Premium research interface

The modern interface for aviation safety intelligence.

Search investigations, review source evidence, monitor watched reports, and trace long-term patterns from one calm, data-first workspace.

63k+
Reports indexed
1940-2026
Coverage
Recent
Last data refresh
Featured Report

Loading…

Loading featured report…

Loading…
Open Report

Safety trends by operating rule

Track fatal and non-fatal accident patterns across Part 91, Part 135, and Part 121 operations.

Loading trend charts…

Browse the aviation graph

Move quickly by aircraft, airport, operator, and time with indexes built for research, not wandering.

Last Data Update

By Decade

By Month

Aircraft Manufacturer

More manufacturers

Airports

More airports

Operators

More operators

About

Aviation safety reports, made easier to study

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.

FAQs

NTSB Report

April 23, 2000 · Cessna 150 · N66430

Lancaster, OH

Overview

Report Status
Final with probable cause
Event Type
Accident
Date
April 23, 2000
Injury Outcomes
2 injuries (2 minor injuries)
Location
Lancaster, OH
Aircraft
Cessna 150
Tail Number
N66430
Injuries
Minor
Aircraft Damage
Substantial
NTSB Number
NYC00LA120

The pilot experienced decreasing airspeed during takeoff climb, and he elected to return to land. The aircraft landed hard, bounced, and nosed over. According to the pilot he lifted off at 70 mph about 1,000 feet down the runway. The pilot reported the climb rate was 200 feet per minute. About 3,500 feet from the lift off point, he felt he had insufficient engine power to continue the departure. The pilot added that the engine noise remained constant from takeoff, but the airspeed was decreasing. He also added that when he was 1,000 feet above the ground, he noticed that the power available was less than what was needed for the departure. The pilot was then asked why he did not return and land on the runway, if he was at 1,000 feet agl with an operating engine. He had no response. The pilot reported no mechanical problems with the aircraft. According to a witness, the airplane became airborne about halfway down the runway; reached an altitude of 10 to 20 feet; and then descended to 5 feet and outside his view behind hangars. The aircraft reappeared about 20 feet above the runway, and he watched it start another descent. The witness heard the pilot declare an emergency over UNICOM, and saw the airplane execute a 180-degree turn. He then watched the airplane contacted the ground, bounce back into the air 20 to 30 feet, and contact the ground a second time before nosing over.

NTSB Probable Cause

The pilot's improper recovery from a bounced landing. A factor in the accident was the pilot's decision to operate the airplane over the maximum gross weight and his improper landing flare.

Full Narrative

On April 23, 2000, about 1150 Eastern Daylight Time, a Cessna 150, N66430, was substantially damage during takeoff from the Fairfield County Airport, Lancaster, Ohio. The certificated private pilot and passenger received minor injuries. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the personal local flight. No flight plan had been filed, and the flight was conducted under 14 CFR Part 91. According to a witness, the airplane became airborne about halfway down Runway 10; it reached an altitude of 10 to 20 feet; and then descended to 5 feet. At this point, some hangars blocked the witness's view, and he thought the pilot had aborted the takeoff. The witness then spotted the airplane about 20 feet above the runway, and watched it start another descent. The witness heard the pilot declare an emergency over UNICOM, and saw the airplane execute a 180-degree turn. He then watched the airplane contacted the ground, bounce back into the air 20 to 30 feet, and contact the ground a second time before nosing over. According to a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Inspector, the pilot stated he experienced no mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane. At the accident site, another FAA Inspector verified with the pilot and passenger the following numbers; pilot's weight 250 pounds, passenger's weight 220 pounds, fuel onboard 30 gallons, and an airplane basic weight of 1,107 pounds. The combined weights equaled 1,768 pounds, about 168 pounds over the maximum gross weight of the airplane. During a subsequent interview, the pilot stated that the above numbers were incorrect. Adding that he actually weighted 220 pounds, his passenger actually weighted 205 pounds, and that the airplane had 19 gallons of fuel onboard at the time of the accident. Using the new numbers, the original Inspector determined the airplane's weight as 1,700 pounds, about 100 pounds over the maximum gross weight of the airplane. In an interview conducted by a safety board investigator, the pilot stated that he preflighted the airplane, boarded his passengers, and started the engine on the first attempt. He then taxied the airplane onto the runway, held the brakes, and advanced the throttle. The engine responded, and rpm stabilized around 2,500. The pilot released the brakes, and the airplane accelerated "normally." At 70 mph and approximately 1,000 feet down the runway, the pilot applied back pressure to the yoke, and the airplane began to climb at 200 feet per minute. Approximately 3,500 feet past the point the airplane became airborne, the pilot felt he had insufficient engine power to continue departure. The pilot added that the engine noise remained constant from takeoff, but the airspeed was decreasing. He also added that when he was 1,000 feet agl and approximately 250 feet north of Runway 10, he noticed that the power available was less than the power required for the departure. The pilot was then asked why he did not return and land on Runway 10, if he was at 1,000 feet agl with an operating engine. He had no response. The pilot reported no mechanical problems with either the engine or the airframe. At 1153 an automated weather facility located at the airport recorded the following: wind 080 degrees magnetic at 5 knots, 10 mile visibility, clear, temperature 55 degrees Fahrenheit, dew point 46 degrees Fahrenheit, and an altimeter of 29.93 inches of mercury.

Flight

Event TypeAccident
Event Time11:50 EDT
Nearest AirportFairfield County (0nm N)
Runway10
Runway Length5004 ft
Runway Width75 ft
Flight Plan FiledNone
Flight Plan ActivatedNo
Aircraft FireNo
Aircraft ExplosionNo

Aircraft

AircraftCessna 150
Tail NumberN66430
Aircraft CategoryAir
DamageSubstantial
Operating RulePart 91
Engines1
Engine TypeReciprocating
Engine DetailsContinental · O-200 · Reciprocating · 100
Seats2

People & Injuries

Injury Summary2 injuries (2 minor injuries)
Fatal0
Serious0
Minor2
Uninjured0
Total2
Crew 1Age 56 · Third Class · Minor

Conditions

ConditionsVMC
LightDaylight
Wind80° @ 5 kt
Visibility10 sm
CeilingNone
Temperature / Dew Point55 / 45 C
Altimeter29.93 inHg
Observation Time15:53
Weather SourceWFAC

Appendix: Source Data