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

June 16, 2016 · Cessna 172M · N12184

Lenoir, NC

Overview

Report Status
Final with probable cause
Event Type
Accident
Date
June 16, 2016
Injury Outcomes
No injuries (1 uninjured)
Location
Lenoir, NC
Aircraft
Cessna 172M (1973)
Tail Number
N12184
Operator
Lenoir Aviation Club
Injuries
None
Aircraft Damage
Substantial
NTSB Number
ERA16CA222

The student pilot was returning to his home airport while on his first solo cross-country flight. The wind sock at the airport was favoring a landing on runway 23 with a slight crosswind. He entered the traffic pattern, and when he lined up on the final leg of the traffic pattern to the turf runway, the airplane encountered a large wind gust. He then aborted the landing and rejoined the traffic pattern. The wind sock was still favoring a landing on runway 23, so he set up for the landing again, and this time encountered a larger wind gust, so he aborted the landing a second time. He then entered the traffic pattern again and noticed that the wind sock was still indicating a slight crosswind but now favored a landing on runway 5. He then flew around the traffic pattern and set up for a landing on runway 5. The student reported that, while on final approach for runway 5, the airspeed was "good." The airplane touched down and then "bounced," and the pilot attempted to recover the landing, but the nose landing gear then dug into the ground. The airplane nosed over and came to rest inverted, which resulted in substantial damage to the empennage and vertical stabilizer. Review of archived weather information revealed that, about the time of the accident, the wind was 330° at 11 knots, gusting to 16 knots. Additionally, wind gusts were present for nearly 4 hours before the accident and continued for about 4 hours after the accident. Before the flight, the student pilot met with his flight instructor and showed him his flight plan. The instructor spoke with the student but did not look at the weather reports, and they "did not call in to check the weather." Review of the student's logbook revealed that it contained an endorsement from the instructor stating that he had reviewed the student's cross-country planning and preparation and found it to be correct and adequate for the flight. The endorsement also contained the caveat that the weather should be "clear," and crosswinds should not exceed 7 knots.

NTSB Probable Cause

The student pilot’s failure to compensate for gusting wind conditions during landing, which resulted in a bounced landing. Contributing to the accident was the flight instructor’s inadequate review of the weather conditions with the student and his inadequate supervision of the student’s solo cross-country flight.

Full Narrative

The student pilot was returning to his home airport while on his first solo cross-country flight. The wind sock at the airport was favoring a landing on runway 23 with a slight cross wind. He entered the traffic pattern, and when he lined up on the final leg of the traffic pattern to the turf runway, he encountered a large wind gust. He then aborted the landing, and then rejoined the traffic pattern. The wind sock was still favoring a landing on runway 23, so he set up for the landing again, and this time encountered a larger wind gust, so he aborted the landing a second time. He then entered the traffic pattern again and noticed that the wind sock was still indicating a slight cross wind but now favored a landing on runway 5. He then flew around the traffic pattern, and set up for a landing on runway 5. While on final approach for runway 5, the airspeed was "good," and he touched down. The airplane then "bounced," and the pilot attempted to recover the landing, but the its nose landing gear then dug into the ground. The airplane nosed over and came to rest inverted, resulting in substantial damage to the empennage and vertical stabilizer.Review of archived weather information revealed that about the time of the accident, the wind was 330 degrees at 11 knots, gusting to 16 knots. Additionally, wind gusts were present for nearly 4 hours prior to the accident, and continued for about 4 hours after the accident. Prior to the flight, the student pilot met the instructor at the instructor's place of business with his flight plan. The instructor spoke with the student pilot but did not look at the weather reports, and they "did not call in to check the weather." Review of the student pilot's logbook revealed that it contained an endorsement from the flight instructor stating that he had reviewed the student's cross-country planning and preparation and found it to be correct and adequate for the flight. The endorsement also contained the caveat that the weather should be "clear," and crosswinds should not exceed 7 knots.

Flight

Event TypeAccident
Event Time13:15 EDT
Nearest AirportLower Creek (0nm SSE)
Runway05
Runway Length3200 ft
Runway Width150 ft
Flight Plan FiledVFR
Flight Plan ActivatedYes
Aircraft FireNo
Aircraft ExplosionNo

Aircraft

AircraftCessna 172M
Tail NumberN12184
Aircraft CategoryAir
DamageSubstantial
OperatorLenoir Aviation Club
Operating RulePart 91
Engines1
Engine TypeReciprocating
Engine DetailsLycoming · O-320-E20 · Reciprocating · 160
Seats4

People & Injuries

Injury SummaryNo injuries (1 uninjured)
Fatal0
Serious0
Minor0
Uninjured1
Total1
Crew 1Age 59 · Third Class · None

Conditions

ConditionsVMC
LightDaylight
Wind330° @ 11 kt, gusting 16 kt
CeilingNone
Temperature / Dew Point54
Altimeter29.89 inHg
Observation Time17:25
Weather SourceWFAC

Appendix: Source Data