Sun Valley - Carlsbad
Flight / Schedule
Sun Valley - Carlsbad
Aircraft
Cessna 560 Citation VRegistration
N86CE
MSN
560-0265
Year of Manufacture
1994
Operator
Goship AirDate
January 24, 2006 at 06:40 AM
Type
CRASHFlight Type
Executive/Corporate/Business
Flight Phase
Landing (descent or approach)
Crash Site
Airport (less than 10 km from airport)
Crash Location
Carlsbad California
Region
North America • United States of America
Coordinates
33.1581°, -117.3506°
Crash Cause
Human factor
Narrative Report
On January 24, 2006 at 06:40 AM, Sun Valley - Carlsbad experienced a crash involving Cessna 560 Citation V, operated by Goship Air, with the event recorded near Carlsbad California.
The flight was categorized as executive/corporate/business and the reported phase was landing (descent or approach) at a airport (less than 10 km from airport) crash site.
4 people were known to be on board, 4 fatalities were recorded, 0 survivors were identified or estimated. This corresponds to an estimated fatality rate of 100.0%.
Crew on board: 2, crew fatalities: 2, passengers on board: 2, passenger fatalities: 2, other fatalities: 0.
The listed crash cause is human factor. Air traffic control cleared the flightcrew for the instrument landing system (ILS) approach to runway 24, which was 4,897 feet long. The flightcrew then reported that they had the runway in sight, cancelled their instrument flight rules (IFR) clearance, and executed a visual flight rules (VFR) approach in VFR conditions to the airport. The reported winds favored a landing toward the east, onto the opposite runway (runway 6). During the approach, after a query from the first officer, the captain indicated to the first officer that he was going to "...land to the east," consistent with the reported winds. However, the final approach and subsequent landing were made to runway 24, which produced a six-knot tailwind. During the approach sequence the captain maintained an airspeed that was approximately 30 knots higher than the correct airspeed for the aircraft's weight, resulting in the aircraft touching down about 1,500 feet further down the runway than normal, and much faster than normal. The captain then delayed the initiation of a go-around until the first officer asked if they were going around. Although the aircraft lifted off the runway surface prior to departing the paved overrun during the delayed go-around it impacted a localizer antenna platform, whose highest non-frangible structure was located approximately 304 feet past the end of the runway, and approximately two feet lower than the terrain at the departure end of the runway. The aircraft continued airborne as it flew over downsloping terrain for about 400 more feet before colliding with the terrain and a commercial storage building that was located at an elevation approximately 80 feet lower than the terrain at the end of the runway. The localizer antenna platform was located outside of the designated runway safety area, and met all applicable FAA siting requirements. The captain had type 2 diabetes, for which he took oral medication and monitored blood sugar levels. He did not reveal his history of diabetes to the FAA. The captain's post-accident toxicology testing was consistent with an elevated average blood sugar level over the previous several months; however, no medical records of the captain's treatment were available, and the investigation could not determine if the captain's diabetes or treatment were potentially factors in the accident. The captain of the accident flight was the sole owner of a corporation that was asked by the two owners of the accident airplane to manage the airplane for them under a Part 91 business flight operation. The two owners were not pilots and had no professional aviation experience, but they desired to be flown to major domestic airports so that they could transfer and travel internationally via commercial airlines. One of the two owners stated that the purpose of the accident flight was to fly a businessman to a meeting, and to also transport one of the owner's wives to visit family at the same destination. According to one of the owners, the businessman was interested in being a third owner in the accident airplane, so the owner permitted the businessman to fly. The owner also stated that the accident pilot told him that the passenger would pay for expenses directly related to the operation of the airplane for the flight (permitted under FAA Part 91 rules), and an "hourly fee" (prohibited under FAA Part 91 rules); however, no documentation was found to corroborate this statement for the accident flight or previous flights.
Aircraft reference details include registration N86CE, MSN 560-0265, year of manufacture 1994.
Geospatial coordinates for this crash are approximately 33.1581°, -117.3506°.
Fatalities
Total
4
Crew
2
Passengers
2
Other
0
Crash Summary
Air traffic control cleared the flightcrew for the instrument landing system (ILS) approach to runway 24, which was 4,897 feet long. The flightcrew then reported that they had the runway in sight, cancelled their instrument flight rules (IFR) clearance, and executed a visual flight rules (VFR) approach in VFR conditions to the airport. The reported winds favored a landing toward the east, onto the opposite runway (runway 6). During the approach, after a query from the first officer, the captain indicated to the first officer that he was going to "...land to the east," consistent with the reported winds. However, the final approach and subsequent landing were made to runway 24, which produced a six-knot tailwind. During the approach sequence the captain maintained an airspeed that was approximately 30 knots higher than the correct airspeed for the aircraft's weight, resulting in the aircraft touching down about 1,500 feet further down the runway than normal, and much faster than normal. The captain then delayed the initiation of a go-around until the first officer asked if they were going around. Although the aircraft lifted off the runway surface prior to departing the paved overrun during the delayed go-around it impacted a localizer antenna platform, whose highest non-frangible structure was located approximately 304 feet past the end of the runway, and approximately two feet lower than the terrain at the departure end of the runway. The aircraft continued airborne as it flew over downsloping terrain for about 400 more feet before colliding with the terrain and a commercial storage building that was located at an elevation approximately 80 feet lower than the terrain at the end of the runway. The localizer antenna platform was located outside of the designated runway safety area, and met all applicable FAA siting requirements. The captain had type 2 diabetes, for which he took oral medication and monitored blood sugar levels. He did not reveal his history of diabetes to the FAA. The captain's post-accident toxicology testing was consistent with an elevated average blood sugar level over the previous several months; however, no medical records of the captain's treatment were available, and the investigation could not determine if the captain's diabetes or treatment were potentially factors in the accident. The captain of the accident flight was the sole owner of a corporation that was asked by the two owners of the accident airplane to manage the airplane for them under a Part 91 business flight operation. The two owners were not pilots and had no professional aviation experience, but they desired to be flown to major domestic airports so that they could transfer and travel internationally via commercial airlines. One of the two owners stated that the purpose of the accident flight was to fly a businessman to a meeting, and to also transport one of the owner's wives to visit family at the same destination. According to one of the owners, the businessman was interested in being a third owner in the accident airplane, so the owner permitted the businessman to fly. The owner also stated that the accident pilot told him that the passenger would pay for expenses directly related to the operation of the airplane for the flight (permitted under FAA Part 91 rules), and an "hourly fee" (prohibited under FAA Part 91 rules); however, no documentation was found to corroborate this statement for the accident flight or previous flights.
Cause: Human factor
Occupants & Outcome
Crew On Board
2
Passengers On Board
2
Estimated Survivors
0
Fatality Rate
100.0%
Known people on board: 4
Operational Details
Schedule / Flight
Sun Valley - Carlsbad
Operator
Goship AirFlight Type
Executive/Corporate/Business
Flight Phase
Landing (descent or approach)
Crash Site
Airport (less than 10 km from airport)
Region / Country
North America • United States of America
Aircraft Details
Similar Plane Crashes
United States Signal Corps - USSC
De Havilland DH.4
The single engine airplane departed Dayton-McCook Field for a local test flight. Shortly after takeoff, the aircraft stalled and crashed, killing both occupants. Crew: Maj Oscar Brindley, Lt Col Henry Damm.
United States Signal Corps - USSC
De Havilland DH.4
Lt. Frank Stuart Patterson, son and nephew of the co-founders of National Cash Register, is killed in the crash of his DH.4M, AS-32098, at Wilbur Wright Field during a flight test of a new mechanism for synchronizing machine gun and propeller, when a tie rod breaks during a dive from 15,000 feet (4,600 m), causing the wings to separate from the aircraft. Wishing to recognize the contributions of the Patterson family (owners of NCR) the area of Wright Field east of Huffman Dam (including Wilbur Wright Field, Fairfield Air Depot, and the Huffman Prairie) is renamed Patterson Field on 6 July 1931, in honor of Lt. Patterson.
United States Signal Corps - USSC
De Havilland DH.4
The aircraft crashed in unknown circumstances.
United States Signal Corps - USSC
De Havilland DH.4
The crew was completing a training mission. At an altitude of about 4,000 feet, the aircraft entered a spin and crashed in an open field near Everman-Barron Field Airport. A crew was killed and the second occupants was injured. The aircraft was destroyed.
U.S. Air Mail Service
De Havilland DH.4
Crashed following an engine failure. Pilot fate unknown.
United States Signal Corps - USSC
De Havilland DH.4
The accident occurred in unknown circumstances.
