Event ANC15LA069

Factual narrative

On September 2, 2015, about 1500 Alaska daylight time, a Piper PA-28 airplane, N7494R, sustained substantial damage following a loss of control while landing at Lakloey Air Park, North Pole, Alaska. The airplane was being operated by the student pilot as a visual flight rules (VFR) flight under the provisions of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91, when the accident occurred. The student pilot sustained minor injuries and the sole passenger was not injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and no flight plan had been filed. During a telephone conversation with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigator-in-charge (IIC) on September 2, the passenger stated that they had overflown a moose hunting area and were returning for landing. After touchdown, during the landing roll, the airplane veered to the left, then to the right, then back to the left before departing the runway and impacting a stand of birch trees. He stated that the airplane seemed to fly great, and he was not aware of, nor did the pilot discuss, any mechanical anomalies or malfunctions during the course of the flight. During an interview with the NTSB, IIC on September 3 the pilot stated that the only thing he remembered from the accident flight was being on short final for runway 24 at Lakloey Air Park. At the time of the accident, a pilot rated witness on the northeast corner of Lakloey Air Park reported light wind conditions out of the east at 8 to 10 knots. He observed the accident airplane on final approach for runway 24; a downwind landing. He noted that the airplane appeared to be a "little fast", and estimated the groundspeed to be about 60 miles per hour. He said that after touchdown, the airplane veered to the left, then to the right, then back sharply to the left before exiting the runway. The NTSB IIC reached the accident site on the morning of September 3. The airplane came to rest upright in a densely populated stand of birch trees about midfield and adjacent to runway 24, on a heading of about 250 degrees. All the primary flight controls were identified at the accident site. Stabilator control continuity was established from the control column to the stabilator balance arm. Rudder control continuity was established from the rudder torque tube to the rudder horn. Aileron control continuity was established in the direct cables, from the control column to the point where the right cable fractured with features consistent with tension overload, to the left and right aileron bellcranks, and in the balance cable to the point where the cable fractured with features consistent with tension overload, to the left and right aileron bellcranks. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the wings and fuselage. The examination of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. The closest weather reporting facility is Ladd Army Airfield, Fort Wainwright, AK approximately 3 miles west of the accident site. At 1458, an aviation routine weather report (METAR) at Fort Wainwright, Alaska, reported in part: wind 090 degrees at 7 knots, visibility, 10 statute miles, clear skies; 67 degrees F; dew point 37 degrees F; altimeter, 29.87 inHG. Title 14, Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) Part 61 prescribes in part: The requirements for issuing pilot certificates and ratings, and the privileges and limitations of these certificates and ratings. The student pilot was subject to the part's applicable rules. Section 61.89, states, in part: A student pilot may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft: That is carrying a passenger. The student pilot was conducting a local flight with a passenger on board. The passenger stated that they had overflown a moose hunting area and were returning to the departure airport for landing. After touchdown and during the landing roll, the airplane veered left, then right, then left again before departing the runway and impacting a stand of birch trees. He stated that the airplane seemed to fly great and that he was not aware of, nor did the pilot discuss, any mechanical anomalies or malfunctions during the flight. Due to injuries sustained in the accident, the student pilot was unable to remember the accident sequence. A pilot-rated witness reported that he observed the airplane on final approach with about an 8- to 10-knot tailwind and noted that the airplane appeared to be a "little fast." He stated that, after touchdown, the airplane veered left, then right, then sharply left again before exiting the runway, corroborating the passenger's statement. The examination of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12

NTSB Findings

Hierarchical cause / factor breakdown from the FAA bulk avdata database. Each finding tagged C (Cause) or F (Factor).

• C Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Directional control-Not attained/maintained - C
• C Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Aircraft control-Student/instructed pilot - C
• C Environmental issues-Conditions/weather/phenomena-Wind-Tailwind-Effect on operation - C