CEN21LA066
2020-11-20 · Lawrence, Kansas, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport LWC
Current FAA registration · N99HV
- Make / Model
- CESSNA 172S
- Year of manufacture
- 2005 · 15 years old at event
- Engine
- LYCOMING IO-360-L2A (180 hp)
- Seats / Engines
- 4 seats · 1 engine
- Last airworthiness date
- 20051227
- ADS-B equipped
- Yes — Mode-S ADD10D
Source: FAA Aircraft Registry (releasable master file).
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The student pilot’s improper landing flare/touchdown which resulted in a hard landing.
Factual narrative
On November 20, 2020, about 1450 central standard time, a Cessna 172S airplane, N99HV, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Lawrence, Kansas. The student pilot was not injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 instructional flight. According to the student pilot, he planned a solo flight. The instructor checked out the airplane from the flight school and passed it off to the student. The instructor indicated that although he would be with another student, he would still be available on the radio if the student needed anything. The student pilot reported that he didn't notice anything unusual during the pre-fight inspection and proceeded through the checklist for obtaining weather and runway information. The student pilot added that that he finished the engine runup and magneto checks and manipulated the control yoke through its full range of motion. The student pilot reported that during the first takeoff the nose pitched up and the airplane climbed much faster than expected, which he attributed to the weight difference from flying solo rather than with an instructor in the airplane. He added that it felt like he had to apply a lot of forward pressure on the yoke to keep the nose down, more than he was used to. He double checked the trim wheel, adding that it felt like it was out of trim, but the wheel was where he set it during the pre-flight. The student pilot stayed in the traffic pattern and on final he reduced the throttle and prepared to land. He stated he was centered on the runway and pulled back on the yoke for the flare. The yoke suddenly came back, and the nose pitched very high. The student pilot added that he didn't expect this sudden pitch change and prepared to add full throttle for a go-around when the airplane stalled and landed hard. After landing the student pilot moved the yoke through the full range forward and backward to check the functionality. He stated that he did not notice the same "pop" forward and backward like he did during the previous landing, so he taxied back for another takeoff. He stated that during the initial climb there was a noticeable change in the yoke pressure, and it was difficult to apply enough forward pressure to keep the nose down. He then turned from base to final and lined up for the landing. The student pilot again reported that it was very difficult to control the pitch and airspeed and the yoke seemed to push either forward or backward over some type of "stuck" point, so he selected full flaps on final. After he initiated the landing flare, there was again a noticeable "snap" back of an inch or two of the yoke. The main gear landed first, however; the nose wheel came down very fast. The student pilot reported that the yoke was as far back as it he could hold it, but the airplane didn't seem to respond to the control input. An initial inspection of the airplane noted damage to the airplane’s nose gear and substantial damage to the firewall and fuselage. An additional examination of the airplane found damage to the forward fuselage structure. Elevator control movement was limited and there was impact damage to the airplane’s tunnel structure and control yoke guides, which jammed the elevator controls. Additional damage was found to the airplane’s landing gear which included the nose gear being tilted 15-degrees. There were no abnormities that would indicate the damage was present before the student’s hard landings. The student pilot planned on a solo flight and reported that he didn't notice anything unusual during the pre-fight inspection. Before takeoff, he manipulated the control yoke through its full range of motion and did not notice any abnormalities. The student pilot reported that during the first takeoff, the nose pitched up and airplane climbed much faster than expected which he attributed to the weight difference from flying solo rather than with an instructor in the airplane. He stayed in the traffic pattern and stated he was centered on the runway and pulled back on the yoke for the flare. The yoke suddenly came back, and the nose pitched very high. The student pilot added that he didn't expect this sudden pitch change and prepared to add full throttle for a go-around when the airplane stalled and landed hard. After landing the student pilot moved the yoke through the full range forward and backward to check the functionality. He stated that he did not notice the same "pop" forward and backward like he did during the previous landing, so he taxied back for another takeoff. The student pilot again reported that during the second flight it was very difficult to control the pitch and airspeed and the yoke seemed to push either forward or backward over some type of "stuck" point, so he selected full flaps on final. After he initiated the landing flare, there was again a noticeable "snap" back of an inch or two of the control yoke. The main gear landed first, however; the nose wheel came down very fast. Examination of the airplane found damage to the airplane’s nose gear and substantial damage to the firewall and fuselage. There were no abnormities that would indicate the damage was present before the student’s hard landings and the damage to the structure and flight controls are likely due to the student’s two hard landings. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12
NTSB Findings
FAA avdata. C = Cause, F = Factor.
- — Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Aircraft control-Student/instructed pilot
- — Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Landing flare-Incorrect use/operation
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2020_CEN21LA066.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, go-around). All research papers
- NASA NTRS 2023 · Reprint (Version printed in journal) Finite Element Simulation of Three Full-Scale Crash Tests for Cessna 172 Aircraft
The NASA Emergency Locator Transmitter Survivability and Reliability project was initiated in 2013 to assess the crash performance standards for the next generation of emergency locator transmitter (E…
- NASA NTRS 2019 · Conference Paper Crash Testing and Simulation of a Cessna 172 Aircraft: Pitch Down Impact Onto Soft Soil
During the summer of 2015, NASA Langley Research Center conducted three full-scale crash tests of Cessna 172 (C-172) aircraft at the NASA Langley Landing and Impact Research (LandIR) Facility.
- NASA NTRS 2019 · Technical Memorandum (TM) Simulating the Impact Response of Three Full-Scale Crash Tests of Cessna 172 Aircraft
During the summer of 2015, a series of three full-scale crash tests were performed at the Landing and Impact Research Facility located at NASA Langley Research Center of Cessna 172 aircraft.
- 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 …
- NASA NTRS 2025 · Conference Paper A Training Study to Improve Monitoring During A Go-Around
As part of an FAA program to improve go-around (GA) safety, we were asked to determine if we could improve the performance of the Pilot Monitoring (PM) during a GA maneuver.
- Flight Safety Foundation 2024 · FSF / AeroSafety World Go-Around Safety Forum Findings
Foundation Go-Around Safety Forum technical findings — examines why pilots fail to execute go-arounds when criteria are met (stabilized approach gate not met, energy state out of envelope, traffic con…