Hawker SEA FURY ISS 25 accident near Breckenridge, Texas, February 18, 2014

The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record

After several hours of ground instruction and one solo flight, the private pilot was making only his second takeoff in a single-seat Hawker Sea Fury airplane. Two witnesses standing at midfield reported hearing abnormal engine and propeller sounds during takeoff, and the airplane's speed seemed to be slower than normal. Another witness, who had pilot experience in the Hawker Sea Fury, did not see the takeoff but reported that he could clearly hear the engine "screaming," and he knew at that moment that the accident pilot was experiencing a propeller overspeed. A flight instructor was conducting a formation takeoff in trail behind the accident airplane to observe the flight. After his takeoff, he joined in on the right side of the accident airplane and he heard the accident pilot make a radio transmission that he had an overspeed and the airplane's rpm was at 3,500. The instructor reported that the maximum takeoff power was about 2,900 rpm. No further transmissions from the accident pilot were heard. The instructor kept repeating for the pilot to pull the power back and keep the nose down. Both airplanes climbed to about 1,000 ft above ground level, and the accident airplane began a slow turn to the left. The flight instructor continued to fly in formation with the accident airplane and continued to transmit instructions to the accident pilot to lower the nose and reduce the throttle. However, the accident airplane continued to slow and fly in a nose-up attitude until it stalled and rolled to the right. It then entered a vertical nose-down dive and impacted terrain. The flight instructor and witnesses reported that there was an immediate explosion and postimpact fire. The witnesses' description of abnormal engine and propeller sounds and the accident pilot's report of 3,500 rpm are indicative of a runaway propeller. The Hawker Sea Fury emergency checklist indicated that recovery from a runaway propeller was possible when following the procedures listed in the checklist, which include reducing the throttle, decreasing the propeller angle, and maintaining an airspeed of 140 knots. A postaccident examination of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. A laboratory examination of the impact- and thermally damaged propeller regulator did not show any obvious evidence of preimpact mechanical malfunction or abnormalities. The cause of the runaway propeller could not be undetermined.

The complete narrative as the NTSB published it. The NTSB's docket holds the report as a PDF and any photographs, statements and other documents from the investigation.