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 28, 2022 · Cessna 120 · N2056V

San Carlos, CA

Overview

Report Status
Final with probable cause
Event Type
Accident
Date
June 28, 2022
Injury Outcomes
No injuries (2 uninjured)
Location
San Carlos, CA
Aircraft
Cessna 120 (1947)
Tail Number
N2056V
Injuries
None
Aircraft Damage
Substantial
NTSB Number
WPR22LA242

The accident pilot reported that, 2 days before the accident, the airplane was flown uneventfully by another pilot to the destination airport using the right fuel tank. The pilot who previously flew the airplane reported that he had refueled the airplane with 15 gallons of fuel before that flight, which lasted about 1 hour and 40 minutes; he used the right tank for that flight. He did not indicate that the tanks had been completely filled, noting that 15 gallons was all he needed for the flight. As he approached the destination, he switched to the left fuel tank and landed uneventfully. According to the accident pilot, after conducting a preflight inspection on the day of the accident, he taxied the airplane out to the runway using the right fuel tank. He recalled that the right tank was full of fuel, which would be inconsistent with the right tank’s fuel state if the previous flight had been flown using the right tank. Following an engine runup, he departed. As the airplane was about 400 ft above ground level, the engine rpm decayed to about 1,800 rpm. The pilot performed a 180° turn but was unable to make it to the runway and landed on an airport perimeter road. The airplane bounced, impacted the fence, and came to rest upright on the airport transient parking ramp. The pilot stated that, after the accident, he observed the right fuel line was “severed” with “pouring out fuel.” Postaccident examination of the airplane revealed that the right fuel line from the lower door frame structure had separated from the fuel fitting. Examination of the recovered airframe and engine revealed no evidence of any preexisting mechanical malfunction that would have precluded normal operation. Although the investigation did not identify performance information for the O-200-A engine installed on the Cessna 120 specifically for fuel burn, given the fuel burn of the O-200-A, and estimated flight time, the previous flight would have used about 10 gallons of fuel. This would place the fuel level in the fuel tank below 1/4 tank, which would prohibit takeoff according to the airplane owner’s manual. Although the pilot may have inadvertently used the wrong fuel tank for takeoff, which could have unported the fuel tank and interrupted the subsequent fuel delivery to the engine, the investigation could not determine the position of the fuel selector valve at the time of the accident. The reason for the total loss of engine power could not be determined.

NTSB Probable Cause

Not determined-Not determined-(general)-(general)-Unknown/Not determined

Full Narrative

On June 28, 2022, about 1146 Pacific daylight time, a Cessna 120, N2056V, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near San Carlos, California. The pilot and passenger were not injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight. The accident pilot reported that 2 days before the accident the airplane was flown, uneventfully, by another pilot from Anderson, California, to San Carlos Airport (SQL), San Carlos, using the right fuel tank. The pilot who previously flew the airplane reported that he had refueled the airplane with 15 gallons of fuel and flew it back to SQL using the right fuel tank; he estimated the duration of that flight as about 1 hour and 40 minutes. He did not indicate that the tanks had been completely filled, noting that 15 gallons was all he needed for the flight. As he approached SQL, he switched to the left fuel tank and landed uneventfully. On the day of the accident, the accident pilot reported he had 14 gallons of fuel onboard. He taxied out to the runway using the right fuel tank, which he recalled was full of fuel. Following an engine runup, he departed runway 30. As the airplane was about 400 ft above ground level, the engine rpm decayed to about 1,800. The pilot performed a 180° turn to runway 12 but was unable to make it to the runway and landed on the airport perimeter road. The airplane bounced, impacted the fence, and came to rest upright on the airport transient parking ramp. The pilot stated that, after the accident, the right fuel line was “severed” with “pouring out fuel.” He reported that he attempted to turn the fuel selector off but instead turned it in the wrong direction before leaving the wreckage. The accident airplane is equipped with two 12.5-gallon fuel tanks, both of which have float-type sight gauges. The fuel selector valve has three positions: LEFT, RIGHT, and OFF. The airplane owner’s manual states in part “…Set fuel tank selector to fullest tank. (Do not take off on less than 1/4 tank).” Postaccident examination of the airplane by a Federal Aviation Administration inspector revealed that the fuselage was substantially damaged. Examination of the recovered airframe and engine revealed no evidence of any preexisting mechanical malfunction that would have precluded normal operation. The position of the fuel selector valve at the time of the accident was unable to be determined. The investigation did not identify any specific performance information for the O-200-A engine installed on the Cessna 120 specifically for fuel burn. However, the Fuel Flow Limits vs RPM chart from the O-200-A overhaul manual indicated that fuel burn rates vary between 4.5 and 9 gallons per hour (GPH) at 2,050 and 2,750 rpm respectfully. Fuel burn at 2,350 rpm would be about 6 gph.

Flight

Event TypeAccident
Event Time11:46 PDT
Nearest AirportSan Carlos (0nm E)
Runway12
Runway Length2621 ft
Runway Width75 ft
Flight Plan FiledNone
Aircraft FireNo
Aircraft ExplosionNo

Aircraft

AircraftCessna 120
Tail NumberN2056V
Aircraft CategoryAir
DamageSubstantial
Operating RulePart 91
Engines1
Engine TypeReciprocating
Engine DetailsContinental Motors · O-200-A · Reciprocating · 100
Seats2

People & Injuries

Injury SummaryNo injuries (2 uninjured)
Fatal0
Serious0
Minor0
Uninjured2
Total2
Crew 1Age 68 · Third Class · None

Conditions

ConditionsVMC
LightDaylight
Wind360° @ 8 kt
Visibility10 sm
CeilingNone
Temperature / Dew Point66 F / 55 F
Altimeter30.09 inHg
Observation Time10:47
Weather SourceWFAC

Appendix: Source Data