Palo Alto County Airport, Palo Alto, California

Airport Location:  The Palo Alto County Airport is located east of Palo Alto, California.

Airport History: In 1924 the public was invited to fly for $2.50 at the Embarcadero site of the current Palo Alto County Airport.  However, the opening dedication was not until 1935.  In 1940 author John Steinbeck came to Palo Alto for flying lessons.

In 1942, World War II interrupted planes to built new and improve airports through out California and the Palo Alto airport was closed.  Air traffic was moved to Fresno where flight training for pilots was conducted.

By 1945 the Palo Alto Airport began transitioning back to public use and by 1946 commercial traffic and mail service were begun and flying lessons became a popular pastime with the local residents.

The Airport continued to grow with a new runway in 1954 and a control tower completed in 1968.  However, competition with nearby San Francisco and San Jose Airports resulted in discontinuing passenger service to Palo Alto.  The Airport continues to operate as a general aviation airport and is considered to be one of the busiest single runway airports in the country.

Palo Alto Airport Today:  Obstructions reported; Birds and Autos; Intensive flight training; Helicopter operations;



Airport Services & Amenities: Advantage Aviation, Inc.; Centurion Flight Services Inc. - Air Charter Taxi; Palo Alto Fuel Services; Peninsula Avionics LLC; Rossi Aircraft; Roy-Aero Enterprises; Victor Aviation; West Valley Flying Club;

Special Events & Attractions: Hiller Aviation Museum; NASA AMES; Stanford Linear Accelerator; Stanford University; Moffet Field Air Museum;

Airport Area Accident History:

On February 17, 2010, about 0754 Pacific standard time, a Cessna 310R airplane, N5225J, was destroyed when it impacted multiple residential structures and terrain following an in-flight collision with power lines and a power line tower. The collision occurred shortly after takeoff from the Palo Alto Airport (PAO), East Palo Alto, California. The commercial pilot and his two passengers were killed. There were no reported ground injuries. The airplane was registered to Air Unique Inc., Santa Clara, California, and operated by the pilot under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 as a personal flight. Instrument meteorological conditions prevailed and an instrument flight plan was filed for the cross-country flight. The flight was originating at the time of the accident with an intended destination of Hawthorne, California.

Multiple witnesses located adjacent to the accident site reported observing portions of the accident sequence. One witness, who was walking on a levee near the accident site reported that she observed an airplane “suddenly appear from the fog” left of her position. The witness stated that she continued to watch the airplane fly in a level or slightly nose up attitude from her left to her right at a low altitude until it impacted power lines shortly after.

Examination of the accident site revealed that the airplane struck power lines and a power line tower about 50 feet above ground level. Various portions of wreckage debris, power lines, and power line tower structure were scattered throughout the wreckage debris path. The wreckage debris path was measured on a southwesterly heading for approximately 900 feet from the first identified point of contact (FIPC) to the main wreckage. All major structural components of the airplane were located within the wreckage debris path. A post-crash fire and wreckage debris damaged multiple residential structures and vehicles along the debris path.

The airplane was recovered to a secure location for further examination.

Accident occurred Tuesday, May 20, 2008 in Palo Alto, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 6/30/2008
Aircraft: Cessna 172N, registration: N6521J
Injuries: 1 Uninjured.
The pilot reported that his approach to landing was unstable and that he added power on short final because he was too low and slow. When the landing gear touched down, the airplane began porpoising with "several hard bounces" down the runway, ultimately resulting in propeller strike damage, firewall damage, engine mount damage, and nose wheel damage. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: The pilot's inadequate recovery from a bounced landing. ===
Accident occurred Friday, February 01, 2008 in Palo Alto, CA
Aircraft: Cessna 152, registration: N49811
Injuries: 1 Uninjured. This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. On February 1, 2008, at 0846 Pacific standard time, a single-engine Cessna 152, N49811, experienced a loss of engine power on takeoff and landed hard following an emergency landing on runway 13 at Palo Alto Airport of Santa Clara County (PAO), Palo Alto, California. West Valley Flying Club operated the airplane under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91 as a personal flight. The private pilot, the sole occupant, was not injured; the airplane sustained structural damage. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the local area flight that was originating at the time of the accident. The flight was destined for San Carlos Airport (SQL), San Carlos, California, and no flight plan had been filed. The National Transportation Safety Board investigator-in-charge (IIC) interviewed the chief pilot for West Valley Flying Club (WVFC). The chief pilot stated that the airplane was a lease-back to the flying club. A Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) operations inspector interviewed the pilot. She reported that she was returning the airplane to its home base of San Carlos. The run-up and initial takeoff were normal. About 500 feet above ground level (agl), the engine began to lose power and "hiccupped." She contacted SQL tower and requested a return for a precautionary landing. The approach was normal; however, after passing over the threshold at 50 feet the engine quit. She stated that she let the airspeed get a "little low" and the airplane started to mush at the point that she started to flare. The airplane landed hard, the nose landing gear sheared off, and the right main landing gear went flat. She also reported that the tail was bent behind the baggage compartment. The pilot stated that the engine was running smoothly, it just wasn't developing power. The FAA inspector also spoke with the owner of the airplane following the accident. The owner stated that he is a pilot as well as an FAA certificated mechanic. Prior to the accident, he was aware of reports that had been made to WVFC that the engine had not been running well. When he inspected the airplane, he observed oil and smoke residue on the right side of the engine cowl. After he had conducted an inspection of the engine, he removed and disassembled the carburetor. During the disassembly of the carburetor he noted a piece of venturi stuck in the flapper valve area. The owner stated that he repaired the carburetor, checked the magneto-to-engine timing, conducted a compression check, and did not conduct a ground run-up following the maintenance that he had performed. However, he did ferry the airplane back to SQL, and noted on the takeoff roll the engine was only developing between 2,200 to 2,300 revolutions per minute (rpm), and it felt sluggish. He leaned the airplane, and reported that he had to lean it more than normal just to get 2,400 rpm's. The owner reported no further incidents during the return flight to SQL. The airplane and engine were retained for further investigation. ===
Accident occurred Monday, April 23, 2007 in Palo Alto, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 11/29/2007
Aircraft: Piper PA-28-161, registration: N8171V
Injuries: 1 Minor.
The engine experienced a loss of power during the takeoff initial climb and the airplane collided with terrain. The pilot stated that as the airplane reached about 300 feet above ground level (agl), the engine experienced a loss of power. In response, the pilot manipulated the throttle forward and aft, which resulted in a temporary surge. The engine subsequently failed to produce any power. The pilot switched the fuel tank selector, but the engine did not restart. The airplane continued to descend, and as landing gear touched down in the soft mud, the airplane suddenly stopped and collided with terrain. An aviation mechanic examined the airplane under the auspice of a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspector. The inspector stated that the examination revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunction or failures with the airframe or engine that would have precluded normal operation. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: a loss of engine power for undetermined reasons. ===
Accident occurred Sunday, January 08, 2006 in Palo Alto, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 4/25/2006
Aircraft: Cessna T206H, registration: N531HP
Injuries: 4 Uninjured.
The airplane collided with multiple airport objects during the landing flare. While in the traffic pattern for landing the pilot was not able to lower the flaps. During the landing flare, the pilot lost sight of the runway, and allowed the airplane to drift off the runway, where it collided with an airport sign and runway lights. He performed a go-around, and was not able to determine the extent of the damage. He elected to divert to another area airport with longer and wider runways. The pilot made a no flap landing at the alternate airport. Maintenance personnel reported that the right rear passenger door has a door/flap limit switch, so that when the door is ajar or open, the flaps cannot be lowered. The system was functionally tested and found to operate normally. It was determined that the right rear passenger was leaning against the door, and deactivated the door/flap limit switch. No further discrepancies were noted. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: the pilot's failure to maintain proper runway alignment, which resulted in a collision with multiple objects. ===
Accident occurred Friday, November 18, 2005 in Palo Alto, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 3/28/2006
Aircraft: Cessna P210R, registration: N6122A
Injuries: 4 Uninjured.
The airplane collided with a perimeter fence during an aborted landing. The air traffic controller requested that the pilot conduct "S" turns to provide spacing for a departing airplane. The pilot complied with the request but ended up landing long on the 2,443-foot runway. He elected to abort the landing when he realized there was not enough remaining runway to stop; however, the airplane did not accelerate adequately for takeoff and the airplane overran the runway. The pilot reported there were no anomalies with the airplane. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: the pilot's misjudged altitude and distance, which resulted in an overrun, and his failure to execute a timely go-around during the approach. ===
Accident occurred Tuesday, April 26, 2005 in Palo Alto, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 9/13/2005
Aircraft: Cessna 172N, registration: N737WF
Injuries: 3 Uninjured.
The airplane veered off the runway and impacted a taxiway following a loss of control during takeoff. The student reported that while on the takeoff roll the airplane was on the centerline of the runway. The airplane started to drift to the right of the centerline. The student said he either released some of the pressure on the right rudder pedal and/or applied some left pedal to correct the drift of the airplane. The certified flight instructor (CFI) reported that during the takeoff roll, with the student at the controls, it "sharply and abruptly" yawed to the left and then "very abruptly rotated." The CFI attempted to regain control of the airplane; however, the airplane impacted "sideways on the parallel taxiway." The student and the CFI both stated that the airplane and engine had no mechanical failures or malfunctions during the flight. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: The student's failure to maintain directional control and the CFI's failure to adequately supervise the flight. ===
Accident occurred Sunday, January 02, 2005 in Palo Alto, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 4/25/2006
Aircraft: Piper PA-46-350P, registration: N4165P
Injuries: 1 Minor, 3 Uninjured.
The airplane landed long and overran the runway, colliding with a berm and marshy terrain about 300 yards beyond the runway end. The first leg of the flight originated at Mammoth Lakes, California, destined for Palo Alto. En route at 18,000 feet over the Sierra Nevada Mountains, the pilot observed erratic high oil temperature and low oil pressure readings and diverted to Modesto to have the engine checked. No mechanics were available at the airport and the pilot subsequently departed for Palo Alto, after adding oil to the engine for the 65-mile remaining trip, heading west. En route to Palo Alto, and in actual IFR conditions, the pilot experienced erratic operation of both GPS navigation systems (one failed after losing a lock on the satellites), which troubled the pilot since she had had a very bad prior experience with losing the navigation systems in actual IFR and icing conditions in a non-radar environment. Shortly after that, the oil pressure and oil temperature indications became erratic again, with the oil temperature flickering near the upper limit and the oil pressure flickering near the lower limit. The pilot said she pushed the reset buttons and cycled the circuit breakers and the audible alarms for the oil temperature and pressure sounded. In addition, the ice warning system activated, alerting the pilot to select the deice functions, and after turning them on, the pilot observed clear ice breaking off the wings. Then the fuel gages started to give erratic indications, cycling to near empty and back again. The pilot told the TRACON controller she needed to land as soon as possible and the controller suggested two nearby airports, one with an 11,000-foot-long runway; however, since the original destination was only 8 minutes further on, the pilot elected to continue to Palo Alto. As she approached the airport, the oil temperature continued to fluctuate and the associated warning horn sounded. She continued to reset (silence) the horn as she approached the airport. The pilot was given the winds at Palo Alto (120 degrees at 8 knots) and since she was concerned with losing the engine over a populated city area, she requested runway 31 in order to make a straight-in approach. The pilot was cleared to land on the 2,500-foot-long runway 31. The pilot said she realized she was high on the approach but did not think about a go-around because of the concern with the potential for an engine failure. The airplane landed about halfway down the runway and could not stop before overrunning the runway and colliding with a berm and marshy terrain about 300 yards beyond the runway end. The aircraft is equipped with an integrated engine parameter instrument and warning system (EMIS), which is a precision measurement and display system containing both analog and digital displays of engine related parameters with alarms for parameter exceedances. In normal operation mode, the Enhanced Digital Indicator (EDI) posts a digital enhancement of the selected analog indicators. The automatic exceedance warning mode has the highest priority. When an exceedance is detected, the EDI will automatically select that indicator and display the readings on the LCD. The peak exceedance value of the indicator will flash in the display and be recorded in non volatile memory for future extraction. The EDI was powered up and placed into exceedance review mode. While in exceedance review mode, the EDI reported the following exceedances: 1) Oil Temperature (OT) recorded three events with a peak exceedance of 278 with an average exceedance of 278 for 11 seconds; 2) Oil Pressure (OP) recorded one event with a peak exceedance of 0 (zero) with an average exceedance of 0 for 81 seconds; 3) Manifold Pressure (MP) recorded nine events with a peak exceedance of 42.0 with an average exceedance of 42.0 for 2 seconds; 4) Turbine Inlet Temperature (T.I.T.) recorded one event of 43 seconds at an average exceedance of 1750. The Cylinder Head Temperature (CHT), Fuel Flow (FF), and Propeller rpm (rpm) indicators did not report any exceedances. A functional test of the EMIS system, to include all probes, analog gages, and associated wiring, was conducted, with no anomalies found. The electrical connection of the temperature probe was forcibly manipulated in an attempt to make the indicator fluctuate. All attempts to duplicate a fluctuating oil temperature indication failed. A detailed examination of the engine found no evidence of a malfunction with the lubricating system or evidence of lubrication related damage to the core engine. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: the pilot's misjudged distance and speed on final approach, which led to a long landing and a runway overrun. Also causal was the pilot's inadequate in-flight decision to continue flight with indications of apparent serious system anomalies, failure to divert to a more suitable destination alternate, and failure to perform a go-around when an overshoot became obvious. Factors in the accident were the short runway at Palo Alto and the pressure placed on the pilot by the apparent indications of multiple system failures and the potential for a catastrophic engine failure. The cause of the erratic engine instrument indications was not resolved. ===
Accident occurred Sunday, January 02, 2005 in Palo Alto, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 4/25/2006
Aircraft: Piper PA-46-350P, registration: N4165P
Injuries: 1 Minor, 3 Uninjured.
The airplane landed long and overran the runway, colliding with a berm and marshy terrain about 300 yards beyond the runway end. The first leg of the flight originated at Mammoth Lakes, California, destined for Palo Alto. En route at 18,000 feet over the Sierra Nevada Mountains, the pilot observed erratic high oil temperature and low oil pressure readings and diverted to Modesto to have the engine checked. No mechanics were available at the airport and the pilot subsequently departed for Palo Alto, after adding oil to the engine for the 65-mile remaining trip, heading west. En route to Palo Alto, and in actual IFR conditions, the pilot experienced erratic operation of both GPS navigation systems (one failed after losing a lock on the satellites), which troubled the pilot since she had had a very bad prior experience with losing the navigation systems in actual IFR and icing conditions in a non-radar environment. Shortly after that, the oil pressure and oil temperature indications became erratic again, with the oil temperature flickering near the upper limit and the oil pressure flickering near the lower limit. The pilot said she pushed the reset buttons and cycled the circuit breakers and the audible alarms for the oil temperature and pressure sounded. In addition, the ice warning system activated, alerting the pilot to select the deice functions, and after turning them on, the pilot observed clear ice breaking off the wings. Then the fuel gages started to give erratic indications, cycling to near empty and back again. The pilot told the TRACON controller she needed to land as soon as possible and the controller suggested two nearby airports, one with an 11,000-foot-long runway; however, since the original destination was only 8 minutes further on, the pilot elected to continue to Palo Alto. As she approached the airport, the oil temperature continued to fluctuate and the associated warning horn sounded. She continued to reset (silence) the horn as she approached the airport. The pilot was given the winds at Palo Alto (120 degrees at 8 knots) and since she was concerned with losing the engine over a populated city area, she requested runway 31 in order to make a straight-in approach. The pilot was cleared to land on the 2,500-foot-long runway 31. The pilot said she realized she was high on the approach but did not think about a go-around because of the concern with the potential for an engine failure. The airplane landed about halfway down the runway and could not stop before overrunning the runway and colliding with a berm and marshy terrain about 300 yards beyond the runway end. The aircraft is equipped with an integrated engine parameter instrument and warning system (EMIS), which is a precision measurement and display system containing both analog and digital displays of engine related parameters with alarms for parameter exceedances. In normal operation mode, the Enhanced Digital Indicator (EDI) posts a digital enhancement of the selected analog indicators. The automatic exceedance warning mode has the highest priority. When an exceedance is detected, the EDI will automatically select that indicator and display the readings on the LCD. The peak exceedance value of the indicator will flash in the display and be recorded in non volatile memory for future extraction. The EDI was powered up and placed into exceedance review mode. While in exceedance review mode, the EDI reported the following exceedances: 1) Oil Temperature (OT) recorded three events with a peak exceedance of 278 with an average exceedance of 278 for 11 seconds; 2) Oil Pressure (OP) recorded one event with a peak exceedance of 0 (zero) with an average exceedance of 0 for 81 seconds; 3) Manifold Pressure (MP) recorded nine events with a peak exceedance of 42.0 with an average exceedance of 42.0 for 2 seconds; 4) Turbine Inlet Temperature (T.I.T.) recorded one event of 43 seconds at an average exceedance of 1750. The Cylinder Head Temperature (CHT), Fuel Flow (FF), and Propeller rpm (rpm) indicators did not report any exceedances. A functional test of the EMIS system, to include all probes, analog gages, and associated wiring, was conducted, with no anomalies found. The electrical connection of the temperature probe was forcibly manipulated in an attempt to make the indicator fluctuate. All attempts to duplicate a fluctuating oil temperature indication failed. A detailed examination of the engine found no evidence of a malfunction with the lubricating system or evidence of lubrication related damage to the core engine. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: the pilot's misjudged distance and speed on final approach, which led to a long landing and a runway overrun. Also causal was the pilot's inadequate in-flight decision to continue flight with indications of apparent serious system anomalies, failure to divert to a more suitable destination alternate, and failure to perform a go-around when an overshoot became obvious. Factors in the accident were the short runway at Palo Alto and the pressure placed on the pilot by the apparent indications of multiple system failures and the potential for a catastrophic engine failure. The cause of the erratic engine instrument indications was not resolved. ===
Accident occurred Friday, February 09, 2001 in Palo Alto, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 11/28/2001
Aircraft: Beech A36, registration: N3191A
Injuries: 1 Uninjured.
The airplane's right wing struck the ground and the airplane came to rest on the runway following a loss of control on an attempted go-around. The pilot had received 107.9 hours of dual instruction and was making his first solo flight in the airplane. The purpose of the flight was to practice takeoffs and landings. The pilot selected approach flaps on downwind but never checked their position. On short final, the pilot sensed his descent rate was too great and attempted a go-around. The airplane drifted towards the left and then rolled right continuing to descend until it struck the ground. Postcrash examination of the engine and propeller revealed impact damage that was consistent with the propeller having contacted the ground in a high airplane pitch attitude, and a propeller blade angle consistent with a "power on" condition. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: The pilot-in-command's delayed decision to go-around and his failure to maintain sufficient airspeed during the attempted go-around. His non-verification of the flap setting contributed to the accident. ===
Accident occurred Sunday, September 03, 2000 in PALO ALTO, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 7/17/2001
Aircraft: Piper PA-28-161, registration: N6462C
Injuries: 2 Uninjured.
The pilot reported he landed the rental aircraft 'somewhat hard' and collapsed the left main landing gear of the fixed gear airplane. The landing gear casting is bolted to the aft side of the wing spar with 8 bolts, 4 in a rectangular pattern on the top and 4 in a similar pattern on the bottom. During postaccident examination of the bottom 4 bolts it was determined that 2 were absent and not located in the wing, the bolt head was missing on the third bolt, and the fourth bolt was loose. All 4 of the upper attach bolts were loose. There was fretting at the casting-to-spar interface and the holes were elongated. The 8 bolts on the right main landing gear attachment, which did not fail, were all loose. There are no Airworthiness Directives or Service Bulletins in effect regarding the landing gear to wing spar attachment on this model aircraft. The aircraft manufacturer's Inspection Checklist for the 100-hour inspection instructs maintenance personnel to: 'Inspect gear struts, attachments, torque links and bolts for condition and security. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: The failure of maintenance personnel to detect and correct loose attachment fasteners and fretting at the landing gear attachment during maintenance inspections. ===
Accident occurred Saturday, July 15, 2000 in PALO ALTO, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 1/2/2002
Aircraft: Cessna 172K, registration: N79004
Injuries: 4 Uninjured.
The pilots of a Beech (Baron) and a Cessna planned to depart using runway 31, and they taxied toward the runway's engine run-up area. Upon arrival, the Baron pilot found the area fully occupied by six other airplanes, so he held short. The Cessna pilot stopped in trail behind the Baron. After a few minutes, an airplane vacated the run-up area, and the Baron pilot applied engine power to reposition his airplane in the run-up area. The Cessna pilot attempted to pass the Baron by proceeding between the Baron's right wing and another airplane, to the Cessna's right side. The Cessna pilot indicated that he misjudged his clearance, and the leading edge of his left wing impacted the rear of the Baron's rotating propeller blades. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: The Cessna pilot's inadequate visual lookout and misjudged distance to a standing Beech while taxiing for takeoff. ===
Accident occurred Saturday, July 15, 2000 in PALO ALTO, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 1/2/2002
Aircraft: Beech 58, registration: N7271R
Injuries: 4 Uninjured.
The pilots of a Beech (Baron) and a Cessna planned to depart using runway 31, and taxied toward the runway's engine run-up area. Upon arrival, the Baron pilot found the area fully occupied by six other airplanes, so he held short. The Cessna pilot stopped in trail behind the Baron. After a few minutes, an airplane vacated the run-up area, and the Baron pilot applied engine power to reposition his airplane in the run-up area. The Cessna pilot attempted to pass the Baron by proceeding between the Baron's right wing and another airplane, to the Cessna's right side. The Cessna pilot indicated that he misjudged his clearance, and the leading edge of his left wing impacted the rear of the Baron's rotating propeller blades. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: The pilot of the other airplane's (Cessna) inadequate visual lookout and misjudged distance to the standing Beech. ===
Accident occurred Friday, April 14, 2000 in PALO ALTO, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 7/17/2001
Aircraft: Piper PA-28-161, registration: N81019
Injuries: 1 Uninjured.
The engine oil was changed and it was the operator's practice, following maintenance, to fly the aircraft before releasing it for student use. The pilot/flight instructor told the operator that the start, taxi, and run-up were normal. The engine operated smoothly until, at 300 feet agl on takeoff climb out, the engine quit abruptly, regained power, then quit again. The pilot attempted to return to the departure runway but landed short in a marsh area. At the accident site, the propeller did not appear to have been turning on impact. There was fuel in both wing tanks and there was no contamination at the sumps. The emergency responders had instructed the pilot to turn the fuel selector to the 'off' position. The fuel pump functioned audibly. There was clean oil in the engine and the engine rotated freely with good compression. After recovery, the cowling was removed and the engine was examined. No anomalies were noted. The propeller was replaced and the carburetor heat box was removed due to damage. The engine started promptly, the run-up was normal, and the engine delivered full power. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: The loss of engine power for undetermined reasons during takeoff climb. ===
Accident occurred Sunday, March 05, 2000 in PALO ALTO, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 7/17/2001
Aircraft: Piper PA-46-310, registration: N43412
Injuries: 2 Uninjured.
The airplane landed approximately 2 feet short of the runway, and then struck the lip of the pavement, which sheered off the left main gear. The gear itself hung onto the trunnion by the brake lines until the airplane came to rest, approximately 600 feet down the runway. Additionally, the airplane struck a taxiway sign with the left wing while it was traveling down the runway. The pilot told investigators that he was planning on landing on runway 30 and was using 85 knots as his target speed. He said that about 100 feet agl he noticed that he had an excessive sink rate and noticed that his airspeed was about 97 knots. He decided to trade his airspeed to cut the sink rate and said by the time he noticed it wasn't working, he was already on the ground. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: The pilot's failure to obtain/maintain the proper visual glide path resulting in an undershoot and collision with the runway edge. ===
Accident occurred Wednesday, February 02, 2000 in PALO ALTO, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 5/9/2001
Aircraft: Robinson R44, registration: N999EV
Injuries: 2 Uninjured.
The pilot and passenger were inbound to land and the pilot requested permission to perform an autorotation, which was approved. The pilot reported that he did not think he was going to reach the runway during the autorotation so he added power. The engine failed to respond and the tail stinger contacted the ground resulting in the separation of the tail boom. The pilot pulled collective pitch; the helicopter briefly became airborne, and spun violently to the right. The pilot maintained a level attitude and the helicopter landed hard. After the rotor stopped, they exited the helicopter. The pilot stated that he should have used carburetor heat prior to the extended engine idle period of the autorotation. The temperature and dew point were in the serious icing-glide power range. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: The pilot's failure to use carburetor heat, resulting in a loss of engine power, and, his misjudged autorotation approach that resulted in a collision with the ground during the landing flare. Contributing to the accident was the conditions conducive to carburetor icing.

Airport Approach / Landing: