Friday, September 18, 2026

Harfang II, C-IFBY, fatal accident occurred on August 19, 2026, near Westport, South Dakota

  • Location: Westport, SD 
  • Accident Number: CEN26LA296 
  • Date & Time: August 19, 2026, 19:20 Local 
  • Registration: C-IFBY 
  • Aircraft: Para-Ski VX 
  • Injuries: 1 Fatal, 1 Serious, 1 Minor 
  • Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General aviation - Personal

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/203627/pdf

On August 19, 2026, about 1920 central daylight time, a Para-Ski VX powered parachute, CIFBY, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Westport, South Dakota. The pilot sustained serious injuries, passenger 1 sustained fatal injuries, and passenger 2 sustained minor injuries. The powered parachute was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight. 

A witness reported that they observed the accident aircraft depart from a field towards the west. The witness looked away for about one minute, and when the witness looked back the aircraft had already impacted terrain. The aircraft impacted terrain, collided with a barbed wire fence, and came to rest on its side with substantial damage to the fuselage. 

Initial reports revealed that the pilot was seated in the front seat with passenger 1 seated in his lap and passenger 2 was seated in the rear seat as seen in figure 1.

The accident aircraft does not meet the requirements as outlined in Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 103 to be considered an ultralight vehicle. The aircraft fuel capacity exceeded 5 gallons and is configured for operation for more than a single occupant. The pilot holds an FAA remote pilot certificate for small unmanned aircraft systems. 

The powered parachute was retained for further examination.

Beechcraft 99 Airliner, N799CZ, and Diamond DA20-C1 Eclipse, N84VV, accident occurred on at Willow Run Airport (YIP/KYIP), Detroit, Michigan

  • Location: Belleville, MI 
  • Accident Number: CEN26LA316 
  • Date & Time: September 10, 2026, 15:45 Local 
  • Registration: N799CZ (A1); N84VV (A2) 
  • Aircraft: Beech 99 (A1); Diamond DA20 (A2) 
  • Injuries: 1 None (A1); 2 None (A2) 
  • Flight Conducted Under: Part 135: Air taxi & commuter - Non-scheduled (A1); Part 91: General aviation - Instructional (A2)

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/203805/pdf

https://registry.faa.gov/AircraftInquiry/Search/NNumberResult?nNumberTxt=N84VV

https://registry.faa.gov/AircraftInquiry/Search/NNumberResult?nNumberTxt=N799CZ

On September 10, 2026, about 1545 eastern daylight time, a Beech 99 airplane, N799CZ, and a Diamond DA20 airplane, N84VV were involved in a ground collision accident at the Willow Run Airport, Belleville, Michigan. N799CZ received minor damage and N84VV received substantial damage. There were no injuries to either the pilot of N799CZ, or the student pilot and flight instructor on-board N84VV. N799CZ was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 135 cargo flight, and N84VV was operated as a Title 14 CFR Part 91 instructional flight. 

The pilot of N799CZ reported that after starting the airplane’s engines, he set the parking brake and then turned around to turn on the airplane’s oxygen bottle which was located behind his seat. While turned he noticed what he thought was a loose cargo strap but discovered that the strap was not loose. When he turned back around the airplane had moved and the propellers began striking the tail of the other airplane. He stopped and shut down the airplane. 

Both the flight instructor and student pilot of N84VV reported that they had completed their preflight inspection of N84VV and had started the airplane’s engine and were stationary. As they were preparing to taxi, they felt the airplane getting struck by N799CZ. They noted that they did not see N799CZ from the cockpit before the collision. Following the collision, they shut down the airplane and deplaned. 

N84VV received substantial damage to the left horizontal stabilizer, left elevator, vertical stabilizer, rudder, left wing flap and left wing aileron.

Flight control sys malf/fail: Cessna 172S Skyhawk SP, N22088, fatal accident occurred on December 20, 2024, near Cintrona, Puerto Rico




  • Location: Cintrona, Puerto Rico 
  • Accident Number: ERA25FA082 
  • Date & Time: December 20, 2024, 14:00 Local 
  • Registration: N22088 
  • Aircraft: Cessna 172 
  • Aircraft Damage: Destroyed 
  • Defining Event: Flight control sys malf/fail 
  • Injuries: 1 Fatal 
  • Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General aviation - Personal 

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/199456/pdf

https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=199456

On December 20, 2024, about 1400 Atlantic standard time, a Cessna 172S, N22088, was destroyed when it was involved in an accident near Cintrona, Puerto Rico. The private pilot was fatally injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight.

The pilot had completed a check out flight earlier in the day, and the accident flight was her first solo flight in the accident airplane. She departed the airport where the airplane was based, flew to another airport and performed a touch-and-go landing, then flew to the airport nearest the accident site where she again performed a touch-and-go landing. Upon departure from that airport, while making a turn likely to return to the airport where the airplane was based, the pilot transmitted a mayday call over the common traffic advisory frequency. In the mayday call the pilot reported a loss of control. The airplane then began a descending right turn until impacting a tree and the ground in a mango orchard.

Postaccident examination of the wreckage revealed that the right aileron carry through cable had fractured, and that 62% of strands on one side of the fracture and 60% of strands on the other side of the fracture failed due to wear. The other strands on the cable failed due to overstress. Based on these findings, it is likely that the wear of this cable progressed to the point where it could no longer support the stresses of flight, resulting in the in-flight failure of the right aileron carry through cable. With this cable failure, the closed loop aileron system would be interrupted and the control inputs from the pilot would only tension a single cable run. This would result in the aileron on the unloaded side tending to float toward its zero hingemoment (aerodynamically neutral) position, while the aileron on the loaded side would remain responsive to pilot input. The pilot would retain partial roll control; however, control effectiveness would be reduced because only the lift-increasing aileron would be actively driven, while the opposing surface would not provide a corresponding aerodynamic response. Due to a lack of available flight data, this investigation could not determine how much control the pilot would retain, and if the pilot would have retained enough control to make a safe landing. 

A review of the airplane’s maintenance logbooks found that the left aileron carry through cable had been replaced about 6 months prior to the accident while the airplane was undergoing an annual inspection. The maintenance log entry documenting the inspection and the cable replacement did not note a reason that the cable was replaced. Given the degree of wear observed on the right aileron cable that was observed after the accident, it is likely that the condition had developed over a prolonged period of time. These wear indications, like fractured cable strands, should have prompted maintenance personnel to replace the cable prior to its failure on the accident flight.

The results of postmortem toxicological testing indicated that the pilot had used the sedating antihistamine medication diphenhydramine, but provided no clear evidence that impairing effects of that medication were impairing the pilot at the time of the accident. The toxicological testing also detected ethanol in blood, but not in vitreous fluid, indicating that the detected ethanol likely was from postmortem sources, and not alcohol consumption.

- Probable Cause: Maintenance personnel’s inadequate inspection of the airplane, which resulted in inflight the failure of the right aileron carry through cable due to wear, reduced effectiveness of the airplane’s ailerons, and a subsequent loss of control. 

Aerodynamic stall/spin: Piper PA-28-140 Cherokee, N515DH, fatal accident occurred on June 14, 2024, near Siler City Municipal Airport (SCR/KSCR), Siler City, North Carolina

  • Location: Siler City, North Carolina 
  • Accident Number: ERA24FA261 
  • Date & Time: June 14, 2024, 12:48 Local 
  • Registration: N515DH 
  • Aircraft: Piper PA28 
  • Aircraft Damage: Destroyed 
  • Defining Event: Aerodynamic stall/spin 
  • Injuries: 2 Fatal 
  • Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General aviation - Instructional

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/194471/pdf

https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=194471

On June 14, 2024, at 1248 eastern daylight time, a Piper PA-28-140 airplane, N515DH, was destroyed when it was involved in an accident near Siler City, North Carolina. The flight instructor and student pilot were fatally injured. The airplane was operated by Executive Flight Training and Services LLC as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 instructional flight.

The flight instructor and student pilot were performing touch-and-go landings at a nearby airport. A second flight instructor for the same operator, who was flying another airplane in the same traffic pattern, observed the accident airplane perform a touch-and-go landing. As the second airplane approached the left base leg of the traffic pattern, the accident flight crew asked for his position and then requested, “Can you extend, we’re having an issue.” There were no further communications from the accident airplane. 

A witness near the runway reported that the accident airplane looked like it was “flying sideways” during takeoff. As it climbed east of the runway, the airplane “almost rolled over on its side and went into a nosedive” before impacting the ground. A postimpact fire ensued. 

Postaccident examination of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. Although the weather conditions at the time of the accident were conducive to serious carburetor icing at glide power, the propeller damage and static tachometer indication were consistent with the engine’s production of cruise power at impact. 

According to ADS-B data, the track resumed near the departure end of the runway 10 ft above ground level (agl) and a groundspeed of 66 kts. During the next 25 seconds, the accident airplane climbed and turned about 90° to the left. The final ADS-B target showed the airplane about 185 ft agl at a groundspeed of 71 knots (kts) before the track data ended near the accident site. 

Postmortem toxicology testing of specimens from the flight instructor was consistent with recent use of cannabis and morphine. Both substances can adversely affect cognitive and psychomotor performance, and the medical review determined that the instructor’s use of these substances, particularly in combination, posed a hazard to flight safety. However, because the potential combined effects could not be predicted and postmortem concentrations could not reliably establish the extent of impairment at the time of the accident, whether drug effects contributed to the accident could not be determined. 

Weather conditions were conducive to serious carburetor icing at glide power, and carburetor icing could have accounted for the issue reported by the flight instructor. However, no witness reported engine roughness or a loss of engine power, and impact and thermal damage prevented determination of the carburetor and induction-system configurations. Additionally, the engine was likely producing cruise power at impact. Therefore, whether carburetor icing may have contributed to the reported issue could not be determined. 

Although the nature of the issue reported by the flight instructor could not be determined, the airplane subsequently entered a low-speed, low-altitude left turn during the initial climb, which increased the airplane’s stall speed; the flight instructor subsequently exceeded the airplane’s critical angle of attack, resulting in an accelerated aerodynamic stall at an altitude too low for recovery.

- Probable Cause: The flight instructor’s failure to maintain airplane control during a low-speed, low-altitude left turn after encountering an undetermined issue during takeoff, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall at an altitude too low for recovery.

Thursday, September 17, 2026

Cessna 441 Conquest II, N128EZ, fatal accident occurred on August 20, 2026, near Cape Newenham Airport (EHM/PAEH), Cape Newenham, Alaska

  • Location: Cape Newenham, AK 
  • Accident Number: WPR26FA309 
  • Date & Time: August 20, 2026, 11:45 Local 
  • Registration: N128EZ 
  • Aircraft: Cessna 441 
  • Injuries: 8 Fatal 
  • Flight Conducted Under: Part 135: Air taxi & commuter - Non-scheduled

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Documents/WPR26FA309%20Prelim.pdf

https://registry.faa.gov/AircraftInquiry/Search/NNumberResult?nNumberTxt=N128EZ

On August 20, 2026, at about 1145 Alaska daylight time, a Cessna 441, N128EZ, was destroyed when it was involved in an accident near Cape Newenham, Alaska. The two pilots and six passengers were fatally injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 135 on-demand air taxi flight. 

Radio communications between Anchorage Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) and the flight crew indicated that, following departure from Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport (ANC), Anchorage, Alaska, the flight crew established communications with the ARTCC while enroute to Cape Newenham LRRS Airport (PAEH), Cape Newenham, Alaska. At the time of departure, the most recent METAR from PAEH reported 10 statute miles (SM) visibility and cloud ceilings at 800 ft above ground level (agl). At about 1016, the flight crew received weather information for PAEH and requested the RNAV Runway 15 approach. The ARTCC subsequently cleared the flight crew to descend at their discretion to 6,000 ft mean sea level (msl). 

At 1027, the controller cleared the flight crew to cross the RNAV (GPS) Runway 15 Initial Approach Fix (IAF), RRLND, at or above 5,000 ft msl and cleared the flight for the RNAV Runway 15 approach. The flight crew responded that they did not want to begin the approach at that time and requested holding instructions. The controller subsequently cleared the flight crew to hold at RRLND with an expected further clearance (EFC) time of 1100. At 1043, the flight crew reported entering the hold at RRLND. The controller acknowledged the report and revised the EFC time to 1130, or earlier upon pilot request. At that time, the Automated Weather Observing System (AWOS) at PAEH reported the wind from 280° at 7 knots 1/4-mile visibility, patches of fog, and overcast 300 ft agl.

At 1102, the flight crew requested and was subsequently cleared by the controller for the RNAV Runway 15 approach. At that time the PAEH AWOS reported 3 miles visibility, mist, and a broken ceiling at 300 ft agl. At 1114, the crew reported they were executing a missed approach, advised the controller that they were operating in visual meteorological conditions, and canceled their IFR clearance. At 1124, the flight crew again contacted ARTCC, reported that the weather conditions at PAEH had improved, and requested an IFR clearance for a second RNAV Runway 15 approach. After confirming the crew could maintain terrain and obstruction clearance to 4,500 ft msl, the controller assigned a transponder code, established radar identification, and cleared the flight for the RNAV Runway 15 approach via IVUXE upon reaching 4,500 ft msl. 

Between 1127 and 1135, the flight crew coordinated with the controller regarding routing for a second RNAV Runway 15 approach. After initially requesting direct routing to IVUXE, the flight crew later requested routing via WAGEN. The controller subsequently cleared the flight crew, upon reaching 4,500 ft msl, to proceed direct to WAGEN, then IVUXE, and direct to PAEH. After reporting level at 4,500 ft msl and later established on the WAGEN-to-IVUXE transition, the flight crew was cleared for the RNAV Runway 15 approach and approved to change frequencies. At that time the PAEH AWOS reported 1/4 mile visibility, fog, and an overcast ceiling at 300 ft agl. No further radio communications were received from the flight crew. 

According to preliminary ADS-B data, the airplane departed from runway 7L at ANC at 0911:54. After departure the airplane climbed to an altitude of about 625 ft msl and initiated a climbing right turn to a southwest heading. 

At 0924:29, the airplane climbed through an altitude of about 16,175 ft msl and entered a right turn to a westerly heading. The data showed the airplane continued climbing to flight level 280 while proceeding west toward PAEH. When the airplane was about 123 miles northeast of the Initial Approach Fix (IAF) RRLND, it began a descent. The airplane crossed RRLND at about 10,375 ft msl and subsequently performed a series of descending turns in the vicinity of the GPS fix, consistent with holding. 

At 1104:31, while at an altitude of about 4,400 ft msl, the airplane turned westbound toward the Intermediate Fix (IF) IVUXE. At 1107:31, the airplane approached IVUXE at about 2,100 ft msl and initiated a left turn toward the Final Approach Fix (FAF) KRSSS. The last recorded altitude north of KRSSS was about 1,025 ft msl prior to ADS-B contact being lost at 1110:13. When ADS-B resumed at 1111:16, the airplane continued on the final approach, until contact was lost at 1111:40, the airplane was about 2.3 miles north of the Missed Approach Point (MAP) CFKMW at an altitude of about 425 ft msl. (See figure 1.)

ADS-B contact was reestablished at 1114:21 while the airplane was on a northerly heading at about 1,300 ft msl. It continued northbound past IVUXE and approached FELTI (located about 21 miles north of IVUXE) at about 2,100 ft msl. The airplane then completed a 180° left turn to a southerly heading toward IVUXE. At 1130:04, the airplane had climbed to an altitude of 3,925 ft msl and had initiated a right turn to the west, as it approached the WAGEN IAF. Between 1132:40 and 1135:56, there were several periods where ADS-B contact was lost. When ADS-B contact resumed at 1135:56, the airplane was at 4,425 ft msl on an easterly heading toward IVUXE. 

At 1138:15, the airplane was at an altitude of about 2,850 ft msl when it initiated a right turn near IVUXE. At 1141:14, the airplane crossed KRSSS at about 2,400 ft msl and continued southbound along the approach course. At 1143:18, the airplane crossed the MAP CFKMW at about 1,000 ft msl. The airplane continued beyond CFKMW, while it descended to about 600 ft msl, until ADS-B contact was lost at 1143:51. At that time, the airplane was about 1.3 miles north of the runway 15 threshold at PAEH. (See figure 2.)

A review of the RNAV (GPS) RWY 15 instrument approach plate, PAEH, dated 09 July 2026, showed Lateral Navigation (LNAV) Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA) as 1320 ft and 3 miles visibility. The MAP was located 2.2 miles north of the runway 15 threshold. Two cautions were noted: “1) Rwy located on slope of 2306’ mountain. High terrain both sides and S end of rwy.” and “2) Successful go-around improbable if initiated past the MAP.”

Technicians who were stationed at the facility near PAEH provided statements to investigators. One technician stated that he performed a routine inspection of the runway at about 0900 on the morning of the accident. As part of this inspection, he drove the length of the runway to check the condition of the runway surface and to ensure there was no wildlife within 100 yards of the runway. At that time, he did not observe any anomalies or foreign objects on the runway and did not see any wildlife. The technician noted that he typically performs another runway inspection to ensure the runway is clear before an airplane is expected to land; however, he was unable to complete a runway inspection for the accident airplane’s arrival because of thick fog that blanketed the runway. 

According to the second technician, the facility featured a dedicated weather building located about 0.3 miles west of the approach end of runway 15. The building housed an aviation radio and terminal that displayed weather information from the AWOS equipment, which was located near the runway. In addition, charts and photographs in the weather building provided the distances and elevations of nearby landmarks. 

At about 0800 or 0830 on the morning of the accident, the technician placed a phone call to the operator to provide the weather conditions at PAEH. In the hours following this call, the technician observed that the cloud ceilings and visibility had decreased. 

Before the airplane began its first approach to PAEH, the technician went to the weather building. The technician used the radio to relay the conditions indicated by the AWOS, augmented by his observation of the visibility reference points listed on the weather building charts. He noted that when the airplane performed its first approach, a reference point that was 1 7/8 miles away from the weather building was obscured by fog. After the airplane performed the missed approach, the flight crew told the technician that they were going to attempt to land at Platinum Airport (PAPM), Platinum, Alaska, about 23 miles north of PAEH. The technician stated that, after the airplane’s first approach, he initially could see small areas of blue sky to the north, but the visibility at PAEH had diminished further. 

Several minutes later, the flight crew reestablished radio contact with the technician, stating that they had been unable to contact PAPM on the radio and wanted to perform a second approach to PAEH. The technician stated that, by the time the airplane had begun its second approach, none of visibility reference points were visible, and he could no longer see the runway. When the flight crew reported they were two minutes out, the technician relayed the AWOS weather reading and noted to himself that he did not have any visual references from the weather building. 

Shortly thereafter, the technician heard “normal motor sounds” as the airplane approached the runway. He then heard the engines “throttle up,” followed by a “backfire,” after which the sounds ceased. After unsuccessful attempts to locate the airplane on ground or to contact the flight crew by radio, the technician and other personnel from the facility began to search for the airplane. The wreckage was located in an area of rising terrain about 0.5 miles west of the approach end of runway 15. 

Examination of the accident site revealed the first identifiable point of contact (FIPC) was an area of disturbed rocks measuring about 6 ft by 6 ft, which exhibited evidence of fire, at an elevation of about 610 ft mean sea level (msl). The debris path extended approximately 160 ft on a true heading of about 250° and continued upslope onto a small, relatively level rocky area. The main wreckage came to rest on its left side on a true heading of approximately 120°, about 160 ft from the FIPC. Wreckage distributed along the debris path included fragments of the wings, fuselage, propeller blades, flaps, and ailerons. All major structural components of the airplane were identified at the accident site. 

The wreckage is pending recovery to a secure location for further examination.