ERA24LA044

Factual narrative

The pilot and the flight instructor planned a flight itinerary that included multiple stops with the aim of the pilot receiving 7 hours of training in the airplane. Prior to the accident, the flight instructor learned that the pilot had not performed go-arounds or touch-and-go landings in the airplane make and model. Upon flying the airplane into the accident airport, the favorable weather conditions and lack of air traffic led them to decide to conduct the training in the traffic pattern there. The first landing was made by the pilot to a full stop with taxi back. The second landing, which was a touch-and-go, was performed by the flight instructor. The third, followed by the fourth and final landing was performed by the pilot. During the fourth landing, with the wing flaps fully extended, the pilot lost directional control of the airplane and attempted to abort the landing as the airplane veered to the left (a right crosswind prevailed at that time). The pilot tried to correct back toward to the runway centerline, but the airplane went off the left side of the runway. The airplane then touched down in the grass, traveled down an embankment, nosed over, and came to rest inverted. The airframe was substantially damaged during the accident sequence. The pilot reported that there were no preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures of the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12

NTSB Findings

FAA avdata. C = Cause, F = Factor.

• — Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Directional control-Not attained/maintained
• — Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Aircraft control-Pilot
• — Environmental issues-Conditions/weather/phenomena-Wind-Crosswind-Response/compensation
• — Personnel issues-Action/decision-Action-Lack of action-Instructor/check pilot