It‘s For You
While you’re flying an airplane is no time to be distracted by a cell phone
Walk along any busy street nowadays, and you're almost certain to see lots of people with cell phones pressed to their ears or held at arm's length while the holder seems to be saying "cheese." Most of the cell phone users seem to have little trouble with the multitasking made necessary by whatever urgent exchange of information is taking place or when a "selfie" photo is being taken. One or two might stumble at a curb, or bump into a lamppost, or walk in front of a bus. But, they're glad to pay such a modest price for the great convenience cell phones offer. A pilot using a cell phone in flight, especially during a high work-load segment of a flight, may find the price that might be paid for giving too much attention to the phone is a lot higher than when on the ground.
Cessna 150
On May 31, 2014, a Cessna 150K crashed about two miles west of the Front Range Airport (FTG), near Watkins, Colo. The pilot and passenger were killed. The airplane had been flying in night IMC, but the pilot hadn't filed an instrument flight plan. The accident took place at about 12:22 a.m., about three minutes after the airplane took off from FTG. The airplane was reported missing at about 3:30 in the morning. Airport personnel located the wreckage about four hours later in a wheat field about two miles west-northwest of the airport. There were no witnesses to the accident.
The pilot was a ground instructor, and held a commercial pilot certificate and an instrument rating. His total time was 726 hours, with about 114 hours of simulated and actual instrument time logged. He had just over 27 night hours logged. Information in the logbooks didn't tell whether he was current for instrument flight or flight at night with passengers.
A few minutes after the time of the accident, a surface weather observation at Denver International Airport, about five miles from the accident site, reported: wind from 160 degrees at three knots; six miles visibility in mist; scattered clouds at 200 feet, broken clouds at 500 feet; temperature 55 degrees F; dew point 54 degrees F; altimeter 30.19.
Although the pilot wasn't in contact with air traffic control, the flight was recorded on ATC radar. Radar data revealed that the airplane first departed FTG at 12:04 a.m., and made one flight around the traffic pattern. It landed on runway 26 at 12:10. During that flight, the airplane reached an altitude of about 900 feet AGL. At 12:18:56, the airplane again departed runway 26 and began to drift to the left of the runway centerline. At 12:20:06, the airplane turned right to the northwest, climbed at 300 feet per minute and reached an altitude of about 640 feet AGL. The airplane began a left turn and continued climbing to about 740 feet AGL. At 12:21:24, the left turn tightened, and the airplane descended at about 1,900 feet per minute. The last radar return was recorded at 12:21:43, at about 140 feet AGL. During the flights, the airplane's distance from the runway varied between 0.44 miles and 1.66 miles away.
All major components of the airplane were found at the accident site. The emergency locator transmitter was found in the armed position and remained attached to the antenna. No ELT transmissions were reported. The vacuum pump was disassembled and revealed normal operating signatures.
An onboard video recording camera was found near the wreckage, and the files were recovered. There were files recorded during a number of flights, with different passengers. The NTSB said that based on the available information, it's likely that the final video file was recorded during the six-minute flight in the traffic pattern just before the accident flight. The video recordings revealed that the pilot and various passengers were taking self-photographs with their cell phones and, during the night flight, using the camera's flash function during the takeoff roll, initial climb and flight in the traffic pattern.
Investigators failed to find any preimpact mechanical problems that would have precluded normal operation of the airplane. In its probable cause for the accident, the NTSB said that spatial disorientation in night instrument meteorological conditions led to the pilot's loss of airplane control. Although there was no video showing the pilot using a cell phone during the accident flight, the NTSB said that the video evidence of his previous cell phone use during low altitude maneuvering was compelling enough to make it likely that cell phone usage continued during the accident flight. That circumstantial evidence was enough for the Safety Board's probable cause to declare that "contributing to the accident was the pilot's distraction due to his cell phone use while maneuvering at low altitude."
Piper PA-28-161
On August 29, 2013, a Piper PA-28-161 struck an ILS glideslope antenna and crashed to the ground at Danville Regional Airport (DAN), Danville, Va. A fire broke out, and the student pilot, who was the only person on board, was fatally injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed. The accident took place just before sunset, at about 7:45 p.m.
According to several witnesses, the airplane made repeated takeoffs and landings to runway 2. During one of the landing attempts, the airplane "appeared too low." The student began a go-around maneuver, and the airplane rolled "sharply left, then sharply right" before it began to climb out. After the go-around, the student made a normal landing and taxied back to the beginning of the runway for another takeoff. It was after that, on the next approach, that the airplane "flared high, then rolled left," and then began to climb out "very shallow" and "appeared level" prior to hitting the antenna. The witnesses reported hearing the engine power increase just prior to impact. Then, engine power decreased.
According to FAA records and the local flight school, the pilot, age 42, held a student pilot certificate. The student's logbook wasn't located during the investigation. Flight school records showed the student had accumulated about 13 total flight hours, of which an estimated 1.6 hours were solo flight.
Official sunset was at 7:50 p.m., and the weather recorded at DAN at about that time was: wind from 050 degrees at five knots; 10 miles visibility; clear skies; temperature 26 degrees C.; dew point 21 degrees C; altimeter 29.99. The end of civil twilight was at 8:16 p.m.
At the time of the accident, the airport's runway 13/31 was closed because of construction. Runway 2/20 was normally 6,502 feet long; however, due to construction, it was reduced to 3,028 feet long. The airport elevation was 571 feet MSL. The ILS glideslope antenna was located about 900 feet from the runway threshold for runway 2 and about 175 feet from the west side of the pavement for runway 2/20.
The ILS glideslope antenna exhibited impact damage at 39.5 feet AGL. It had been struck by the airplane's left wing. The left wing had been ripped off and was found next to the antenna. The debris path included a ground scar in a position consistent with the right wing impacting the ground in a right-wing low attitude. The impact mark was located 105 feet from the antenna.
A cell phone was located in the wreckage, in a carrying case, and the case had extensive thermal damage. Removing the phone from the case revealed it wasn't on. After it was turned on for examination, the phone indicated that a missed call was received at 7:46 EDT.
The student pilot was a doctor, who was late arriving at the airport because a medical procedure he was performing on a patient took longer than anticipated. In an interview, the flight instructor told investigators that the student was scheduled to fly at 5:30, but had to delay the flight. The instructor said the student pilot was upset that the flight was going to be delayed. The instructor also said the student pilot's patient almost died while the medical procedure was being performed.
After the doctor arrived at the airport, he and the instructor flew three takeoffs and landings. Then, the instructor got out and gave the student the okay to fly not more than eight solo takeoffs and landings. The instructor told investigators that the student pilot was very focused on flying; however, when his pager or cellular phone sounded, he'd immediately reach for it. The instructor said that once, while in the airport traffic pattern, the instructor's cell phone "went off," and the student "started looking like it was his." The instructor said he told the doctor, "It's my cell phone. Forget it. And he [the student] looked at me like, forget the cell phone? He couldn't imagine somebody just ignoring a cell phone."
The NTSB determined that the probable cause of this accident was the student pilot's failure to maintain control and climb the airplane during a go-around maneuver. Contributing to this was the flight instructor's failure to provide adequate oversight of the student pilot by ensuring that the cockpit was free of distractions.
Peter Katz is editor and publisher of NTSB Reporter, an independent monthly update on aircraft accident investigations and other news concerning the National Transportation Safety Board. To subscribe, write to: NTSB Reporter, Subscription Dept., P.O. Box 831, White Plains, N.Y. 10602-0831.
Subscribe to Our Newsletter
Get the latest Plane & Pilot Magazine stories delivered directly to your inbox