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.
Elko, NV
This was the first flight after an annual inspection had been performed. Prior to the initial takeoff, the airplane was taxi tested with no discrepancies noted. The pilot stated that the engine started easily and ran smoothly at lower rpm settings. An engine run-up was conducted, which included a magneto check, with no anomalies experienced. During the takeoff roll, the pilot noted that the engine did not produce full power. He elected to continue the takeoff, and noted that the rpm did not go above 1,600. He attempted to turn back to the runway to land. As he made the crosswind to downwind turn, the left wing stalled. The airplane pitched down and fell about 50 feet to the ground. The engine was inspected, and found to have weak compression in two cylinders. The examination further revealed that there were leaks coming from the intake and exhaust valves of both cylinders. No further discrepancies were noted.
The pilot's failure to reject the takeoff after noting that the engine would not produce takeoff power.
On June 19, 1999, at 1400 hours Pacific daylight time, a Piper J3C-65, N26842, impacted terrain after takeoff from the Elko Muni-J.C. Harris Field, Elko, Nevada. The airplane, operated under 14 CFR Part 91, sustained substantial damage. The commercial pilot/owner, the sole occupant, was not injured. Visual meteorological conditions existed for the local area personal flight and no flight plan was filed. The pilot stated that the airplane had received an annual inspection in June 1999. Prior to initial takeoff, the airplane was taxi tested for about 2 hours, and the engine started easily and ran smoothly at the lower rpm setting. On the run-up before takeoff, the pilot performed the magneto check with no discrepancies noted. During the takeoff roll, the pilot noted that the engine did not produce full power. On the initial climb he noted a further loss of power and decay in airspeed. He stated that he thought there was something wrong with the engine because the rpm would not go above 1,600; however, he elected to continue the takeoff. After becoming airborne there was a further loss of airspeed. He attempted to turn back to the runway for landing, but as he was making the crosswind turn to the downwind leg, the left wing stalled and the aircraft "fell 50 feet to the ground." In the pilot's written statement to the Safety Board, he indicated that he should have aborted the takeoff sooner. An airworthiness inspector from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspected the airplane. The FAA inspector stated that this was the first flight after an annual inspection had been performed. The inspector further noted that the engine never fully developed power and the pilot elected to continue the takeoff resulting in a further loss of engine power and subsequent crash. During the engine inspection he observed the number 2 cylinder compression ratio was 14/80 with excessive exhaust and intake valve leaks, and the number 3 cylinder compression ratio was 20/80 with an excessive intake valve leak. No further discrepancies were noted.