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.
Torrance, CA
THE HELICOPTER WAS ON AN FAA CERTIFICATION TEST FLT WITH A PART-TIME COMPANY EMPLOYEE IN THE LEFT SEAT AS PILOT- IN-COMMAND (PIC). AN FAA TEST PLT WAS IN THE RIGHT SEAT. THE PURPOSE OF THE FLT WAS TO ESTABLISH NEW DATA FOR THE HELICOPTER'S HEIGHT-VELOCITY (HV) CURVE. THE PIC STATED THAT ALL POINTS ALONG THE CURVE HAD BEEN SUCCESSFULLY DEMONSTRATED ON AN EARLIER DATE. AFTER A NUMBER OF AUTOROTATIONS, THE PIC SUCCESSFULLY DEMONSTRATED A SPECIFIC POINT AT 100 FT & 48 KTS. THE FAA PLT THEN TOOK THE CONTROLS & ATTEMPTED TO DUPLICATE THE POINT IN QUESTIONS. THE FLARE FOR THE LANDING DID NOT ARREST THE DESCENT. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE HELICOPTER LANDED HARD & THE MAIN ROTOR SERVED THE TAIL BOOM. BOTH PLTS ADMITTED THAT THEY DID NOT CLEARLY DEFINE THEIR INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITIES PRIOR TO THE FLT.
THE HELICOPTER WAS ON AN FAA CERTIFICATION TEST FLT WITH A PART-TIME COMPANY EMPLOYEE IN THE LEFT SEAT AS PILOT- IN-COMMAND (PIC). AN FAA TEST PLT WAS IN THE RIGHT SEAT. THE PURPOSE OF THE FLT WAS TO ESTABLISH NEW DATA FOR THE HELICOPTER'S HEIGHT-VELOCITY (HV) CURVE. THE PIC STATED THAT ALL POINTS ALONG THE CURVE HAD BEEN SUCCESSFULLY DEMONSTRATED ON AN EARLIER DATE. AFTER A NUMBER OF AUTOROTATIONS, THE PIC SUCCESSFULLY DEMONSTRATED A SPECIFIC POINT AT 100 FT & 48 KTS. THE FAA PLT THEN TOOK THE CONTROLS & ATTEMPTED TO DUPLICATE THE POINT IN QUESTIONS. THE FLARE FOR THE LANDING DID NOT ARREST THE DESCENT. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE HELICOPTER LANDED HARD & THE MAIN ROTOR SERVED THE TAIL BOOM. BOTH PLTS ADMITTED THAT THEY DID NOT CLEARLY DEFINE THEIR INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITIES PRIOR TO THE FLT.