SEA08FA078 · Lancair LC41 550FG

Prior to initiating the first ILS approach to runway 10R, the pilot was advised by the tower controller that the runway visual range (RVR) was 600 feet, followed by being given a landing clearance. A little more than 2 minutes later the pilot declared a missed approach and was given radar vectors for a second ILS approach. After turning inbound on the localizer the pilot was advised that the runway visual range was 600 feet, midfield 800 feet, and roll out 800 feet. The pilot was then cleared to land. When the tower controller observed the airplane turning to the south of the runway on her radar display, she issued missed approach instructions, which was followed by an inaudible transmission. There were no further transmissions from the pilot. The airplane impacted the top of an 85-foot tall tree with its right wingtip, 3,200 feet southeast of the approach end of the runway, then continued on the collision course before impacting the ground about 845 feet from the initial impact point with the tree. The airplane was subsequently consumed by fire. The weather minimums for the approach required a ceiling of 200 feet and an RVR of 1,800 feet or one-half mile; the decision altitude was 224 feet msl. The FAA published missed approach procedure instructed the pilot to climb to 900 feet, then climbing right turn to 4,000 feet, intercept the 160 degree radial of the VORTAC, and proceed to a DME fix and hold. The airplane's turn to the southeast was consistent with the missed approach course of 160 degrees; however, a climb to 900 feet is required prior to commencing the right turn, as outlined on approach plate's missed approach instructions. It appears the pilot likely misinterpreted the missed approach instructions by making the right hand turn prior to initiating a climb to 900 feet, which resulted in the subsequent impact with the tree. No preimpact anomalies were found during an examination of the airframe and engine. The airplane's avionics components revealed that they were too thermally and impact-damaged to provide any data. No anomalies were found during a post accident examination of the instrument landing system components.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset