and at impact there was little if any translational motion along its vertical axis. This evidence would result if the aircraft were in a coordinated spiral at impact or if it crashed after its nose dropped sharply from a steeply banked attitude with no turning component. In view of the fore— going, the final maneuver, clearly indicative of a loss of aircraft control, can only be attributed to either pilot incapacitation or to a form of spatial disorientation.
The Board is of the opinion that the weight of the available evidence discounts pilot incapacitation. In this regard it agrees with the profess1onal opinion of the FAA Flight Surgeon that the remoteness of the pilot's medical problems, being some l0 to 12 years earlier, make connecting them with the accident difficult particularly with the series of satisfactory flight medical examinations since at least 1959. The Board considers these satisfactory examinations over the extended period convincing evidence that the pilot was 1n good health. It also believes that its view is additionally supported by the absence of any known medical treatment over these years and by the statements attesting to the pilot's good spirits and health by his copilot of prior flights including one on the day of the accident and by persons who talked to him just before the accident flight. Finally the apparent normal operation of the aircraft before, during and after takeoff until the moment of control loss tends in some degree to lessen the possibility of pilot incapacitation.
