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.
Knox, IN
This airplane was involved in a near collision with another airplane while in positive control airspace. Both airplanes took evasive action. Visibility was reported by both flight crews as being reduced by the presence of cirrus clouds with no visible horizon. This airplane had acknowledged and responded to a turn instruction issued to a third airplane with a similar call sign, and turned to a heading which put the two involved airplanes on an intersecting course. The turn instruction was challenged by the airplane for whom it was intended, but the incident airplane was never turned back to its original heading. The error was discovered a short time later by the manual controller and pointed out to the radar controller. He issued turn and climb instructions to the incident airplane along with a traffic advisory. Correlation of the two DFDR readouts with radar track data show that at the point of closest approach, vertical separation was between 95 and 200 ft.
THE RADAR CONTROLLLER'S FAILURE TO MAINTAIN RADAR SEPARATION. FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO THE INCIDENT WERE: MISUNDERSTANDING OF AN ATC INSTRUCTION BY THE PILOT OF THE INCIDENT AIRPLANE, AND UNCLEAR PHRASEOLOGY USED IN THE INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED BY THE RADAR CONTROLLER.
THIS AIRPLANE WAS INVOLVED IN A NEAR COLLISION WITH ANOTHER AIRPLANE WHILE IN POSITIVE CONTROL AIRSPACE. BOTH AIRPLANES TOOK EVASIVE ACTION. VISIBILITY WAS REPORTED BY BOTH FLIGHT CREWS AS BEING REDUCED BY THE PRESENCE OF CIRRUS CLOUDS WITH NO VISIBLE HORIZON. THIS AIRPLANE HAD ACKNOWLEDGED AND RESPONDED TO A TURN INSTRUCTION ISSUED TO A THIRD AIRPLANE WITH A SIMILAR CALL SIGN, AND TURNED TO A HEADING WHICH PUT THE TWO INVOLVED AIRPLANES ON AN INTERSECTING COURSE. THE TURN INSTRUCTION WAS CHALLENGED BY THE AIRPLANE FOR WHOM IT WAS INTENDED, BUT THE INCIDENT AIRPLANE WAS NEVER TURNED BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL HEADING. THE ERROR WAS DISCOVERED A SHORT TIME LATER BY THE MANUAL CONTROLLER AND POINTED OUT TO THE RADAR CONTROLLER. HE ISSUED TURN AND CLIMB INSTRUCTIONS TO THE INCIDENT AIRPLANE ALONG WITH A TRAFFIC ADVISORY. CORRELATION OF THE TWO DFDR READOUTS WITH RADAR TRACK DATA SHOW, THAT AT THE POINT OF CLOSEST APPROACH, VERTICAL SEPARATION WAS BETWEEN 95 AND 200 FT.