Loss of control in flight: Cirrus SR22, N831AZ, fatal accident occurred on September 27, 2024, near Provo Airport (PVU/KPVU), Provo, Utah

• Location: Provo, Utah 
• Accident Number: WPR24FA313 
• Date & Time: September 27, 2024, 10:10 Local 
• Registration: N831AZ 
• Aircraft: CIRRUS DESIGN CORP SR22 
• Aircraft Damage: Substantial 
• Defining Event: Loss of control in flight 
• Injuries: 2 Fatal 
• Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General aviation - Personal 

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/195213/pdf

https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=195213

On September 27, 2024, about 1010 mountain daylight time, a Cirrus SR22 airplane, N831AZ, was destroyed when it was involved in an accident near Provo, Utah. The pilot and pilot-rated passenger were fatally injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight.

The pilot was conducting a personal cross-country flight with a pilot-rated passenger when he performed a go-around at the direction of the tower air traffic controller due to an airplane on the runway ahead. He reentered the traffic pattern on the right downwind leg and, after the flight was established on the downwind leg, the controller cleared him to land. About a minute later, the pilot of another airplane on final approach to the same runway observed the accident airplane descend rapidly and rotate three times before the airplane’s parachute deployed and the airplane impacted the water. 

Airport surveillance video showed an airplane approaching the runway and performing a touch-and-go landing. The accident airplane then came into view; about 50 ft above ground level, it climbed and maneuvered to the right before passing out of the camera’s view. The airplanes appeared to be about 200 ft apart. ADS-B data showed that the accident airplane reentered the right downwind leg. A few moments later, as the airplane approached the turn to the base leg, its ground speed decreased, and the airplane turned right while descending. The recorded flight data ended over Utah Lake near the accident location. The airport surveillance video then partially showed the airplane in a steep, nose-down attitude before its parachute began to deploy.

Postaccident examination of the airframe and engine revealed no mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. Based on the available information, the accident sequence was consistent with the pilot’s exceedance of the airplane’s critical angle of attack while maneuvering in the airport traffic pattern for landing, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall, loss of control, spin, and impact with the water.

- Probable Cause: The pilot's exceedance of the airplane’s critical angle of attack while maneuvering for landing, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall and loss of control.

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.