1972 — Sep 24, Air Show Plane Crash/Fire, Ice Cream Parlor, Sacramento, CA –22-23

— 24 Cornell, James. The Great International Disaster Book (Third Edition). 1982, p. 376.
–22 Inside Farrell’s Ice Cream Parlor
— 2 Outside in car parked in parking lot (other reporting is that this was a moving car.)
— 23 Blanchard. Includes woman killed by a truck as she crossed road to try to render aid.
— 23 Pierleoni. “Somber event recalls Farrell’s jet-crash disaster.” Sacramento Bee, 9-24-2012.
— 22 Check-Six.com. “The Crash at Farrell’s Ice Cream Parlor…Sacramento…Sep 24, 1972.
— 22 Ferrara, Grace M. The Disaster File: The 1970’s. New York: Facts on File, 1979, p. 8.
— 22 NFPA. “Multiple-Death Fires, 1972,” Fire Journal, Vol. 67, No. 3, May 1973, pp. 73-74.
–22 (Five men, five women, five boys, and seven girls were killed.)
–19 Inside Farrell’s Ice Cream Parlor
— 3 Outside in automobiles.
— 22 National Fire Protection Association. The 1984 Fire Almanac. 1983, p. 139.
— 22 NTSB. AAR. Spectrum Air…Sacramento, CA, September 24, 1972 (NTSB-AAR-73-6).
— 22 NTSB. NTSB Identification: OAK73AP008, Canadair Mark 5.
— 22 Notable California Aviation Disasters. “The 1970s.” Oct 23, 2008 update.
— 22 Press-Telegram, Long Beach (CA). “Jet Hits Party, Killing 22,” September 25, 1972, A1.

Narrative Information

National Fire Protection Association: “On September 24, in Sacramento, California, a plane apparently lost power on takeoff and failed to become airborne during an air show. It crashed into a parking lot and an ice cream parlor. Twenty-two persons were killed. The aircraft was a Canadian-built version of the US Air Force’s F-86, a fighter-type aircraft used during the Korean war. The plane, which had been disas¬sembled and stored for eight years and then had been sold and rebuilt for air show use, reportedly carried a certificate of flightworthiness (experimental cate¬gory) from appropriate authorities.

“The pilot had an appropriate license and experience, but apparently he had flown this type of plane only once before the accident. The plane had taken part in the air show, demonstrating low-level passes over the field and various “acrobatic” maneuvers. It landed after finishing its part of the program and later was allowed to take off on a parallel runway while the show con-tinued.

“The plane failed to become airborne and continued along the ground — striking a barrier, continuing across a four-lane highway and through the parking lot of a shopping plaza, and crashing into the shopping mall building. The plane crushed three cars in the parking lot, then pushed in the wall of a building that was occupied by an ice cream parlor. There were about 100 occupants, both patrons and staff, in the ice cream parlor. The plane, the three cars, and the ice cream parlor all burst into flames.

“The local fire department, augmented by an airport crash crew, men, and equipment from a nearby US Air Force facility, and various police and ambulance units, performed rescue work and fire-fighting. One wall of the structure had been pushed in and a portion of the roof had collapsed. Most of the victims were trapped in rubble.

“Five men, five women, five boys, and seven girls were killed. Three of the victims had been in automobiles. The rest had been in the ice cream parlor. Twenty-six other people, including the pilot, were injured.” (NFPA. “Multiple-Death Fires, 1972,” Fire Journal, 67/3, May 1973, pp. 73-74 & 102)

National Transportation Safety Board: “Synopsis Spectrum Air, Inc., Sabre Mark 5 , N275X, crashed during a rejected takeoff from Runway 30 at Sacramento Executive Airport, Sacramento, California, at approximately 1624 Pacific daylight time, on September 24, 1972. The aircraft collided with several automobiles and came to rest in an ice cream parlor across the street from the airport. Twenty-two persons on the ground were killed and 28 others, including the pilot, were injured. The aircraft was destroyed.

“The aircraft became airborne twice during the attempted takeoff but each time returned to the runway. The pilot reported that the aircraft acceleration and control response were normal until he felt a vibration shortly after initial lift-off. He did not recall whether it persisted through the subsequent liftoff and the rejected takeoff.

“The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was the over-rotation of the aircraft and subsequent derogation of the performance capability. The over-rotation was the result of inadequate pilot proficiency in the aircraft and misleading visual cues.

“As a result of this accident the Safety Board recommended major changes in the regulations and procedures governing certification of aircraft in the experimental category and the control of pilots who fly them. Recommendations were also made in regard to the safety of persons and property around airports.” (NTSB-AAR-73-6, p. 1.)

“History of the Flight Spectrum Air, Inc., Sabre Mark 5, N275X, was flown from Oakland to Sacramento, California, to be exhibited as a static display at the Sacramento Executive Airport on September 24, 1972. This was the final day of the 2-day Golden West Sport Aviation Show.

“The pilot stated that the flaps were in the takeoff position,and he completed the pretakeoff checklist. He checked throttle friction, emergency ignition, and engine instruments during the engine runup at the end of the runway. The exhaust gas temperature was 680’ to 690’ and the tachometer was indicating 97 to 98 percent r.p.m. He released the brakes and used nose-wheel steering for directional control until his speed was approximately 60 knots. He then checked the engine instruments for the last time – everything was normal. At 105 knots he applied sufficient back pressure to raise the nose-wheel off the runway, and maintained that attitude. The aircraft became airborne within a few seconds. The takeoff roll and lift-off were normal in every respect. After a slight hesitation, preparatory to raising the landing gear, the pilot heard and felt an unusual vibration which startled him. The aircraft was no longer accelerating in a normal fashion, so he instinctively lowered the nose, confirmed that he still had full throttle, and was surprised that the aircraft settled back onto the runway. He did not recall whether the vibration ended, but acceleration seemed normal again so he dismissed a momentary thought of discontinuing, and resumed the takeoff attitude. The aircraft became airborne again; however, it was obvious to the pilot that the aircraft was not going to fly, and he began the rejected takeoff procedure. He closed the throttle, touched down, and continued straight ahead trying to slow the aircraft. Within a second he hit something and was airborne again. He shut off the ‘fuel switch’ and shielded his face with his right arm. He was unable to control the aircraft as it continued across the street and into the building. The highest airspeed he observed at anytime was 120 knots….” (NTSB-AAR-73-6, p.3)

“The aircraft skid marks began approximately 40 feet from the end of Runway 30 and continued 453 feet over a sod overrun and a 25-foot-wide perimeter roadway. At this point the aircraft became airborne again, crashed through a chain link fence and a fire hydrant, and skidded across a 112-foot-wide divided highway. The aircraft came to rest approximately 800 feet from the end of the runway, less than 25 feet to the left of the extended runway centerline….” (NTSB. P. 9.)

“The aircraft external fuel tanks ruptured on the chain link fence, and other tanks failed as the aircraft continued skidding across the street into the ice cream parlor. The main fireball occurred on the airport side of the street, and the fire trail followed the aircraft into the building….” (NTSB-AAR-73-6, p. 10.)

“Analysis The aircraft was certified in accordance with existing procedures, and there is no evidence of malfunction or mechanical failure, which would have prevented a normal takeoff. The pilot reported that he felt and heard a vibration shortly after initial lift-off. Apparently, he as not sufficiently concerned to reject the takeoff at that point. He stated that when he lowered the nose, acceleration seemed normal again and he continued the takeoff. The Board believes that the vibration experienced was precipitated by disturbed airflow, because of excessive nose-high attitude during lift-off. Documentation of the excessive attitude, and proper thrust development by the engine, was found in the testimony of witnesses and the analysis of the 8-mm movies of the takeoff. The aircraft pitch attitude during the initial lift-off was more than three times higher than that of the test Sabre Mark 5 aircraft [also at the show], yet N275X reached a velocity of more than 130 knots in an exaggerated takeoff attitude twice on the 5,000-foot runway. Apparently, both times the aircraft remained airborne in ground effect as long as the pilot maintained the excessive noseup control input. Each time he relaxed the back pressure on the yoke the aircraft settled to the runway.

“The over-rotation was undoubtedly a function of (1) a lack of familiarity with the Sabre Mark 5 and (2) the effect of visual cues at Sacramento as opposed to Oakland. The pilot had logged a total of 3.5 flying hours in N275X, but claimed an additional 4 hours which were not logged. The only other “swept wing” experience he had was 31 hours logged as second-in-command in a Lockheed Jetstar. The remainder of his jet experience was accumulated in a Lear Jet as second-in-command. Although all jet experience provides a measure of exposure to the faster acceleration, and consequently to the quicker reactions required, very few models of aircraft are more sensitive to over-rotation than Sabre-type aircraft….” (NTSB-AAR-73-6, pp. 14-15.)

“The pilot was restricted from operating N275X from any airport other than Oakland or Sonoma County, except for exhibition. When the aircraft was exhibited at a bona fide airshow, the only airport restriction was that imposed by the performance capability of the aircraft. If there had been no airshow, N275X would not have been authorized to land or take off from Sacramento. Consequently, the rejected takeoff must be considered as directly related to the airshow, even though N275X was not specifically identified as part of the airshow.

“The inadequacies of the rules governing operation of experimental aircraft are, perhaps, best demonstrated in a comparison of the provisions before and after the accident. The generalized statements concerning pilot qualification for a letter of authority were changed to require a military or manufacturer’s checkout and recent pilot-in-command experience in jet aircraft. The previous certification requirement, for a statement of the purpose for which the aircraft will be used, is now expanded by a requirement to submit a resume each time the air-craft is to be exhibited. The resume must include all routes of flight, arrival, and departure, which must be approved by the FAA office involved. Takeoffs or landings over densely populated areas must now be approved at the regional level. It is obvious that the pilot of N275X could not qualify for a letter of authority under the new directive because he had not completed the appropriate training and because he lacked the pilot-in-command experience. Additionally, there is a possibility that the proposed exhibition might have been rejected if a resume had been presented to the FAA Western Region, as now required. Even assuming that the region approved the flight into Sacramento Executive Airport, some runway restriction would have been imposed because of the populated areas surrounding certain runways….” (NTSB-AAR-73-6, pp. 16-17.)

“The second circumstance which added to the catastrophe was the location of the ice cream parlor. The construction of the shopping center was accomplished in accordance with existing statutes of the various jurisdictions. Although some of the structures exceeded the height standards of Part 77, the FAA determined that the obstructions did not constitute hazards to air navigation. The city, county, and State governments all generally agreed that once the shopping center was built, the subsequent addition of the ice cream parlor and sign had little effect on aircraft operations. This conclusion was an obvious extension of the initial rationale that ‘… the construction (of the shopping center) would affect operations no differently than other existing structures such as a gasoline sign, television antennas, traffic signal standards, etc.”….” (NTSB-AAR-73-6, p. 17.)

From Appendix E to NTSB-AAR-73-6, Safety Recommendation A-72-210 thru 223 (to the FAA), dated December 28, 1972:

“…The built-up area around the Sacramento Executive Airport raises serious questions with regard to the suitability for airshows of this and similar airports, especially when one considers the practicability of applying the following sample of a special provision from the pertinent handbook: “The holder of the airshow waiver shall insure that roads adjacent to the airport, as specified below, are devoid of vehicular traffic and the property adjoining the airport shall be free of spectators.” This provision was not incorporated in the certificate of waiver for the Sacramento airshow; if it had been, it would have been very difficult to implement….” (NTSB-AAR-73-6, p. 31.)

NTSB: “Probable Cause.
Pilot in Command – Improper Operation of Flight Controls
Pilot in Command – Failed to Obtain/Maintain Flying Speed
Pilot in Command – Lack of Familiarity with Aircraft
Remarks – Overrotation of Acft due inadequate Plt proficiency & misleading visual cures hit ice cream parlor.”

(NTSB. NTSB Identification: OAK73AP008.)

Check-Six.com: “Ultimately, the accident forced the closure of Runway 12-30 to jet traffic, became the impetus to a comprehensive land-use plan for the area around the airport, and resulted in a $5 million settlement for the survivors and the families of those who died, but only after years of legal maneuvers, concluding in May of 1976.

“The crash also highlighted an important need to the Sacramento area – a specialized burn unit. Cliff Haskell, a Fire Captain with the Sacramento Fire Department, convinced the Sacramento Area Fire Fighters Local 522, to allow him to raise funds for and establish the Firefighters Burn Institute in December of 1973. A similar facility at the University of California-Davis Medical Center was opened a month later.

“William Penn Patrick, the owner of the F-86 and successful entrepreneur, did not hang around for too much longer. On the morning of June 9th, 1973, he took when his P-51 Mustang out for a flight, during which he made a series of low passes, the plane entered into a steep dive, and crashed on the grounds of his High Valley Ranch.” (Check-Six.com.)

“Local residents, led by one of the survivors of the mishap, used the opportunity to raise funds jointly with the city to build a memorial at the crash site to the victims.” (Check-Six.com.) There are twenty-three names on the plaque.

Notable California Aviation Disasters: “Date / Time: Sunday, September 24, 1972 / 4:24 p.m.
“Operator / Flight No.: Spectrum Air, Inc. / Non-Commercial
“Location: Sacramento, Calif.

“Details and Probable Cause: The aircraft, a restored Korean War-era North American F-86 SabreJet (N275X) displayed earlier in the day at an aviation show and exhibition, failed to become airborne during its takeoff roll at Sacramento Executive Airport.

“After rising twice from the runway but returning to the ground both times, the speeding fighter jet overran the end of the runway, bounded up over a levee, tore through a chain-link fence, plowed across Freeport Boulevard slamming into an automobile, and crashed into a crowded Farrell’s Ice Cream Parlor in a ball of fire.

“Twelve children and 10 adults were killed, including the couple in the car that was struck by the careening plane. Another 28 persons were injured in the catastrophe. One eight-year-old survivor lost nine members of his family: both parents, two brothers, a sister, two grandparents and two cousins.

“The 36-year-old pilot, Richard Bingham, was helped from the wreckage by bystanders and survived the crash with a broken arm and facial cuts.

“Moments after the crash, a 61-year-old woman and her 62-year-old husband were both struck by a truck as they attempted to cross Freeport Boulevard on foot to reach the crash site; the woman died of her injuries.

“Pilot error. The premature nose-up attitude of the aircraft during its takeoff run produced a partly stalled condition and excessive drag that affected the plane’s acceleration. As a result, the aircraft never achieved the proper takeoff speed to become airborne.

“The horrific crash resulted in a $5 million out-of-court settlement for the survivors and relatives of those who died.

“The worst on-ground death toll in a California aviation accident.
“Fatalities: 22.” (Notable California Aviation Disasters. “The 1970s.” Oct 23, 2008 update.)

Newspapers

Sep 25, Associated Press: “Sacramento (AP) – ‘It took one wall where 17 kids were and just pushed it,’ one witness gasped after a burning plane slashed into an ice cream parlor jammed with children and their parents, [exploded] killing 22 persons. Authorities said one entire family of five died in the crash Sunday along with at least 12 children. Twenty-six others – mostly children – were injured when the private plane catapulted across a highway shortly after takeoff and hit Farrell’s Ice Cream Parlor. Eight persons remained hospitalized…one in critical condition.

“The pilot of the Korean war-vintage jet fighter survived and was quoted as saying, ‘I’m sorry; I’m sorry;’ as he was pulled from the wreckage.

“Describing the scene at the wall where the 17 youngsters had been sitting…[one witness] said, ‘They were all in a big pile. It just pushed them.’….a management trainee working at the store, said a birthday party group of 17 persons was seated at the table at the front window and had just been served with ice cream, candy and favors when the plane crashed through the wall beside them. Most of the dead were found in that part of the store.

“The crash occurred as the F86 Sabrejet was taking off from Sacramento’s Executive Airport after participating in an air show. The plane had been converted to civilian use. Witnesses said the plane appeared to lose power in the takeoff. It crashed on an old levee barrier at the end of the runway and hurtled across a four-lane highway. The craft burst into flames about the time it hit three autos parked by the front entrance to the ice cream parlor. Two of the autos were rammed with the burning plane through the front of the building.” (Press-Telegram. “Jet Hits Party, Killing 22,” Sep 25, 1972, A1.)

Sep 25, Press-Telegram,: “The Sacramento 49ers, a Little League football team, was having a party at the time.” (Press-Telegram. “Chaos and Death at Farrell’s nets ‘A Lot of Empty School Seats’,” 9-25-1972, p. A-10.)

Sep 25, Associated Press,: “Sacramento (AP) – A 62-year old woman and her husband injured while running across a busy boulevard toward the scene of Monday’s plane crash, police reported.” (Press-Telegram, Long Beach. “Woman Dies in Aid Effort,” Sep 25, 1972, p. A-10.)

Sources

Check-Six.com. “The Crash at Farrell’s Ice Cream Parlor in Sacramento, CA – September 24, 1972. Accessed 8-3-2009 at: http://www.check-six.com/Crash_Sites/Sabrejet_crash_site.htm

Cornell, James. The Great International Disaster Book (Third Edition). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1982.

Ferrara, Grace M. The Disaster File: The 1970’s. New York: Facts on File, 1979.

National Fire Protection Association. “Multiple-Death Fires, 1972,” Fire Journal, Vol. 67, No. 3, May 1973, pp. 71-74 & 102.

National Fire Protection Association. The 1984 Fire Almanac. Quincy, MA: NFPA, 1983.

National Transportation Safety Board. Aircraft Accident Report. Spectrum Air, Inc., Sabre Mark 5, N275X, Sacramento, California, September 24, 1972 (File No. 3-1191; NTSB-AAR-73-6). Washington, DC: NTSB, adopted March 28, 1973, 38 pages. Accessed at: http://www.airdisaster.com/reports/ntsb/AAR73-06.pdf

National Transportation Safety Board. NTSB Identification: OAK73AP008. Accessed at: http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?ev_id=66685&key=0#

Notable California Aviation Disasters. “The 1970s.” Oct 23, 2008 update. Accessed 10/18/2009 at: http://www.jaydeebee1.com/crash70s.html

Pierleoni, Allen. “Somber event recalls Farrell’s jet-crash disaster.” Sacramento Bee, 9-24-2012. Accessed 7-6-2020 at: https://web.archive.org/web/20140112211942/http://www.sacbee.com/2012/09/24/4847905/somber-event-recalls-farrells.html

Press-Telegram, Long Beach, CA. “Chaos and Death at Farrell’s Nets ‘A Lot of Empty School Seats’,” p. A-10. At: http://www.newspaperarchive.com/FullPagePdfViewer.aspx?img=46451309