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.
Springfield, OH
THE PLT WAS MAKING A CONTRACT CARGO FLT UNDER FAR 91 RULES AND HAD EXPERIENCED ICG ENROUTE. WHEN JUST PAST DAYTON, HE INDICATED THAT HE 'HAD A LITTLE FUEL PROBLEM' AND NEEDED TO GET INTO OSU WITHOUT DELAYS. A SHORT TIME LATER HE INDICATED THAT HE NEEDED TO GO TO THE NEAREST AIRPORT. HE WAS VECTORED TOWARD SGH FOR LDG. HE THEN INDICATED THAT HE HAD LOST AN ENGINE AND A SHORT TIME LATER INDICATED THAT HE HAD LOST THE OTHER ENGINE. THE ACFT CRASHED IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA. THERE WAS NO FIRE AND ONLY RESIDUAL FUEL WAS FOUND IN THE AIRPLANE. THE COMPANY PRESIDENT INDICATED THAT HE DID NOT ENCOURAGE HIS PILOTS TO CARRY 'EXCESS FUEL'. IT WAS REPORTED THAT THIS PILOT, ALONG WITH OTHERS, HAD BEEN 'CHEWED OUT' FOR CARRYING 'EXCESS FUEL'. THE OPERATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED UNDER FAR 135 RULES SINCE THE COMPANY HAD RETAINED OPERATIONAL CONTROL OF THE OPERATION.
FUEL EXHAUSTION PRECIPATATED BY THE INADEQUATE FUEL CONSUMPTION CALCULATIONS PERFORMED BY THE PILOT, PRESSURE FROM THE COMPANY PRESIDENT TO NOT CARRY EXCESS FUEL AND IMPROPER IN-FLIGHT PLANNING/DECISIONS BY THE PILOT BY NOT REFUELING ENROUTE BEFORE FUEL WAS EXHAUSTED. CONTRIBUTING TO THE ACCIDENT WAS THE INADEQUATE SURVEILLANCE AND CERTIFICATION OF THE OPERATOR BY THE FAA.
THE PLT WAS MAKING A CONTRACT CARGO FLT UNDER FAR 91 RULES AND HAD EXPERIENCED ICG ENROUTE. WHEN JUST PAST DAYTON, HE INDICATED THAT HE 'HAD A LITTLE FUEL PROBLEM' AND NEEDED TO GET INTO OSU WITHOUT DELAYS. A SHORT TIME LATER HE INDICATED THAT HE NEEDED TO GO TO THE NEAREST AIRPORT. HE WAS VECTORED TOWARD SGH FOR LDG. HE THEN INDICATED THAT HE HAD LOST AN ENGINE AND A SHORT TIME LATER INDICATED THAT HE HAD LOST THE OTHER ENGINE. THE ACFT CRASHED IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA. THERE WAS NO FIRE AND ONLY RESIDUAL FUEL WAS FOUND IN THE AIRPLANE. THE COMPANY PRESIDENT INDICATED THAT HE DID NOT ENCOURAGE HIS PILOTS TO CARRY 'EXCESS FUEL'. IT WAS REPORTED THAT THIS PILOT, ALONG WITH OTHERS, HAD BEEN 'CHEWED OUT' FOR CARRYING 'EXCESS FUEL'. THE OPERATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED UNDER FAR 135 RULES SINCE THE COMPANY HAD RETAINED OPERATIONAL CONTROL OF THE OPERATION.