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.
Navasota, TX
The pilot reported that he recently purchased the accident airplane to transition from large airplanes back to small airplanes. He conducted a normal, uneventful flight. When he approached the airport to land, he went through the “GUMP” checklist twice. However, when the airplane touched down onto the runway the landing gear was retracted which resulted in substantial damage to the underlying structure of the lower fuselage. The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation During a postaccident telephone conversation, the pilot mentioned that he accidentally merged the “GUMPS” check with a checklist he commonly used for large airplanes. He further reported that the airplane was not equipped with a landing gear horn, therefore, he was not alerted of the unsafe landing gear condition. He further stated that a landing gear warning horn will be installed on the airplane during the repair process.
Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Use of checklist-Pilot
The pilot reported that he recently purchased the accident airplane to transition from large airplanes back to small airplanes. He conducted a normal, uneventful flight. When he approached the airport to land, he went through the “GUMP” checklist twice. However, when the airplane touched down onto the runway the landing gear was retracted which resulted in substantial damage to the underlying structure of the lower fuselage. The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation During a postaccident telephone conversation, the pilot mentioned that he accidentally merged the “GUMPS” check with a checklist he commonly used for large airplanes. He further reported that the airplane was not equipped with a landing gear horn, therefore, he was not alerted of the unsafe landing gear condition. He further stated that a landing gear warning horn will be installed on the airplane during the repair process.