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.
Victorville, CA
THE AIRCRAFT OWNER WAS NOT A PILOT AND ENGAGED THE SERVICES OF A LOCAL PILOT TO FLY THE AIRCRAFT FROM A MAINTENANCE FACILITY TO ITS HOME BASE. THE PILOT ASSUMED THAT THE OWNER WAS A PILOT THAT JUST WAS NOT CURRENT AND OBSERVED THE OWNER CONDUCT THE PREFLIGHT. THE PILOT VERBALLY CONFIRMED THE ADEQUACY OF FUEL FOR THE FLIGHT WITH THE OWNER. THE OWNER ESTIMATED ONE HALF TANKS BY FUEL GAUGE, VISUAL, AND DIP STICK INDICATIONS. THE AIRCRAFT DID NOT HAVE ANY EVIDENCE OF FUEL ON BOARD AFTER THE FORCED LANDING AND THE DEPARTURE FUEL WAS ESTIMATED TO BE 10 GALLONS.
THE PILOT'S FAILURE TO CONDUCT AN ADEQUATE PREFLIGHT AND ASSURE THE PROPER QUANTITY OF FUEL ON BOARD FOR THE PROPOSED FLIGHT.
THE AIRCRAFT OWNER WAS NOT A PILOT AND ENGAGED THE SERVICES OF A LOCAL PILOT TO FLY THE AIRCRAFT FROM A MAINTENANCE FACILITY TO ITS HOME BASE. THE PILOT ASSUMED THAT THE OWNER WAS A PILOT THAT JUST WAS NOT CURRENT AND OBSERVED THE OWNER CONDUCT THE PREFLIGHT. THE PILOT VERBALLY CONFIRMED THE ADEQUACY OF FUEL FOR THE FLIGHT WITH THE OWNER. THE OWNER ESTIMATED ONE HALF TANKS BY FUEL GAUGE, VISUAL, AND DIP STICK INDICATIONS. THE AIRCRAFT DID NOT HAVE ANY EVIDENCE OF FUEL ON BOARD AFTER THE FORCED LANDING AND THE DEPARTURE FUEL WAS ESTIMATED TO BE 10 GALLONS.