator pressure. Since the airplane is already close to its stalling speed and is settling, this added back-elevator pressure only slows the settling instead of stopping it. At the same time, it results in the airplane touching the ground in the proper landing attitude and the main wheels touching down first so that little or no weight is on the nose wheel. At 1253, the recorded weather at Somerset Airport (SMQ), Somerville, New Jersey, located 15 nautical miles east of the accident site, included wind 350° at 10 knots, visibility 10 miles, sky clear, temperature 21°C, dew point -1°C, and an altimeter setting of 30.17 inches of mercury. Calculation of the crosswind component using the recorded weather at SMQ indicated that about a 2-knot tailwind would have been present on runway 25 at N40 about the time of the accident. The Hunterdon County Medical Examiner, Flemington, New Jersey, performed autopsies on the pilot and passenger. The cause of death of both occupants was blunt force trauma to the body. The FAA Bioaeronautical Sciences Research Laboratory, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, conducted toxicological testing on specimens from the pilot. The toxicology results were negative for ethanol and drugs of abuse. According to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) records, the pilot held a private pilot certificate with an airplane single-engine land rating. His most recent FAA third-class medical certificate was issued on February 10, 2016. According to the pilot's logbook, he had accrued about 188 total hours of flight experience of which 36 hours were in the accident airplane make and model. Review of the pilot's logbook revealed that his most recent flight before the accident flight was in a Piper PA-28-181, on January 14, 2016, about 8 months before the accident. Further review of the pilot's logbook revealed that the pilot's most recent flight in a Mooney M20J before the accident flight occurred on November 21, 2015, about 10 months before the accident. The airplane was a 4-place, complex, single-engine monoplane. The airframe had a tubular steel cabin frame covered with non-structural aluminum skins, a semi-monocoque tail cone, and a full cantilever laminar-flow wing. It was equipped with a retractable, electrically-operated, tricycle-type landing gear with rubber shock discs, a steerable nose wheel, and hydraulic disc brakes. It was powered by an air-cooled, fuel-injected, 200 horsepower, horizontally-opposed, four-cylinder, Lycoming engine driving a 2-blade, variable-pitch, constant-speed McCauley propeller. According to FAA and airplane maintenance records, the airplane was manufactured in 1980. The airplane's most recent 100-hour inspection was completed on August 13, 2016. At the time of the inspection, the airplane had accrued about 4,690.3 total hours of operation, and the