WPR13FA061

The pilot's failure to maintain clearance with terrain while maneuvering in a remote mountainous region. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's improper decision to traverse the remote mountainous area in high-density altitude conditions with the airplane near its maximum gross weight. Contributing to the delay in the search and rescue (SAR) was the lack of a 406-MHz ELT signal, which would have allowed SAR responders to initiate a more timely search and find the accident site more quickly.

Family members reported to the Federal Aviation Administration that the airplane was overdue on the cross-country flight. One week after the initial notification, the wreckage was located in the upper end of a canyon about 11 nautical miles west of the departure airport at an elevation of 8,992 feet mean sea level (msl) in a grove of trees. A ridge, which was located directly in front of and on the airplane's flightpath about 950 feet from the wreckage site, was measured at 9,186 feet msl. Evidence at the accident site indicated that the airplane initially impacted the trees on a southeasterly heading in a level attitude and that its left wing subsequently impacted a tree. The impact rotated the airplane counter-clockwise, and it subsequently came to rest upright on a northwesterly heading about 150 feet from the first point of impact. The airplane was found relatively intact except for the separation of the left wing. A postcrash fire consumed the cabin and cockpit areas; the pilot had refueled before departure. Postaccident examination of the airframe and engine revealed no mechanical anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. Although no hazardous weather conditions were reported in the area at the time of the accident, unexpected turbulent conditions can occur in mountain canyons. Further, the density altitude was calculated to be 9,663 feet, which would have adversely affected the airplane's performance. A family member, who was a pilot, reported that, before the accident pilot departed on the first leg of the three-leg flight, he assisted him in calculating the airplane's weight and balance for each leg. He reported that, for each calculation, he used the estimated weight of each passenger, the baggage, the two dogs, a rifle, and full fuel and that, although the airplane was right at its maximum gross takeoff weight for each leg, it was within its weight and balance limits. He stated that the accident pilot had made this same cross-country flight three or four times previously but that he did not know the extent of the pilot's mountain-flying experience. The pilot's decision to fly in a canyon in high-density altitude conditions near the airplane's maximum gross weight likely contributed to the accident. The airplane was likely equipped with a 121.5/243-MHz emergency locator transmitter (ELT). Due to fire damage, it could not be determined whether the ELT switch was in the armed position or whether the ELT activated immediately after impact. Regardless, the 121.5-MHz signal would only have been detected by other aircraft flying in the remote area because satellite monitoring for 121.5-MHz ELT signals ceased in February 2009. Search and Rescue (SAR) operations, which commenced the day following the accident, took 7 days. During this time period, the Civil Air Patrol from three states flew a total of 86 missions, and local law enforcement agencies conducted additional SAR missions. SAR operations were protracted due to the lack of flight following services, ELT signal and radar data, and a digital emergency signal from a 406-MHz ELT or other satellite emergency notification device and the fact that the white airplane crashed and fragmented in a snowy, forested area, which made visual detection difficult. Two passengers initially survived the accident. They were found at the accident site wearing t-shirts and jeans; however, they were observed with warm weather coats before their departure on the day of the accident. It could not be determined whether any survival equipment was on board the airplane, but none was observed at the accident site; any survival gear may have been consumed by the postcrash fire. No evidence indicated that the survivors attempted to make an overnight shelter. The temperatures at the accident site, which was in a snow-covered area, were reportedly in the high teens to low 20s the night of the accident. The autopsy for both passengers indicated that the cause of death included hypothermia. Therefore, the two passengers did not survive the first night after the accident due to exposure to the cold temperature and the generally inclement weather conditions. It is not known whether an immediate 406-MHz ELT signal would have allowed SAR responders to reach the scene of the accident before the deaths of the two passengers; however, such a signal detection would have initiated an immediate search and greatly enhanced the opportunity for the accident site to be located more quickly.

HISTORY OF FLIGHT On November 25, 2012, about 1300 mountain standard time, a Piper PA-28-181 airplane, N8314E, was substantially damaged following impact with remote mountainous terrain while maneuvering about 9 nautical miles (nm) west-northwest of Aurora, Utah. The certified private pilot, who occupied the left front cockpit seat, the certified student pilot, who occupied the right front cockpit seat, and the sole passenger who occupied one of the rear cabin seats sustained fatal injuries. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the cross-country flight, which was being operated in accordance with 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91, and no flight plan had been filed. The flight departed Fillmore Municipal Airport (FOM), Fillmore, Utah, about 1245, with the Gillette-Campbell County Airport (GCC), Gillette, Wyoming, as its intended destination. In a telephone interview with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigator-in-charge (IIC) 9 days after the accident, and 2 days subsequent to the airplane's wreckage being located, a family member of the pilot reported that the pilot and his 2 passengers had flown from GCC to the Shafter-Minter Field (MIT), Shafter, California, via Fillmore, Utah, about a week earlier to celebrate Thanksgiving; he also reported that the pilot had made this same trip over the same route 3 or 4 times previously, but had no actual knowledge of the pilot's mountain flying experience. The family member stated that the pilot had informed the 2 female passengers prior to their departure from GCC, that due to the additional weight of the two dogs that would be accompanying them, they would not be able to take their suitcases, but that they could take a back pack instead. The family member further stated that each of the airplane's three occupants had their own back packs and warm weather coats with them when they departed MIT, and that they had purchased additional clothing while in California. Additionally, the family member, who was a pilot, stated that on the morning of the departure, when he noticed how much baggage the pilot was loading into the airplane, he used a program on his computer to assist the accident pilot with his weight and balance calculations. He said he estimated the weight of each passenger, the three back packs, the two dogs, a rifle that the pilot was taking with him, and used full fuel for the calculation of each leg of the flight. He said that the airplane was right at its maximum gross takeoff weight in each instance, and that the airplane was within its weight and balance limits. The family member reported that the pilot departed MIT for GCC, but stopped at the Tehachapi Municipal Airport (TSP), Tehachapi, California, to refuel and visit with relatives prior to departing for FOM on their way to GCC; TSP is located 43 nm southeast of MIT. The family member further reported that the pilot and his 2 passengers arrived at MIT at 0540 Pacific Standard Time (PST), and departed for TSP at 0615 PST. He thought the flight arrived TSP about 0645 and departed for FOM about 0730 or 0800, but wasn't certain of the exact time. When the flight failed to arrive at GCC on the evening of November 25, concerned family members contacted the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for assistance in locating the airplane. An Alert Notification (ALNOT) was issued by the FAA at 1148 on November 26. Subsequent to a multi-state search and rescue effort, the airplane was located by a Utah State Department of Public Safety helicopter pilot on December 2, about 0800. The accident site was located in remote mountainous terrain, about 11 nm due east of the departure airport, at an elevation of about 9,000 feet mean sea level (msl). On December 4, 2012, the airplane was recovered to a secured storage location for further examination. PERSONNEL INFORMATION Left seat pilot The left seat pilot, age 37, held a private pilot certificate with an airplane single-engine land rating, which was issued on December 6, 2011. The pilot held a third-class Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airman medical certificate, dated January 11, 2010, with no limitations or restrictions. While the pilot's personal logbooks were not recovered during the investigation, a family member reported that he thought the pilot's total flight time was about 200 hours, or a little more. Right seat pilot The right seat pilot, age 33, held a student pilot certificate, and was issued a third-class FAA airman medical certificate on April 17, 2009. No pilot records indicative of the pilot's flight times or aircraft flown were recovered during the course of the investigation. AIRCRAFT INFORMATION The single-engine, low wing Piper PA-28-181, serial number 28-8390016, was manufactured in 1982. Maintenance records revealed that the airframe and engine had accrued a total time in service of 3,916 hours as of its most recent annual inspection, which was performed on October 6, 2012. The Lycoming O-360 –A4M engine, serial number L-22551-36A, had accumulated a total 1,610.5 hours since its most recent major overhaul, which was performed on August 27, 1994. During the investigation, the NTSB IIC was provided with fuel records by the city of Fillmore, Utah. The records revealed that the accident airplane was refueled at the FOM self-serve fuel station at 1233 on the day of the accident with 26.87 gallons of 100 Low Lead aviation fuel. There were no witnesses at FOM on the day of the accident who observed the airplane refuel or depart. SURVIVAL FACTORS A National Transportation Safety Board Survival Factors Specialist reviewed the Search and Rescue (SAR) data during the investigation and reported the following: The first information in the AFRCC log regarding this accident was an Information Request (INREQ) received from the FAA at 1801Z (1301 EST, 1101 MST) on November 26, 2012. The INREQ contained information indicating the VFR flight with 3 occupants originated at Shafter Airport (MIT), Shafter, California, with expected stops at Tehachapi Municipal Airport (TSP) California, Fillmore City Airport (FOM), Utah, and Huntington Municipal Airport (69V), Utah. The final destination was Gillette-Campbell County Airport (GCC) in Wyoming, and the airplane was expected by family to land at approximately 2230Z (1530 MST) on November 25, 2012. The INREQ was apparently a result of a family concern phone call from the pilot's brother. After leaving a message for the pilot on his cell phone, Air Force Rescue Coordination Center (AFRCC) contacted Fillmore City Airport (KFOM) and learned that one of the known passengers on the airplane had purchased fuel with a credit card at 1233 MST on November 25, 2012. The FAA issued an ALNOT for the airplane at 1848Z on November 26, 2012, and AFRCC contacted the Utah Department of Aviation (DOA). Utah DOA requested a Civil Air Patrol (CAP) mission be opened, which was done a short time later. At the same time, missions were also opened for CAP radar data review and cell phone forensics. AFRCC contacted and requested ramp checks of both 69V and GCC with negative results for the airplane. About 4 hours after the INREQ was initially received, the CAP cell phone forensic analyst reported text message activity from the passenger's cell phone from FOM at 1152 MST on November 25, 2012. When the recipient of the message was contacted, it was learned that the message stated "In the air. Should be home in a few hours." (It was also learned that a second passenger on the airplane also was carrying a cell phone.) The timing and content of this communication did not match with the fuel credit card transaction information, leading to speculation about the exact time the airplane took off from FOM. Radar analysts could find no radar tracks of aircraft departing FOM near these times, leading investigators to believe the airplane's crash site was likely in the vicinity of the airport. Review