Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 45; Flight Crew Total 1645; Flight Crew Type 125
Time Pressure; Situational Awareness
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Human Factors
As a preamble; the aircraft is very well maintained; but as it is nearly forty years old; there are a couple of issues that it has that are pertinent to the incident.  They are not problems that cause the aircraft to be unairworthy; and the PIC needs to deal with them to have a successful outcome.  First; the autopilot in the aircraft is old; and has difficultly intercepting final approach courses when the intercept angle is too great.  Attempting to get the autopilot settled led to valuable time lost before I disconnected it.  Another issue with the aircraft is that the flight controls are rigged in such a way that the yoke appears to be slightly turned to the left in straight and level flight.  Therefore if one were to fly the aircraft with the yoke in the standard straight and level position; the airplane would be in a shallow right turn.  When I fixated during my hand-flown final approach; I reverted to holding the yoke in a 'normal' straight and level position.  This led the plane to deviate to the right. I was cleared for the ILS 23 approach into FDK.  My final vector onto the LOC was approximately a quickly descending 120 turn to the right; directly onto both the LOC and glide slope.  I was not prepared to be so aggressively vectored; and rolled out high and fast; with the aircraft in a clean configuration.  At this point I should have abandoned the approach; as I had too much potential and kinetic energy; I was not established on my final approach course; my aircraft was not properly configured; and the autopilot was having great difficultly intercepting the LOC.  But; due to both pride and get-there-itis for my passenger; I pressed on.  This; combined with an inadequate scan due to fixation; led to me having an excessively high rate of descent and to be off course to the right.  Frederick Tower told me that approach control was getting a low altitude alert; but at this point I had broken out and stabilized the aircraft.  I landed without incident. Lessons that I have taken away from this incident for use in all aircraft: 1. If aggressively vectored to final approach; one may need to aggressively reduce the aircraft's energy state.  I was too worried about 'babying' the engines in the early stages; whereas if I had aggressively reduced power when intercepting the final approach course I would have been able to slow down appropriately.  If I am not willing to aggressively reduce power; I need to refuse the approach clearance. 2. If the aircraft is not in the proper configuration and in a stabilized approach at the FAF; I need to abandon the approach and try again. 3. If the approach becomes unstable inside the FAF; I need to immediately execute a missed approach.  2 & 3 are obviously basic rules of instrument flying.  I need to lay aside my pride and get-there-itis to be safe. Lessons that I have taken away when flying this specific aircraft: 1. When aggressively vectored onto a final approach course; just turn the autopilot off immediately.  It can't handle the intercept.  I must establish the aircraft on a stable approach; and then I may re-engage the autopilot if I desire. 2. Be more aware of the unusual flight control rigging when hand-flying in IMC. A final lesson:  Keep my scan up.  If not actively flying approaches in IMC; I need to be using simulators to keep my scan active and crisp.
PA34 pilot reported he deviated from charted procedure on a steep approach to FDK in IMC that resulted in a CFTT incident.