SEA04CA105
2004-06-16 · Nampa, Idaho, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The pilot's failure to maintain directional control of the tail wheel aircraft during an aborted landing. Factors include a slight tailwind, and a mound (berm) of earth in the area where the aircraft departed the side of the runway.
Factual narrative
On June 16, 2004, approximately 1200 mountain daylight time, an experimental Fetherolf Hatz CB-1, collided with the terrain during an attempted go-around at Nampa Municipal Airport, Nampa, Idaho. The private pilot, who was the sole occupant, was not injured, but the aircraft, which is owned and operated by the pilot, sustained substantial damage. The 14 CFR Part 91 personal pleasure flight, which was taking place within the confines of the VFR traffic pattern, was being operated in visual meteorological conditions. The aircraft had been airborne for about five minutes at the time of the accident. No flight plan had been filed. According to the pilot, he came to the airport to regain takeoff and landing proficiency in the subject aircraft since he had not flown it for a "considerable period of time." After taking off from runway 29, he continued around the VFR pattern, and established the aircraft on a final approach for a three-point landing on the same runway. As he crossed the runway threshold at about 65 mph, he added a little power and started moving the control stick aft. The aircraft's nose then moved upwards, partially blocking the pilot's view of the runway, so he looked along the left side of the cowling in an attempt to keep the runway in sight. Although he expected the aircraft to slow rather quickly, it did not do so, and continued to float at a height of about five feet above the ground. The aircraft then suddenly dropped hard onto the runway and bounced back into the air. During this sequence, the pilot "lost visual orientation with the direction the plane was headed," so he added full power in an attempt to execute a go-around, but the aircraft dropped onto the runway a second time. According to the pilot, he then moved the stick to the "full back" position, but the aircraft did not lift off again, and instead exited the side of the runway where its left main gear impacted a mound of earth. At that point, the left main gear separated from the aircraft, which continued on for about another thirty yards before the right main gear collapsed, which resulted in significant damage to the wings and fuselage. The aircraft ultimately came to rest pointing 180 degrees from its final approach course heading. The pilot further stated that after the accident, as he was exiting the aircraft, he noticed that the nearest wind sock was indicating a tailwind. According to both the pilot, and the FAA Inspector who responded to the scene, there was no evidence of any anomaly in the flight control or braking system of the aircraft. The pilot came to the airport to regain takeoff and landing proficiency in the subject aircraft since he had not flown it for a "considerable period of time." After taking off from runway 29, he continued around the VFR pattern, and established the aircraft on a final approach for a three-point landing on the same runway. As he crossed the runway threshold at about 65 mph, he added a little power and started moving the control stick aft. The aircraft's nose then moved upwards, partially blocking the pilot's view of the runway, so he looked along the left side of the cowling in an attempt to keep the runway in sight. Although he expected the aircraft to slow rather quickly, it did not do so, and continued to float at a height of about five feet above the ground. The aircraft then suddenly dropped hard onto the runway and bounced back into the air. During this sequence, the pilot "lost visual orientation with the direction the plane was headed," so he added full power in an attempt to execute a go-around, but the aircraft dropped onto the runway a second time. According to the pilot, he then moved the stick to the "full back" position, but the aircraft did not lift off again, and instead exited the side of the runway where its left main gear impacted a mound of earth. At that point, the left main gear separated from the aircraft, which continued on for about another thirty yards before the right main gear collapsed, which resulted in significant damage to the wings and fuselage. After the accident, the pilot noticed that a slight tailwind was blowing. There was no evidence of any anomaly in the flight control or breaking system of the aircraft. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database (Pre-2008 Archive) Retrieved: 2026-02-12
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2004_SEA04CA105.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 (go-around). All research papers
- 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…
- Semantic Scholar 2022 · Article (Journal of Safety Research) Go-around accidents and general aviation safety.
INTRODUCTION Changes in General Aviation (GA) accident rates, specifically in the go-around phase, are examined by comparing the number of accidents, the proportion of fatal accidents, and the proport…
- Semantic Scholar 2021 · Article (Aerospace) Classification and Analysis of Go-Arounds in Commercial Aviation Using ADS-B Data
Go-arounds are a necessary aspect of commercial aviation and are conducted after a landing attempt has been aborted. It is necessary to conduct go-arounds in the safest possible manner, as go-arounds …
- NASA NTRS 2021 · Accepted Manuscript (Version with final changes) Go-Around Criteria Refinement for Transport Category Aircraft
Presently, airline pilots are trained to go around if, when lower than 500 ft above the ground, they are outside of a handful of parameters such as airspeed, position, and rate of descent.
- NASA NTRS 2019 · Conference Paper Validation of Proposed Go-Around Criteria Under Various Environmental Conditions
This paper evaluates the effects of environmental conditions on touchdown performance under varying approach states and validates proposed go-around criteria developed using data from a previously con…