ERA24FA292 · Cessna 172N

The student pilot initiated a solo flight to a nearby airport, likely to practice pattern work. Her flight instructor, who characterized her as an outstanding student, was not aware that she was flying that day, and he stated that this lack of coordination was contrary to what he had taught her. Flight track data showed that the pilot entered the traffic pattern on the downwind leg and proceeded to line up on final approach for the 3,799-ft-long runway. About halfway down the runway length, the airplane climbed and immediately turned left to enter the crosswind leg. A witness observed the airplane and reported that he thought that the airplane would not clear the trees in its direct flight path. He also stated that the airplane’s engine was running without hesitation; however, the airplane was “struggling.” The airplane collided with the top of a tree near stall speed (based on the groundspeeds reported in the flight track data), with flaps retracted, then collided with and came to rest against the base of another tree. Postaccident examination of the airframe and engine did not reveal evidence of any preexisting mechanical failures or malfunctions that would have precluded normal operation. Although the student pilot had an instructor endorsement for solo flight, the accident flight was only her second solo flight. Based on the available evidence, had she established an appropriate climb airspeed and altitude on the upwind leg of the traffic pattern before turning crosswind, the accident likely would not have occurred.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset