Event ERA21FA142

Factual narrative

On February 28, 2021, at 1230 eastern standard time, a Luscombe 8E, N2960K, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Jupiter, Florida. The pilot was fatally injured and the pilot-rated passenger was seriously injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91 personal flight. A witness reported that the pilot spent 45 minutes performing engine runups in front of his hangar the day prior to the accident and that on the day of the accident, the pilot, and his pilot-rated passenger, departed from the 2,700-ft paved runway at Tailwinds Airport (FD15). A witness, located near the midpoint of the runway, recorded video of the takeoff and stated that the engine sounded “strong” as the tailwheel airplane lifted off. The recording showed that as the airplane passed in front of the camera, the left engine cowling was open and flapping. A reduction in engine power was heard and the airplane leveled off about 30 ft above ground level (see figure 1). As the airplane leveled off, the engine power was reduced further and the airplane appeared to descend toward the runway. Engine power then increased and the airplane began to climb; the wings rocked during the level off and subsequent climb before the airplane made a gradual left turn to the north and disappeared out of camera view. Figure 1 – Still frame from video showing the accident airplane during takeoff. Note open left engine cowling. Witness accounts of the engine operation were inconsistent. Reports variously indicated that the engine was running rough, that it lost power, and that it sounded “strong.” According to the pilot-rated passenger, who had no recollection of the accident flight, a new carburetor was installed about 1 month prior to the accident, and the engine runups performed the day before the accident were due to high exhaust gas temperatures (EGT). He stated they filled up the airplane with about 30 gallons of fuel and likely used about 3 gallons of fuel during the engine runups. The airplane impacted dense woods and terrain about 700 ft northeast of the airport on a heading of about 035° from the departure end of runway 9 at an elevation of 20 ft above mean sea level. The airplane came to rest on its right side, with the left wing pointing up in a near-vertical position with leading edge exhibiting compression damage. The right wing was separated from the fuselage at the wing root and the leading edge showed damage consistent with tree impact. The right-wing strut sheared off from the wing and the fuselage and was discovered about 75 ft from the main wreckage. First responders reported a strong fuel odor at the site during rescue and recovery. On-scene examination revealed that fuel was present in the gascolator and fuel lines leading from the fuel tanks into the engine. The ground under the right wing near the wing root was saturated with fuel and fuel was dripping from a fractured fuel line. Recovered fuel was light blue, clear, and free of water or debris. Tree damage consistent with propeller strikes was observed near the wreckage. The propeller remained attached to the hub and exhibited aft bending with a slight s-bend. The propeller had diagonal chordwise scrapes on one of the blades. Flight control continuity was confirmed on all flight control surfaces, through their respective control cables into the cockpit. The engine cowl remained attached on the right side and the wing nuts were secured in place. The left side, which had flush mounted screw fasteners, was unlatched and there was no damage noted to the fasteners or their receptacles. A postaccident engine start and run-up were conducted. New ignition leads were installed on the right magneto and the top spark plugs were replaced with serviceable units to facilitate engine start and operation. The engine was started and cycled from idle to 75% power over 90 seconds with no anomalous behavior noted. Examination of the wreckage revealed no evidence of any preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures with the engine that would have precluded normal operation. According to the autopsy report prepared by the Medical Examiner Department, District 19, State of Florida, the pilot’s cause of death was blunt impact trauma and manner of death was accident. No significant natural disease was identified. According to toxicology testing performed on the pilot by the Steward Reference Laboratory at the request of the medical examiner, delta-9-THC (tetrahydrocannabinol, the primary active component in cannabis) was identified at less than 1.0 ng/ml in chest blood. None of the active metabolite, 11- Hydroxy-delta-9 THC was detected. The inactive metabolite, carboxy-delta-9-THC was found at 18.9 ng/ml. According to toxicology testing performed by the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Forensic Sciences Laboratory, cetirizine (a sedating antihistamine) was detected at 177 ng/ml in cavity blood. In addition, although no delta-9- THC or 11-hydroxy- delta-9-THC were detected in cavity blood, 11-hydroxy- delta-9-THC was detected in liver (not quantified), and carboxy-delta-9-THC was found at 18.3 ng/ml in cavity blood and in liver (not quantified). An engine data monitor (EDM) was recovered from the airplane and sent to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Vehicle Recorders Laboratory for data download. The EDM recorded EGT, cylinder head temperature (CHT), fuel flow in gallons per hour (GPH), voltage, and time. The data showed that the CHT and EGT remained consistent throughout the takeoff and fuel flow increased from 2.6 GPH to a maximum of 7.4 GPH before decreasing to 3 GPH over 24 seconds until recorded data ceased. The video of the flight was sent to the NTSB Vehicle Performance Division where a performance study was accomplished. Based on the video, the airplane’s height above ground, speed, and the sound of the engine rpm, were calculated and combined with automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) data provided by the FAA. It was determined that the video recorded 28 seconds of flight as the airplane overflew the runway. Location, altitude, and roll data were determined from video time 7 seconds until 28 seconds. Additionally, engine rpm was determined from the video sound for the duration of the video. During the initial seconds of the takeoff climb, the airplane gained altitude and speed. At 10 seconds, the engine rpm dropped and then decreased further at 17 seconds; this corresponded to a point on the video where the left cowl flap was open and flapping. After the second decrease in rpm, the airplane lost altitude and the speed reduced. The airplane again climbed as the rpm steadily increased up to about 1,850 before the video portion of the flight ended. ADS-B data showed that the airplane was about 50 ft above the ground as it flew beyond the end of the runway; it continued to slow and had slowed to below a calculated calibrated airspeed of 40 kts by the end of the ADS-B data. The airplane’s Owner’s Handbook reported that the airplane’s stall speed was 48 mph, indicated airspeed, or 42 kts. As the airplane turned left, the bank angle increased to more than 20°, which would have increased the stall speed. A witness reported that the engine sounded “strong” when the pilot and pilot-rated passenger took off from the 2,700-ft paved runway. Video of the takeoff showed a normal takeoff near the midpoint of the runway followed by a level-off about 30 ft above the ground. About that time the sound produced by the engine reduced in what appeared to be an attempt to land on the remaining runway. As the airplane passed in front of the camera, the front left engine cowl could be seen open and flapping. As the airplane proceeded to fly down the runway, the engine power increased, and the airplane began to climb. The airplane’s wings rocked left and right as the airplane climbed over the end of the runway and turned left before disappearing out of the camera’s view toward nearby trees. The airplane subsequently impacted trees and terrain about 700 ft beyond and to the left of the departure end of the runway. A postaccident examination of the airplane and test run of the engine revealed no evidence of any preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. The airplane’s engine cowling fasteners were unlatched, but otherwise intact and undamaged. A performance study based on video and ADS-B data revealed that, after departure, the airplane entered a climbing left turn during which it slowed to a calculated calibrated airspeed near its published stall speed. The turn, combined with the low speed, likely resulted in an exceedance of the airplane’s critical angle of attack and an aerodynamic stall. It is also likely that the engine cowling was not fully secured before the flight. Based on available information, it is likely that the pilot became distracted when the cowling opened during takeoff and did not maintain control of the airplane. The pilot’s post-mortem toxicology results indicated that at some point prior to the flight he had used cannabis. However, the absence of any active parent drug (delta-9-THC) or active metabolite (11-hydroxy-delta-9-THC) indicated that it was very unlikely that he was impaired by any effects from his use at the time of the accident. The detected level of cetirizine (a sedating antihistamine) in the pilot’s specimens was below the blood level thought to cause symptoms, though because the specimens were from cavity blood, they may not accurately reflect antemortem levels. Therefore, whether the pilot was impaired by effects from cetirizine and whether those effects contributed to his failure to secure the cowling and his distraction during the takeoff could not be determined. 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).

• — Personnel issues-Task performance-Inspection-Preflight inspection-Pilot
• — Aircraft-Aircraft structures-Fuselage-Aerodynamic fairings structure-Inadequate inspection
• — Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Aircraft control-Pilot
• — Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Angle of attack-Capability exceeded