Overall Trends
Total, fatal, and serious accidents in the selected range.
Search investigations, review source evidence, monitor watched reports, and trace long-term patterns from one calm, data-first workspace.
Fast key and full-text search with live filters, watches, and precise metadata.
Use quotes for exact phrase matches (for example "fuel selector valve").
Track fatal and non-fatal accident patterns across Part 91, Part 135, and Part 121 operations.
Major cases, deep-report coverage, and investigation media across decades of NTSB history.
Move quickly by aircraft, airport, operator, and time with indexes built for research, not wandering.
NTSB Reports is an independent research and search tool for public aviation accident and incident records. It brings NTSB aviation reports, structured fields, docket files, extracted figures, photos, videos, and update history into one searchable interface.
The goal is practical safety education: make it faster to find relevant investigations, compare similar events, review factual records, and understand the evidence behind probable-cause and preliminary reports.
The investigative work and source records belong to the National Transportation Safety Board and the published investigation record. This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the NTSB.
Lawrenceville, GA
The student pilot elected to go flying after finishing work at a local pizza restaurant, which he stated was his habit. His wife and 3 friends accompanied him. He reported that his preflight inspection did not include draining the fuel gascolator, as listed in the owners' handbook. The first take off attempt on the same flight was delayed when the engine quit during runup. The pilot believed the engine had quit because the primer was not fully closed. After pushing the airplane back to the ramp, it remained stationary until a second start was accomplished. During the ensuing initial climb after take off the engine lost power. The pilot said the airplane began turning and diving to the right so, he tried to apply back pressure to the yoke and a little rudder. He stated that he heard the stall warning horn when the engine power decreased. The airplane was equipped with a stall warning light, only. The pilot had recorded 4 flights in a Cessna 152 and 7 flights in the PA28. Passengers on the airplane stated that after take off the nose was pitched up abnormally high, then the airplane rolled and descended to impact. Examination of the fuel system revealed water contamination.
THE PILOT'S FAILURE TO MAINTAIN AIRCRAFT CONTROL WHICH RESULTED IN AN INADVERTENT STALL, AND HIS IMPROPER EXECUTION OF EMERGENCY PROCEDURES. FACTORS WERE THE PILOT'S OVERCONFIDENCE, HIS INADEQUATE PREFLIGHT INSPECTION WHEN HE FAILED TO DRAIN THE GASCOLATOR, THE WATER CONTAMINATION IN THE FUEL, AND THE LEAKING FUEL TANK CAP.
THE STUDENT PILOT ELECTED TO GO FLYING AFTER FINISHING WORK AT A LOCAL PIZZA RESTAURANT, WHICH HE STATED WAS HIS HABIT. HIS WIFE AND 3 FRIENDS ACCOMPANIED HIM. HE REPORTED THAT HIS PREFLIGHT INSPECTION DID NOT INCLUDE DRAINING THE FUEL GASCOLATOR, AS LISTED IN THE OWNERS' HANDBOOK. THE FIRST TAKE OFF ATTEMPT ON THE SAME FLIGHT WAS DELAYED WHEN THE ENGINE QUIT DURING RUNUP. THE PILOT BELIEVED THE ENGINE HAD QUIT BECAUSE THE PRIMER WAS NOT FULLY CLOSED. AFTER PUSHING THE AIRPLANE BACK TO THE RAMP, IT REMAINED STATIONARY UNTIL A SECOND START WAS ACCOMPLISHED. DURING THE ENSUING INITIAL CLIMB AFTER TAKE OFF THE ENGINE LOST POWER. THE PILOT SAID THE AIRPLANE BEGAN TURNING AND DIVING TO THE RIGHT SO, HE TRIED TO APPLY BACK PRESSURE TO THE YOKE AND A LITTLE RUDDER. HE STATED THAT HE HEARD THE STALL WARNING HORN WHEN THE ENGINE POWER DECREASED. THE AIRPLANE WAS EQUIPPED WITH A STALL WARNING LIGHT, ONLY. THE PILOT HAD RECORDED 4 FLIGHTS IN A CESSNA 152 AND 7 FLIGHTS IN THE PA28. PASSENGERS ON THE AIRPLANE STATED THAT AFTER TAKE OFF THE NOSE WAS PITCHED UP ABNORMALLY HIGH, THEN THE AIRPLANE ROLLED AND DESCENDED TO IMPACT. EXAMINATION OF THE FUEL SYSTEM REVEALED WATER CONTAMINATION.