FLIGHT FINDINGSAVIATION OCCURRENCE MAP
Back to map

ERA17FA167 · Cirrus Design Corp SR22

24 Apr 2017 · Wallingford, CT, United States

Cirrus Design Corp SR22 · Accident: abnormal runway contact during landing

From Meriden Markham Municipal Airport (MMK) to Meriden Markham Municipal Airport (MMK)

Report a problem

Event

NTSB case
ERA17FA167
Event typeAccident: someone killed or seriously injured, or the aircraft substantially damaged (NTSB definition). Incident: an occurrence that affected or could have affected safety, short of that. Glossary
Accident
InvestigationHow far the investigation had got when the record was published: preliminary, ongoing, final or completed. Unknown where the source does not say. Glossary
Completed
API-reported fatalities
1 · all aircraft and ground
Ground fatalities
Unknown
OperationWhat kind of flying it was, grouped by the rules it flew under: airline (US Part 121), air taxi and commuter (Part 135), general aviation (Part 91 and similar), military or government. Glossary
General aviation
WeatherVisual meteorological conditions (VMC): good enough to fly by looking outside. Instrument conditions (IMC): cloud or low visibility, flying by instruments. Glossary
Visual Meteorological Cond

Cirrus Design Corp SR22

Aircraft type
Cirrus SR22
Category
Airplane
RegistrationThe aircraft's tail number, such as N12345 or G-ABCD. Registrations are reissued, so the same one years apart can be a different aircraft. Glossary
N94LP
Operator
Unknown
Onboard fatalities
Unknown
Route
From Meriden Markham Municipal Airport (MMK), Wallingford, CTTo Meriden Markham Municipal Airport (MMK), Wallingford, CT
Aircraft age
About 12 years (built 2005)
Flight rulesThe regulations the flight operated under: in the US, Part 91 (general aviation), Part 121 (airlines), Part 135 (air taxi and commuter) and others; for flights abroad, the NTSB's coarser commercial or non-commercial code. Glossary
Part 91: General Aviation
Phase of flightThe stage of the flight when things started to go wrong: standing, taxi, takeoff, initial climb, en route, maneuvering, approach or landing. Glossary
Landing · flare/touchdown
Defining eventThe single coded event the NTSB judges best describes what happened (records from 2008 on). Older records name the first occurrence in the sequence instead. Glossary
Abnormal runway contact
DamageDestroyed: beyond practical repair. Substantial: damage that affects the structure, performance or handling and normally needs major repair. Minor: less than that. Glossary
Destroyed

Cause areas

  • Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability
  • Personnel issues › Task performance

Approximate · Coordinates as recorded by the NTSB; no uncertainty radius is established.

NTSB narrative

The accident flight was the private pilot's first flight without a flight instructor in his recently purchased, high-performance airplane. The passenger reported that, following an uneventful local flight, he and the pilot returned to the airport for a full-stop landing. Witnesses reported that the airplane was high and fast during the landing approach, touched down about halfway down the 3,100-ft-long runway, and bounced about three times before conducting a go-around. The second landing approach appeared to be slower but was still high. The airplane flared about 10 ft above the runway then abruptly descended, again touching down about halfway down the runway. The passenger reported that the airplane bounced "a couple of times" and that the bounces were "pretty high." A witness stated that, after bouncing, the airplane's engine rpm increased and the airplane became airborne, pitching to an approximate 40° nose-up attitude. About 75 ft above the ground, the airplane entered a steep, left-turning descent that continued to ground contact; the airplane came to rest next to a road just outside airport property and was consumed by a postcrash fire.

The witness accounts of the airplane approaching the runway fast and high and its touchdown point are consistent with the pilot's failure to fly a stabilized landing approach. This likely contributed to the airplane touching down on the nose landing gear first, as evidenced by the black tire marks in an S-shaped (sinusoidal) pattern co-located with white paint transfer marks on the surface of the runway, which are consistent with a nosewheel shimmy and nosewheel pant contact. After bouncing during the second landing, the pilot added engine power to conduct a go-around, allowed the airplane's pitch to rapidly increase, and entered a steep left turn before attaining a proper climb speed, which resulted in a loss of control during the attempted go-around.

Examination of the wreckage revealed no evidence of any preimpact failures or malfunctions of the airplane or engine that would have precluded normal operation. The pilot had about 1,200 total hours of flight experience and had received about 10.5 hours of transition training in the accident airplane make and model from a local flight instructor. During that time, the pilot performed 12 landings and received an endorsement for operating high-performance airplanes such as the accident airplane. Before purchasing the accident airplane, the pilot owned another airplane that was not classified as high-performance. Despite receiving transition training, it is likely that the pilot's lack of experience with his new airplane and its flight characteristics, and particularly operation of the airplane in abnormal/emergency situations, contributed to his loss of control.

Probable cause

The pilot's unstablilized approach and improper landing flare, which resulted in a bounced landing, and his subsequent failure to maintain control during a go-around. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's lack of experience in the accident airplane make and model.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset

Sources

NTSB record ERA17FA167
Event ID
20170424X93837
Case number
ERA17FA167
Dataset
full-current
Source SHA-256
5cf380f0061817c0331a6b2d8cc7e0ee3a79bea469a1001dc5c10e56f35f5ab3
Source notes (4)
  • Unreviewed is an editorial label, not an investigation status. API-sourced is not report-checked or human-reviewed. Explicit event totals are used without summing aircraft injury tables; onboard allocation is withheld. Unknown values remain unknown. The operation category is mapped from the NTSB-reported FAR part and has not been reviewed.
  • Filled from the NTSB case API where the bulk record had no value: investigation status. Values present in the bulk record are kept.
  • The date is the local date, which is the same as the UTC date the NTSB stores.
  • API snapshot SHA-256: c94f23ccef33d84e2f4a7e9368464c07bf3efdb9c66898bff3b35b3604f60d00; retrieved 2026-09-15T06:01:35.688Z.