CEN15CA165
2015-03-01 · Lee's Summit, Missouri, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport LXT
Current FAA registration · N3575X
- Make / Model
- PIPER PA-28-181
- Year of manufacture
- 1979 · 36 years old at event
- Engine
- LYCOMING O&VO-360 SER (180 hp)
- Seats / Engines
- 4 seats · 1 engine
- Last airworthiness date
- 19791217
- ADS-B equipped
- Yes — Mode-S A401EB
Source: FAA Aircraft Registry (releasable master file).
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The pilot-receiving-instruction's excessive pitch control during takeoff, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall shortly after liftoff and the subsequent loss of control. Contributing to the accident was the flight crew's decision to have the flight instructor separately control the throttle while the pilot-receiving-instruction manipulated the flight controls, which resulted in inadequate coordination between the flight crew during the attempted stall recovery.
Factual narrative
The pilot-receiving-instruction reported that the purpose of the flight was to receive a checkout in the flying club airplane. After completing three uneventful takeoffs and landings, the flight instructor asked the pilot-receiving-instruction to perform a simulated soft-field takeoff from a high-altitude airport. The pilot-receiving-instruction had not performed the requested maneuver previously, which was described as a soft-field takeoff at 50-percent engine power to simulate the atmospheric conditions of a high-altitude airport. Before attempting the takeoff, both pilots agreed that the pilot-receiving-instruction would manipulate the flight controls and that the throttle would be separately controlled by the flight instructor. The pilot-receiving-instruction reported that during the takeoff, shortly after becoming airborne, while still in ground-effect, the airplane encountered an aerodynamic stall. The pilot-receiving-instruction briefly reduced airplane pitch to recover from the aerodynamic stall, but as the airplane drifted toward the right side of the runway he subsequently increased yoke backpressure to keep the airplane airborne. The pilot-receiving-instruction reported that the airplane encountered a second aerodynamic stall after he increased airplane pitch. The airplane subsequently drifted left, crossing back over the runway, before the airplane landed along the left side of the runway. The flight was terminated and the aircraft inspected for damage. The airplane exhibited damage to the tail skid, tail tie-down ring, left wingtip, the nose and left main landing gear, and the propeller. An additional examination established that the aft fuselage bulkhead had sustained substantial damage when the tail struck the runway. The pilot-receiving-instruction reported there were no mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airframe or engine that would have precluded normal operation.The flight instructor reported that the engine power had been set at 2,100 rpm to simulate the available engine power while operating at a high-altitude airport. He reported that the pilot-receiving-instruction had used excessive pitch control inputs during the initial takeoff roll to keep the nose wheel off the runway, the airplane veered to the right before coming airborne, and that the airplane encountered an aerodynamic stall upon liftoff. The flight instructor reported that the airplane subsequently bounced, drifted to the left, and eventually landed along the left side of the runway. The pilot-receiving-instruction reported that the purpose of the flight was to receive a checkout in the flying club airplane. After completing three uneventful takeoffs and landings, the flight instructor asked the pilot-receiving-instruction to perform a simulated soft-field takeoff from a high-altitude airport. The pilot-receiving-instruction had not performed the requested maneuver previously, which was described as a soft-field takeoff at 50-percent engine power to simulate the atmospheric conditions of a high-altitude airport. Before attempting the takeoff, both pilots agreed that the pilot-receiving-instruction would manipulate the flight controls and that the throttle would be separately controlled by the flight instructor. The pilot-receiving-instruction reported that during the takeoff, shortly after becoming airborne, while still in ground-effect, the airplane encountered an aerodynamic stall. The pilot-receiving-instruction briefly reduced airplane pitch to recover from the aerodynamic stall, but as the airplane drifted toward the right side of the runway he subsequently increased yoke backpressure to keep the airplane airborne. The pilot-receiving-instruction reported that the airplane encountered a second aerodynamic stall after he increased airplane pitch. The airplane subsequently drifted left, crossing back over the runway, before the airplane landed along the left side of the runway. The flight was terminated and the aircraft inspected for damage. The airplane exhibited damage to the tail skid, tail tie-down ring, left wingtip, the nose and left main landing gear, and the propeller. An additional examination established that the aft fuselage bulkhead had sustained substantial damage when the tail struck the runway. The pilot-receiving-instruction reported there were no mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airframe or engine that would have precluded normal operation. The flight instructor reported that the engine power had been set at 2,100 rpm to simulate the available engine power while operating at a high-altitude airport. He reported that the pilot-receiving-instruction had used excessive pitch control inputs during the initial takeoff roll to keep the nose wheel off the runway, the airplane veered to the right before coming airborne, and that the airplane encountered an aerodynamic stall upon liftoff. The flight instructor reported that the airplane subsequently bounced, drifted to the left, and eventually landed along the left side of the runway. The flight crew's decision to have the flight instructor separately control the throttle during the accident takeoff likely prevented the pilot-receiving-instruction from adequately recovering from the initial aerodynamic stall. Additionally, following the initial aerodynamic stall, there was likely inadequate coordination between the flight crew to reestablish control of the airplane before it impacted the ground. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12
NTSB Findings
FAA avdata. C = Cause, F = Factor.
- C Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Pitch control-Incorrect use/operation - C
- C Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Angle of attack-Not attained/maintained - C
- C Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Aircraft control-Student/instructed pilot - C
- F Personnel issues-Action/decision-Info processing/decision-Decision making/judgment-Flight crew - F
- F Personnel issues-Task performance-Communication (personnel)-Lack of communication-Pilot - F
- F Personnel issues-Task performance-Communication (personnel)-Lack of communication-Student/instructed pilot - F
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2015_CEN15CA165.txt.
Findings + structured fields enriched from FAA avall.mdb.
Full investigation docket on
data.ntsb.gov ↗.
Search this event elsewhere
External sources are reported, not agency: signal that something happened, not fact about what happened.
- TallyAero Live Wire Aviation press
- NTSB CAROL Agency ↗
- NTSB Docket Agency ↗
- Aviation Safety Network Aviation press ↗
- Kathryn's Report Aviation press ↗
- Aviation Herald Aviation press ↗
- AVweb Aviation press ↗
- Pilots of America Community ↗
- Reddit /r/flying Community ↗
- FlightAware Aviation press ↗
- AOPA accident database Aviation press ↗
- Google News News ↗
- DuckDuckGo News ↗
Related research
Matched on aircraft type or causal vocabulary (stall, loss of control). All research papers
- Semantic Scholar 2016 · Article (Interacción) Trajectory Recovery System: Angle of Attack Guidance for Inflight Loss of Control
This paper describes the design and development of an ecological display to aid pilots in the recovery of an In-Flight Loss of Control event due to a Stall (ILOC-S).
- NTSB Aircraft Accident Reports 2010 · Accident report Loss of Control on Approach — Colgan Air Flight 3407
Colgan Air 3407 / Continental Connection (Q400) Buffalo NY, February 12, 2009 — 50 fatalities. Definitive investigation of the Colgan 3407 stall-stick-pusher crash on approach to Buffalo.
- NASA NTRS 2026 · Conference Paper Computational Analysis of Steady State Aerodynamics of Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Configuration in Deep Stall
This study presents a computational investigation of steady state aerodynamics of the Subsonic Ultra-Green Aircraft Research (SUGAR) Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) configuration over a wide range …
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2025 · Journal article (JAAER) A Scoping Review of Aviation Loss of Control Inflight Research
Loss of control – inflight (LOC-I) contributes to aircraft accidents at unacceptably high rates. Significant industry efforts and research have aimed to improve LOC-I prevention, detection, and recove…
- SKYbrary (Eurocontrol) 2024 · SKYbrary article Loss of Control In-Flight (LOC-I) — SKYbrary Knowledge Base
SKYbrary comprehensive knowledge-base entry on Loss of Control In-Flight — definitions, contributing factors, accident case studies (Air France 447, Colgan 3407), and prevention strategies.
- Semantic Scholar 2024 · Article (International Conference on Networking and Services) Risk Assessment of Loss of Control In-Flight Trajectories for Urban Air Mobility Safety
In Urban Air Mobility (UAM), maintaining a minimum separation between aircraft is a safety requirement, which becomes challenging amidst congested air traffic and off-nominal conditions, such as Loss …