ERA22LA428

Factual narrative

On September 22, 2022, about 0700 eastern daylight time, an experimental amateur-built Zenith CH 750, N2992W, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident at near Cincinnati, Ohio. The private pilot was not injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight. According to the pilot, during the takeoff roll he noticed that “something felt wrong.” He reduced power and the airplane started to “bounce” on the runway. The airplane briefly climbed before landing hard on the nosewheel. An examination of the airplane by a Federal Aviation Administration inspector revealed that the engine firewall was buckled. Further examination of the airplane revealed that a control yoke nut and bolt were missing. Both pieces of hardware were subsequently located inside the fuselage. An examination of the hardware revealed that it did not look like any of the other hardware that was attached to the control system, and review of the engineering drawings for the airplane revealed that the separated nut and bolt were not the correct type called for (bolt secured with castle nut and cotter pin). The pilot further described the findings by stating that, “There was a hardware store nut used on the wrong type bolt. Nut came off and bolt fell out [of] elevator control.” A review of the airplane’s maintenance records revealed that it had undergone three annual condition inspections since it had been completed. The records did not note that any work had been performed on the control yoke or replacement of any flight control hardware. The pilot stated that, during the takeoff roll in the experimental amateur-built airplane, he noticed that “something felt wrong” with his flight controls. The airplane briefly climbed before landing hard on the nosewheel, resulting in substantial damage to the engine firewall. During a postaccident examination of the airplane, a bolt that attached the control yoke to the flight controls was missing. The missing bolt and a nut were subsequently located within the fuselage of the airplane. The “hardware store” -type nut was not the castle type nut with cotter pin -type that was called for in the airplane’s engineering drawings. Review of the airplane’s maintenance records revealed that it had undergone 3 annual condition inspections since being constructed and that no documented maintenance to, or replacement of the flight control hardware had occurred. Based on this information, it is likely the builder of the airplane used improper hardware to assemble the flight controls, which resulted in the separation of the control yoke from the flight controls and the subsequent loss of control during takeoff. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12

NTSB Findings

FAA avdata. C = Cause, F = Factor.

• — Aircraft-Fluids/misc hardware-Misc hardware-Fasteners-Not installed/available
• — Personnel issues-Action/decision-Info processing/decision-Decision making/judgment-Owner/builder