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.
Cahokia, IL
After completing several practice instrument approaches at night, the flight crew decided to finish the flight with a simulated single-engine approach and landing. The simulated right engine failure was accomplished using the manufacturer's recommended procedures. The flight crew was cleared for the instrument landing system (ILS) runway 30L approach, circle-to-land on runway 12R. The dual-student flew the instrument approach to the minimum descent altitude and then circled to the south to join the right downwind for runway 12R. The dual-student climbed to traffic pattern altitude while on downwind and extended the landing gear when abeam the touchdown point. When the airplane turned onto final approach, it was slightly above the glide slope, at 90 knots, and left of the extended runway centerline. When the airplane was on 1/4 mile final for the runway, it was on glide slope and fully configured for landing. At this time, the airplane was still left of the extended centerline, approximately aligned with the runway edge lighting. About 20-30 feet above ground level, the dual-student banked the airplane about 10-15 degrees to the right. The flight instructor stated that the student's actions made him uncomfortable, given the proximity to the ground. He assumed control of the airplane and initiated a go-around. The airplane yawed and banked to the left as he advanced the engine throttles and pitched up for the go-around. His corrective flight control inputs were ineffective, and the airplane impacted left-wing low in the grass area off the left side of the runway. No flight control anomalies were noted during a post-accident inspection.
The flight instructor's failure to correct for proper runway alignment during final approach and his failure to maintain aircraft control during his subsequent go-around. Contributing to the accident was the dual-student's failure to properly align with the runway centerline during final approach and the dark night.
After completing several practice instrument approaches at night, the flight crew decided to finish the flight with a simulated single-engine approach and landing. The simulated right engine failure was accomplished using the manufacturer's recommended procedures. The flight crew was cleared for the instrument landing system (ILS) runway 30L approach, circle-to-land on runway 12R. The dual-student flew the instrument approach to the minimum descent altitude and then circled to the south to join the right downwind for runway 12R. The dual-student climbed to traffic pattern altitude while on downwind and extended the landing gear when abeam the touchdown point. When the airplane turned onto final approach, it was slightly above the glide slope, at 90 knots, and left of the extended runway centerline. When the airplane was on 1/4 mile final for the runway, it was on glide slope and fully configured for landing. At this time, the airplane was still left of the extended centerline, approximately aligned with the runway edge lighting. About 20-30 feet above ground level, the dual-student banked the airplane about 10-15 degrees to the right. The flight instructor stated that the student's actions made him uncomfortable, given the proximity to the ground. He assumed control of the airplane and initiated a go-around. The airplane yawed and banked to the left as he advanced the engine throttles and pitched up for the go-around. His corrective flight control inputs were ineffective, and the airplane impacted left-wing low in the grass area off the left side of the runway. No flight control anomalies were noted during a post-accident inspection.