NTSB Factual Report

On October 1, 2002, at 1530 central daylight time, a Waco UPF-7, N32039, was substantially damaged during a go-around from a bounced landing on runway 30 at Owatonna Regional Airport (OWA), Owatonna, Minnesota. The airplane veered off the left side of the runway, impacted the runway's precision approach path indicator lights, and nosed over in a ditch. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident. The 14 CFR Part 91 instructional flight was not operating on a flight plan. The certified flight instructor (CFI) and dual student were uninjured. The local flight originated from OWA at 1500.

The dual student stated that he was receiving tailwheel training from the CFI. He stated that there were four flights preformed on the day of the accident, all of which were flown with the CFI occupying the front seat. The first flight was in a Champion 7ECA which was 0.7 hours in duration. During that flight, he successfully performed three three-point landings and three tail wheel landings at OWA. The second flight was in the accident airplane in which they performed slips, stalls, and slow flight, demonstrating airspeed control and the airplanes descent rate with no power during a 1.2 hour flight. The third flight was flown in the accident airplane at OWA where they demonstrated five three point landings and five wheel landing during a 1 hour flight. The fourth flight, which was the accident flight, was to serve as a transition to the paved runway at OWA. The dual student stated that he made two successful wheel landings on grass as practice for the paved runway. He then moved to the paved runway and made a successful wheel landing. A second landing resulted in a bounce and a go-around. The third landing attempt resulted in a bounce followed by an addition power to execute a go-around. At that point, the CFI took control. The airplane continued to the left, off the runway, through the grass, and struck a ditch, flipping the airplane over.

The Compleat Taildragger Pilot (1998) states under Selecting An Instructor, "It would be beneficial if his record included at least 20 hours in the specific model which you want your instructor in. Remember that the instructor has two primary functions. First, he is there to teach; secondly he must prevent any accident while you learn, and he can hardly accomplish this with only 10 or 15 hours of taildragger time. To be sure, time flown is not the only criterion for choosing an instructor, and you can certainly think of others. However, the minimums mentioned above are a good starting point. The publication also states under Visibility, "Taildraggers in general have a reputation for poor visibility... Most of the older bi-planes as exemplified by the Stearman and Waco UPF-7 have little visibility straight ahead while in the three-point attitude, and the visibility to the sides is somewhat impaired by the presence of the wings and struts."

The accident airplane, serial number 5670, was owned by the CFI who had a total flight time of 15,500 hours, of which 2,000 hours were in single engine airplanes and 36 hours were in the accident make and model. The CFI reported a total flight time of 32 hours in the last 90 days and a total flight time of 17 hours as an instructor in the accident make and model. Three hours in the accident make and model were accumulated in the last 24 hours.

The dual student pilot had a tail wheel endorsement prior to receiving instruction in the accident airplane. He reported a total flight time of 2,205 hours in single engine airplane of which 2.7 hours were in the accident make and model.

The OWA weather, at 2120, recorded wind from 360 degrees at 14 knots gusting to 18 knots.

NTSB Probable Cause

The remedial action not performed by the certified flight instructor (CFI) during the bounced landing and directional control not maintained during the go-around by CFI. Contributing factors were the CFIs preflight planning/preparation in placing the dual student in the rear seat, the limited ability for visual detection from the rear seat, and the lack of instructional experience of the CFI in the make and model of the accident airplane. The gusts and crosswind were additional factors.