Controlled flight into terr/obj (CFIT): Cessna 172N Skyhawk, N737VC, fatal accident occurred on January 23, 2024, near Weston, Florida

• Location: Weston, Florida 
• Accident Number: ERA24FA096 
• Date & Time: January 23, 2024, 18:44 Local 
• Registration: N737VC 
• Aircraft: Cessna 172 
• Aircraft Damage: Substantial 
• Defining Event: Controlled flight into terr/obj (CFIT) 
• Injuries: 2 Fatal 
• Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General aviation - Personal

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/193703/pdf

https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=193703

On January 23, 2024, about 1844 eastern standard time, a Cessna 172N, N737VC, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Weston, Florida. Both commercial pilots were fatally injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight.

The pilots onboard the accident airplane took off under visual flight rules at night, and after about 8 minutes, turned toward an undeveloped wetland area where there was little to no ground lighting. About that time, the right-seat pilot sent a text message along with a photograph describing how dark it was outside. As the airplane continued flying, ADS-B data showed that its altitude varied between 1,600 and 1,000 ft before it began to descend at a rate of about 1,700 ft per minute; at the last ADS-B observed position, the descent rate had increased to 3,400 ft per minute. The airplane impacted the swampy area below about 1,000 ft beyond that last track data point.

A postaccident examination of the wreckage found no evidence of any preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. It could not be definitively determined which pilot was flying the airplane; however, it is likely that the left-seat pilot, who had rented the airplane, was flying with the right seat pilot monitoring (based on statements from the operator). The investigation was also unable to determine the night or instrument currency of either the left- or right-seat pilot, as no logbooks were found for the left-seat pilot and the last non-draft electronic logbook entry for the right-seat pilot was from a year before the accident.

Postmortem toxicological testing of samples from the left-seat pilot performed by the local medical examiner detected methamphetamine in blood and urine, whereas testing by the FAA Forensic Sciences Laboratory did not detect methamphetamine in blood, urine, or liver tissue. Neither laboratory detected the methamphetamine metabolite amphetamine. Even if only the peripheral blood methamphetamine level measured by one laboratory was considered, that level would not be indicative of whether methamphetamine was used medicinally or recreationally, nor would that level indicate specific associated effects, which might range from improved reaction time and decreased fatigue to increased risk-tolerance and psychomotor impairment. Some conditions that might be treated with methamphetamine also are potentially impairing, but the reviewed FAA medical certification and death investigation information for the left-seat pilot did not document any such condition. Overall, the left-seat pilot’s postmortem toxicological results were unclear as to his potential impairment. The low level of ethanol detected in the right-seat pilot’s blood, and the fact that ethanol was not detected in vitreous fluid or urine, indicated that some or all of the small amount of detected ethanol may have been from postmortem sources, and that the right-seat pilot was unlikely to have been impaired by ethanol effects at the time of the accident.

The circumstances of this accident were consistent with the pilots experiencing spatial disorientation, most likely somatogravic illusion. An aircraft performance study found the apparent pitch angle (or the angle that would be “felt” by the pilots’ vestibular systems) remained nearly nose-level during the initial 20-seconds of the final descent. The night lighting conditions, and particularly the limited cultural lighting along the flightpath, would have made it difficult for the pilots to recognize that the airplane was descending if they were trying to utilize outside visual references to fly the airplane. By the time the pilots may have realized the airplane was descending, it would likely have been at an altitude too low for recovery.

- Probable Cause: The pilots’ spatial disorientation in dark night visual meteorological conditions, which resulted in their failure to maintain altitude and a subsequent descent and impact with a swamp.

Loss of control in flight: Air Creation Twin, N4425L, fatal accident occurred on March 17, 2024, at Gila Bend Municipal Airport (E63), Gila Bend, Arizona

• Location: Gila Bend, Arizona 
• Accident Number: WPR24FA112 
• Date & Time: March 17, 2024, 09:42 Local 
• Registration: N4425L 
• Aircraft: HOLMES WILLIAM B AIR CREATION TWIN 
• Aircraft Damage: Substantial 
• Defining Event: Loss of control in flight 
• Injuries: 1 Fatal, 1 Minor 
• Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General aviation - Instructional 

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/193945/pdf

https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=193945

On March 17, 2024, about 0942 mountain standard time, an experimental light-sport weightshift control Air Creation Twin, N4425L, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Gila Bend, Arizona. The pilot sustained fatal injuries and the passenger sustained minor injuries. The aircraft was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 instructional flight.

The non-pilot-rated passenger in the front seat reported that he was in the process of purchasing the weight-shift-control aircraft from the pilot seated in the rear seat. The pilot was providing the passenger with instruction to gain flight experience and to familiarize him with the flight characteristics of the aircraft. Before departure, the pilot briefed the passenger that they would take off and fly in the local area then return to the airport to practice touch-and-go takeoffs and landings. The pilot briefed that the passenger would fly the approach and that the pilot would perform the landing.

The passenger reported that the flight was about 45 minutes and they had performed one touch-and-go. During the second approach, on the final leg of the airport traffic pattern, the passenger was on the controls, the pilot called out “my airplane” and took the flight controls. The aircraft drifted to the right of the runway centerline and overflew the unimproved desert surface that consisted of brush and mesquite trees. The pilot increased the engine power and maneuvered the aircraft to the left toward the runway. During the descending left turn back to the runway, the aircraft’s approach speed was fast, and the aircraft collided with a 10-ft tall mesquite tree, subsequently impacting the ground about 85 ft to the right of the runway surface. The passenger reported that the engine sounded strong, and there were no observable aircraft malfunctions before the collision with the tree. The nearest weather reporting facility, 5 miles from the accident site, recorded calm wind at the time of the accident.

Postaccident examination of the aircraft revealed no anomalies with the airframe or engine that would have contributed to a loss of control.

- Probable Cause: The pilot’s loss of control and subsequent collision with a mesquite tree on approach to land.

VFR encounter with IMC: Cessna 208A Cargomaster, N40EA, fatal accident occurred on February 14, 2025, near Pierson, Florida

• Location: Pierson, Florida 
• Accident Number: ERA25FA119 
• Date & Time: February 14, 2025, 18:40 Local 
• Registration: N40EA 
• Aircraft: Cessna 208 
• Aircraft Damage: Substantial 
• Defining Event: VFR encounter with IMC 
• Injuries: 1 Fatal 
• Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General aviation - Positioning

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/199705/pdf

https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=199705

On February 14, 2025, about 1840 eastern standard time, a Cessna 208, N40EA, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Pierson, Florida. The commercial pilot was fatally injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 positioning flight.

The pilot was conducting a visual flight rules (VFR) cross-country repositioning flight at dusk in preparation for skydiving activities the following morning. Although he had accumulated more than 8,600 total flight hours, he did not hold an instrument rating.

The ADS-B data for the flight showed that the pilot did not fly a direct route to the destination airport and that the airplane’s altitude varied throughout the flight. During the first half of the flight, the pilot flew the airplane northbound along a major interstate at an altitude of about 1,700 ft mean sea level (msl). He then turned left and flew the airplane west over a city and climbed to 3,100 ft msl before turning right to the north-northeast. Weather conditions along the latter portion of the route included areas of low ceilings and cloud cover. The airplane’s meandering flight path was consistent with a pilot attempting to avoid entering instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) and/or using ground lighting and roadways to navigate and maintain visual references.

The ADS-B data showed that, in the final minute of the flight, the airplane entered a descending 180° turn to the right, and the descent rate increased steadily to greater than 12,000 ft per minute (fpm) until the data ended. Although the pilot’s initiation of the right turn may have been an attempt to avoid or exit IMC, a review of available weather information revealed that, about the time of the right turn, the airplane likely encountered and remained in IMC consisting of significantly reduced visibility and low ceilings while flying over a rural area with few ground lights or other visual references.

Loss of external visual references during VFR flight presents a high risk of spatial disorientation and loss of control. Several risk factors for spatial disorientation were present in this accident: the pilot did not have an instrument rating and, thus, likely had limited experience flying in instrument meteorological conditions; the weather conditions included reduced visibility and low ceilings; and the flight occurred near dusk which would further limit the pilot’s ability to maintain outside visual reference when flying in areas of limited ground cultural lighting. Based on these factors, and the rapidly descending flight path and severely fragmented wreckage consistent with a high-energy impact, the pilot likely experienced spatial disorientation after entering IMC and subsequently lost control of the airplane.

A postaccident examination of the wreckage revealed no evidence of any preimpact mechanical malfunction or failure that would have precluded normal operation. Although the pilot’s age, history of high blood pressure (which he reported at his most recent aviation medical examination), and possible diabetes or prediabetes (as suggested by the metformin detected by postmortem toxicological testing) were associated with some increased risk of having impairing cardiovascular disease, the pilot’s autopsy was too limited by injury to provide significant information about his cardiovascular health at the time of the accident. Although potentially impairing effects of diabetes, including fatigue and vision changes, could not be excluded based on the available medical evidence, the circumstances of the accident did not indicate that medical factors likely contributed to the accident.

- Probable Cause: The non-instrument-rated pilot’s continued visual flight into instrument meteorological conditions, which resulted in spatial disorientation and a subsequent loss of control.

Turbulence encounter: Airbus A321-211, N189UW, accident occurred on June 22, 2025, near Miami, Florida

• Location: Miami, Florida 
• Accident Number: DCA25LA240 
• Date & Time: June 22, 2025, Local 
• Registration: N189UW 
• Aircraft: AIRBUS INDUSTRIE A321-211 
• Aircraft Damage: None 
• Defining Event: Turbulence encounter 
• Injuries: 1 Serious, 9 Minor, 179 None 
• Flight Conducted Under: Part 121: Air carrier - Scheduled

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/200362/pdf

https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=200362

American Airlines flight 1286 (AAL1286) encountered unexpected convectively induced turbulence (CIT) while at 25,000 ft (FL250) about 17 minutes after departure from Miami International Airport (MIA), Miami, Florida. One flight attendant (FA) received a serious injury, and 3 FAs and 6 passengers received minor injuries. The seatbelt sign was illuminated at the time of the event. No significant convective weather or turbulence was forecasted or depicted during the flight crew’s flight planning or displayed on the onboard weather radar, or WSI weather app before the event.

At the time of the event, multiple FAs were conducting cabin service with beverage carts positioned in the aisle, and one passenger was occupying the aft lavatory. The turbulence lasted about 5 to 8 seconds and consisted of abrupt vertical accelerations, resulting in multiple FAs being thrown to the floor or striking interior cabin structures, unsecured service items becoming airborne, and damage to the aft lavatory door.

AAL1286 flight crew indicated they had the airborne radar tilt up to 3.5 degrees during the period and likely scanned over the area. Airborne radar does not detect echoes less than 20 dBZ, while echoes of 45 dBZ were detected under the flight track. The model High-Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) sounding indicated a potential for updrafts to 144 knots or 4,173 fpm, and an unstable atmosphere.

Following the turbulence encounter, the captain transferred control to the first officer and communicated with the cabin crew to assess injuries. A deadheading captain assisted with cabin coordination and injury assessment. The flight crew contacted dispatch and MedLink and declared an emergency with air traffic control. Based on medical guidance and aircraft position, the decision was made to continue to Raleigh-Durham International Airport (RDU), North Carolina. The airplane landed without further incident. Emergency medical personnel met the flight upon arrival at RDU, and injured crew members and at least one passenger were transported to local hospitals for evaluation and treatment. One FA was diagnosed with a fracture to her arm.

A review of the weather conditions indicated that there were no frontal boundaries over the area and no organized jet streams or strong winds aloft to indicate any potential clear air turbulence (CAT). While the NWS convective outlook expected a widely scattered area of general thunderstorms over Florida and the surrounding coastal waters during the time period. The High-level Significant Weather Prognostic Chart indicated no organized areas of convection or turbulence over the general route of flight, and no PIREPs or inflight weather advisories for thunderstorms or turbulence were current at the time of the turbulence encounter.

A review of the NWS weather surveillance radar 1988 doppler (WSR88D) and satellite imagery showed an area of scattered echoes over central Florida and off the Florida coast between the Bahamas Islands. A review of the flight path confirmed that the flight over flew an area of developing echoes near 45 dBZ which rapidly increased in height between FL250 to FL420 surrounding the period, while the GOES-19 infrared image indicated radiative cloud tops near FL380 at the time of the turbulence encounter. Several cloud-to-ground lightning strikes were noted with the echoes after the flight had overflown the area of echoes. Thus, other than the flight’s airborne weather radar no visual clues were available prior to the encounter.

A HRRR numerical model indicated an unstable atmosphere with potential strong updrafts or maximum vertical velocities (MVV) near to 14,173 fpm. The Eddy Dissipation Rate (EDR) recorded by the accident flight was 0.665 which corresponded to the upper bounds of severe turbulence for a medium weight category aircraft.

A review of the astronomical conditions indicated that official nighttime conditions existed at the time of the encounter with no illumination from the Moon, which was more than 30 degrees below the horizon at the time of the encounter.

- Probable Cause: The unexpected encounter with a rapidly developing convective cell during climb resulting in convectively induced turbulence on a dark moon-less evening.

Prop/jet/rotor blast/suction: Airbus A319-131, N822UA, accident occurred on July 18, 2025, at Santa Barbara Municipal Airport (SBA/KSBA), Santa Barbara, California

• Location: Santa Barbara, California 
• Accident Number: DCA25LA268 
• Date & Time: July 18, 2025, 17:35 Local 
• Registration: N822UA 
• Aircraft: AIRBUS INDUSTRIE A319-131 
• Aircraft Damage: None 
• Defining Event: Prop/jet/rotor blast/suction 
• Injuries: 1 Serious, 133 None 
• Flight Conducted Under: Part 121: Air carrier - Scheduled

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/200619/pdf

https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=200619

On arrival at Santa Barbara Municipal Airport (SBA), Santa Barbara, California, United Airlines flight 2428 (UAL2428), operating from San Francisco International Airport (SFO), San Francisco, California, experienced multiple electrical system fault indications after landing and during taxi-in. Following the aircraft’s arrival at its gate, a ramp service agent sustained serious injuries after entering the jet blast area of an engine that remained running during ramp operations. No damage to the aircraft was reported.

The flight crew reported that the flight segment from SFO to SBA was uneventful. After landing and clearing the runway, the first officer (FO), who was the pilot monitoring, started the auxiliary power unit (APU) and conducted the after-landing checklist. The captain, who was the pilot flying, taxied the airplane toward gate 2, where ramp personnel were positioned to receive the aircraft.

As the airplane approached the stopping point at the gate, the Electronic Centralized Aircraft Monitoring (ECAM) system annunciated a Level 2 caution chime and light with a “ELEC APU GEN FAULT” on the Engine/Warning Display. The captain verbalized “ECAM” and instructed the FO to “Stand by” on the ECAM procedure as the captain prioritized their parking guidance. Upon reaching the designated gate stop point, the marshaller signaled the flight crew to stop the airplane, and the captain set the parking brake. The FO subsequently shut down the Number 2 (right) engine in accordance with the standard parking procedure.

Immediately following the right engine shutdown, the flight crew observed multiple ECAM fault messages, including an intermittent right engine fire warning accompanied by an aural alert and illumination of associated warning lights. The indication cleared within several seconds. With the left engine still running and the aircraft beacon still on the captain instructed the FO to begin ECAM actions to try and get the APU GEN back online. The flight crew attempted to reset the APU generator; however, the fault condition persisted. The crew then requested ground power before shutting down the remaining Number 1 (left) engine. Ramp personnel informed the crew that jet bridge power could not be connected while the left engine was still operating. A portable ground power unit (GPU) was subsequently retrieved and connected to the aircraft. After verifying that external power was available, the flight crew shut down the left engine and completed the parking checklist. According to the captain, the elapsed time from parking brake set to engine shutdown was approximately 10 minutes.

Once the aircraft was secured, the captain and FO coordinated with United Maintenance Control to troubleshoot the electrical system faults. During this time, the FO was informed by the ramp lead that one of the ground crew members, serving as a wing walker, had sustained a serious injury from jet blast while the left engine remained running. According to the ramp lead, the injured wing walker approached the aircraft prematurely to place chalks at the main landing gear and entered the jet blast zone without confirming that the left engine had been shut down. The ramp lead indicated that the employee was relatively new and may have misinterpreted marshalling procedures, potentially confusing the procedures with those used by other carriers operating at SBA.

According to United, there were 5 ground crew members in place to bring in UAL2428. The marshaller was behind the aircraft nose stop mark, one wing walker was on the left-wing side of the airplane, the lead ramp agent and the right wing walker was at the right-wing side of the airplane, and another support ramp agent was by the jetbridge to handle the chocks and other arrival duties. Once the aircraft came to a stop, the marshaller gave the X signal (stop), and the support agent placed the nose landing gear chocks.

The support ramp agent does not need an all-clear signal to chock the nose landing gear, as this position is not exposed to engine jet blast. The marshaller then gave the hand signal to the flight crew indicating that the aircraft was chocked and lowered his hands. Standard procedure requires the left and right wing walkers—who are potentially exposed to engine jet blast—to wait for an all-clear signal from the marshaller before approaching the airplane to chock the main landing gear.

The injured ramp service agent (left wing walker) indicated that he was waiting for the “safe-to-approach” signal from the marshaller but was uncertain whether he misinterpreted the signal or received it in error. He proceeded behind the left engine while carrying wheel chocks, unaware that the engine was still operating. He recalled being struck by jet blast and falling onto his left side, sustaining multiple injuries. He reported experiencing shock and was unable to feel pain immediately after impact. Nearby personnel assisted him and transported him to the on-site emergency response vehicle. The injured agent reported that he was not distracted or under time pressure and had already serviced four flights that day.

The lead ramp agent stated that the ramp experienced a brief delay due to the ongoing electrical issue reported by the flight crew. During this time, the injured ramp agent appeared to misinterpret the marshaller’s gestures as the all-clear signal and began approaching the aircraft carrying two wheel chocks. The lead agent observed that the anti-collision beacon remained illuminated and that the left engine was still operating. He attempted to radio the injured agent to stop, but the agent did not appear to have heard the transmission. Moments later, the agent was struck by the exhaust blast from the operating left engine resulting in the agent being thrown to the ground.

Following the accident, United issued a safety alert reminding the employees that aircraft must only be approached after marshallers give the “Safe to Approach” signal and only after confirming the nose gear is chocked, both engines are fully shut down and spooled down, the beacon light is off, and emphasizing “when in doubt, wait.”

- Probable Cause: The ramp worker’s premature entry into the jet blast hazard area of an operating engine due to his failure to maintain situational awareness and his misinterpretation of the marshaller’s hand signals.

Turbulence encounter: Embraer ERJ-175LR, N229JQ, accident occurred on July 21, 2025, near Jacksonville, Florida

• Location: Jacksonville, Georgia 
• Accident Number: DCA25LA269 
• Date & Time: July 21, 2025, 13:01 Local 
• Registration: N229JQ 
• Aircraft: EMBRAER-EMPRESA BRASILEIRA DE ERJ 170-200 LR 
• Aircraft Damage: None 
• Defining Event: Turbulence encounter 
• Injuries: 1 Serious, 79 None 
• Flight Conducted Under: Part 121: Air carrier - Scheduled

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/200620/pdf

https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=200620

Republic Airways, dba Delta Connection, flight 5826 encountered unanticipated moderate turbulence while deviating around convective weather during climb-out from Jacksonville International Airport (JAX), Jacksonville, Florida en route to General Edward Lawrence Logan International Airport (BOS), Boston, Massachusetts. The turbulence occurred as the airplane passed through approximately 10,000 feet and resulted in a serious injury to a flight attendant (FA). Following the event, the flight diverted to Washington Dulles International Airport (IAD), Dulles, Virginia.

Before the event flight, the flight crew had completed an inbound leg from BOS to JAX during which they experienced light turbulence during descent, between 6,000 ft and landing. Before departure, the captain conducted a standard crew briefing and advised the FAs that “light chop” was expected during climbout, with smoother conditions anticipated during cruise. The captain was the pilot flying (PF) for the return flight to Boston.

During climbout, the captain observed cloud tops along the flight path at about 10,000 ft and believed the flight would skim the tops. However, the airplane passed through the cloud tops, and immediately encountered light chop, which intensified into moderate turbulence. The captain selected manual speed control and maintained 250 knots while climbing through the area.

The first officer made the “10,000 ft” callout and turned off the sterile cockpit light (which informs the FAs that the flight is above 10,000 feet) prior to the onset of moderate turbulence.

Shortly after the turbulence encounter, the “B” FA contacted the flight crew and reported that the “A” FA had fallen in the aft galley and appeared to be injured. The captain transferred airplane control and radio communications to the first officer so that she could handle the injury situation. The captain contacted dispatch and was subsequently connected to StatMD medical services, who advised they apply ice and administer acetaminophen from the Emergency Medical Kit.

The flight crew and dispatch discussed if the flight should continue to BOS or divert to a closer airport. After determining that the “A” FA could not perform her duties due to her injuries, dispatch recommended the flight divert to IAD.

After the injury, the “B” FA assumed the “A” FA’s duties in the forward cabin, and the injured FA remained seated in the aft jumpseat. Medical personnel met the airplane upon arrival at the gate and transported the injured FA to the hospital where she was diagnosed with a broken ankle.

- Probable Cause: The airplane’s encounter with unanticipated moderate turbulence.

Evacuation: Airbus A220-300, C-GYLQ, accident occurred on August 31, 2024, at Denver International Airport (DEN/KDEN), Denver, Colorado

• Location: Denver, Colorado 
• Accident Number: DCA25LA308 
• Date & Time: August 31, 2025, 09:00 Local 
• Registration: C-GYLQ 
• Aircraft: Airbus Canada BD500 
• Aircraft Damage: None 
• Defining Event: Evacuation 
• Injuries: 1 Serious, 123 None 
• Flight Conducted Under: Part 129: Foreign 

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/200905/pdf

https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=200905

Air Canada flight 1038, a scheduled international passenger flight from Denver International Airport (DEN), Denver, Colorado, to Toronto Pearson International Airport (YYZ), Mississauga, Ontario, Canada, experienced smoke and an electrical odor in the cabin, resulting in an air turnback. After landing, an evacuation was initiated, and one passenger sustained a serious injury.

According to the flight crew, during climb out, the flight attendants (FAs) informed them of an electrical burning odor in the aft cabin. The flight crew turned the power to the aft galley off, but the FAs stated the odor was getting stronger and that they observed haze in the cabin. At that time, the flight crew declared an emergency and coordinated with air traffic control for a return to DEN.

After landing, the flight crew stopped the aircraft on the runway and contacted the flight attendants to get an update on the situation in the cabin. The FAs stated that the situation was worse and that passengers were experiencing eye irritation. At that time, the captain commanded an evacuation.

During the evacuation, FAs observed passengers standing on both wings. One FA exited onto each wing and assisted with the overwing evacuations. A passenger sustained a serious injury to their right ankle and was unable to move away from the slide. At that time, passengers were redirected into the cabin and out the left overwing exit. The remainder of the evacuation was uneventful.

Post-event evaluation revealed burned debris on the baffle plate, carriers, and tray installed in an aft galley oven.

- Probable Cause: Unidentified burned debris in an aft galley oven, which generated smoke and odor in the cabin and led to an air turnback and subsequent evacuation, during which a serious injury occurred.