N9588SChampion 7GCAA · 1965

On May 4, 2014, about 1635 central daylight time, a Champion 7GCAA, N9588S, collided with terrain less than 3/10's of a mile from the departure airstrip near Bardwell, Kentucky. The private pilot and one passenger sustained minor injuries and the airplane was substantially damaged. The airplane was registered to and operated by a private individual, under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part [91 as a personal, local flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time and no flight plan was filed. The flight originated less than 1 minute earlier from a runway located adjacent to the pilot's sister's house.The pilot stated that earlier that day he had flown the airplane from his house to the runway adjacent to his sister's house and after landing secured the engine. He reported that there were no issues with the airplane during that flight, and he remained on the ground about 30 minutes. He and the passenger (his nephew) then boarded the airplane for a local flight. The pilot further stated that he performed an engine run-up before takeoff which included checking both magnetos noting each decreased equally 75 rpm. He applied takeoff power noting the engine was developing full red line rpm, and became airborne in about 500 to 600 feet. After becoming airborne he levelled off to accelerate then began to climb turning to a southwesterly direction, or into the wind which was from the south at 10 to 15 knots with occasional gusts. The airplane climbed to between 150 and 200 feet, and with the engine operating at 2,400 rpm (reduced by him to that setting), the airplane began descending. He applied full power and reported the engine did respond but the airplane continued to descend. The airplane impacted in a field and then nosed over; both occupants exited the airplane. The pilot was taken to a hospital by relatives for treatment of his injuries.

A trooper from Kentucky State Police (KSP) went to the hospital where the pilot was taken for treatment of his injuries. The trooper reported communicating with the pilot and noting that he smelled of alcohol. A doctor and nurse also reported to the trooper that the pilot smelled of alcohol; however, the pilot left the hospital before toxicology testing was performed. He later indicated he left the hospital because he was feeling OK, and not because he wanted to avoid toxicological testing.

The passenger reported to a KSP trooper that the takeoff was ok, and after climbing above trees in a turn, "…a big 'gulp' of wind came from the right side of the airplane which nose dived." He indicated the airplane hit nose first and then nosed over. The trooper informed the passenger that she smelled alcohol on the pilot's breath, and asked him if the pilot had been drinking. The passenger reported that he never saw a beer, but the way the pilot was slurring his words he didn't know if it was the blood or something else. The passenger also indicated the pilot had just shown up 5 to 10 minutes before they departed.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspector-in-charge interviewed the pilot the day after the accident at the accident site. During that interview the inspector asked the pilot if there was a flight control malfunction to which he replied no. He also asked the pilot if the engine was operating properly at the time of the accident and he indicated it was. The inspector asked the pilot if he was intoxicated at the time of the flight and whether he had been drinking before the accident. The FAA inspector reported the pilot indicated he had not, and then asked him when was the last time he consumed alcohol prior to the accident and he indicated he had a few drinks the night before, but that was only beer and not "hard liquor." During the interview, a trooper from the KSP arrived at the accident site and began interviewing the pilot. The trooper asked questions of the pilot about intoxication, and he replied that was not the case. The pilot was also confronted about the fact that medical professionals and another KSP trooper smelled alcohol on him while he was in the hospital; he denied the accusations and offered an excuse saying his cologne had alcohol in it.

The FAA inspector-in-charge interviewed the passenger and asked him if the pilot was intoxicated at the time of the accident. The passenger indicated he did not see the pilot drinking any alcohol but also indicated the pilot had only arrived there several minutes before the accident flight. The passenger did indicate that had he thought the pilot had been drinking, he would not have flown with him. The passenger was asked if the engine was running normally during the flight and he responded that it sounded normal to him.

Two days after the accident, the FAA inspector-in-charge met with the pilot and reviewed the maintenance records and pilot logbooks. During that review, he noted the airplane was out of annual and the pilot's last flight review was more than 2 years ago.

Postaccident inspection of the wreckage by the FAA inspector-in-charge revealed the left wing had been cut by first responders due to fuel leakage. The tank contained some fuel however a sample was not taken. The right fuel tank was greater than ½ full, and the fuel was blue in color consistent with 100 low lead (100LL); no contaminants were noted. Because of the position of the engine, he was unable to access the fuel strainer or carburetor. He confirmed the fuel selector was in the "on" position.

Further inspection of the wreckage by the FAA inspector-in-charge revealed rudder flight control continuity was confirmed; however, he was unable to confirm continuity for elevator or aileron. All engine controls from the cockpit remained connected at their respective attach points at the carburetor; the throttle and mixture controls were full forward. Because of the position of the airplane, he was unable to rotate the Lycoming O-320-A2B, S/N L-15766-27A, through 360 degrees of rotation; however, there was no evidence of preimpact failure or malfunction. He inspected the No. 1 cylinder top spark plug, and noted it was dry, not wet, and was black in color. Inspection of the propeller revealed 1 blade was bent slightly forward, then bent sharply aft, while the second blade was bent aft, exhibited leading edge twisting towards low pitch, and had several deep gouges on the leading edge of the blade at the blade tip. The blade also exhibited chordwise scratches on the blade face.