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.
Montague, MA
The pilot reported that, during the takeoff roll, as the airplane accelerated to 40 mph, the engine sputtered, and he reduced power with sufficient runway remaining to stop; however, the sputtering ceased, and he then added power to continue the takeoff attempt. The engine sputtered a second time, and the pilot reduced engine power again. At that point, he was concerned about the length of runway remaining and elected to steer off the left side of the runway, rather than risk going off the end of the runway and down into a ditch. As the airplane departed the left side of the runway, it struck a runway sign and sustained substantial damage to the aft fuselage and empennage. The pilot subsequently defueled and moved the airplane before it could be examined. Therefore, it was not possible to verify the fuel quantity or determine if any fuel contamination was present. Postaccident examination of the airframe and engine did not reveal evidence of any preimpact mechanical failures. The pilot reported that he should have aborted the takeoff earlier.
The pilot's delay in performing a rejected takeoff after experiencing an intermittent loss of engine power, which resulted in a runway excursion.
The pilot reported that during the takeoff roll, as the airplane accelerated to 40 mph, the engine sputtered and he reduced power with sufficient runway remaining to stop; however, the sputter ceased and he then added power to continue the takeoff attempt. The engine sputtered a second time and the pilot reduced engine power again. At that point, he was concerned about the length of runway remaining, and elected to steer off the left side of the runway, rather than risk going off the end of the runway and down a ditch. As the airplane departed the left side of the runway, it struck a runway sign and came to rest upright. During the accident sequence, the airplane sustained substantial damage to the aft fuselage and empennage. The pilot subsequently defueled and moved the airplane before it was examined by a Federal Aviation Administration inspector. As such, the inspector was unable to verify the fuel quantity or if any fuel contamination was present. His subsequent examination of the airframe and engine did not reveal any preimpact mechanical failures. Additionally, the pilot reported that there were no other preimpact mechanical malfunctions and that he should have aborted the takeoff earlier.