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

January 28, 2023 · Aero Commander 500 B · N107DF

Sylacauga, AL

Overview

Report Status
Final with probable cause
Event Type
Accident
Date
January 28, 2023
Injury Outcomes
1 injury (1 serious injury)
Location
Sylacauga, AL
Aircraft
Aero Commander 500 B (1962)
Tail Number
N107DF
Operator
Central Air Southwest
Injuries
Serious
Aircraft Damage
Substantial
NTSB Number
ERA23LA122

The pilot was taking the airplane on a flight to another airport for maintenance. During the preflight inspection, the pilot turned on the electrical power and noticed that the fuel gauge was indicating 80 gallons of fuel. The pilot reported the airplane holds a maximum of 156 gallons of fuel and he calculated that he needed 113 gallons of fuel to legally complete the flight. He informed the fixed base operator (FBO) that he wanted the fuel tanks topped off, but was informed by the ramp technician that the fuel tanks were full and he did not need fuel. The pilot went back to the airplane and removed the fuel cap. He noticed fuel in the filler neck and assumed the fuel tanks were full. He did not push open the anti-siphon fuel valve to see if the tanks were full or if residual fuel was pooled on top of the anti-siphon fuel valve. When the pilot started the engines, he noticed the fuel gauge was flickering and thought it was malfunctioning. He proceeded to depart for the maintenance base. After about 2 hours of flight time both engines lost power. Unable to reach the closest airport, the pilot executed an off-field landing in a cotton field. After landing, the airplane rolled into the trees and the left wing separated from the fuselage. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the left and right wings. According to the fueler at the FBO, she drove out to the airplane to fuel it on the morning of the accident and, after removing the single fuel cap, saw fuel on top of the anti-siphon valve. She used her finger to push down the valve and felt fuel, so she believed the airplane was full of fuel and it did not need additional fuel. Both wing fuel bladders were breached during the accident and a minor amount of fuel was leaked onto the ground. Personnel from the company who recovered the wreckage stated that there was no fuel in the fuel tanks when the airplane was recovered. The fuel quantity transmitter was sent to the manufacturer for examination. Testing of the transmitter revealed no anomalies with the unit. Based on this information, it is likely that the pilot erred in his assessment of the airplane’s fuel quantity prior to departing on the accident flight and that the available quantity of fuel was exhausted, which resulted in the total loss of engine power and the subsequent forced landing.

NTSB Probable Cause

The pilot’s failure to assure there was an adequate amount of fuel onboard to complete the flight, which resulted in a loss of engine power due to fuel exhaustion.

Full Narrative

On January 28, 2023, at 1751 central standard time, an Aero Commander 500-B, N107DF, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Sylacauga, Alabama. The pilot was seriously injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 positioning flight. According to the pilot, he flew a different airplane to the Tampa Executive Airport (VDF), Tampa, Florida, and intended to reposition the accident airplane, which was due for a 100-hour inspection, to Birmingham-Shuttlesworth International Airport (BHM), Birmingham, Alabama, for maintenance. During the preflight inspection, the pilot turned on electrical power and noticed that the fuel gauge was reading 80 gallons of fuel. He walked into the FBO at VDF and requested that the airplane’s fuel tanks be topped off. A ramp technician reported that the fuel tanks were already full. The pilot subsequently removed the airplane’s fuel cap, noticed fuel in the filler neck and assumed the fuel tanks were full. He did not push open the anti-siphon fuel valve to see if the tanks were full. The pilot reported the airplane holds a maximum of 156 gallons of fuel and he calculated that he needed 113 gallons of fuel to legally complete the flight. According to the fueler at the FBO, she removed the airplane’s single fuel cap and saw fuel on top of the anti-siphon valve. She used her finger to push down the valve and felt fuel, so she believed the airplane was full of fuel and it did not need additional fuel. The pilot completed the preflight inspection checklist and started the engines. He noticed the fuel gauge was flickering and thought it was malfunctioning. He proceeded to depart for BHM. After about 2 hours of flight time, the airplane’s right engine lost power and, a few seconds later, the left engine also lost power. He did not look at the fuel gauge during this time. He notified the air traffic controller of the loss of power to both engines and was vectored towards Merkel Field Sylacauga Municipal Airport (SCD), Sylacauga, Alabama. The airplane was unable to reach the runway and the pilot performed a landing in a cotton field. After landing, the airplane rolled into trees and the left wing separated from the fuselage. Federal Aviation Administration inspectors who examined the airplane at the accident site noted the airplane sustained substantial damage to the left and right wings. They also noted that both wing fuel bladders were breached and noted minor fuel leakage on the ground adjacent to the wing. Personnel with the wreckage recovery company stated that there was no fuel in the airplane’s fuel tanks at the accident site. When electrical power was applied to the airplane, the fuel gauge read 68 gallons of fuel. The fuel transmitter was sent to the manufacturer for examination. Testing of the transmitter revealed no anomalies with the unit.

Flight

Event TypeAccident
Event Time17:51 CST
Nearest AirportMerkel Fld Sylacauga Muni (2nm NW)
Runway09
Runway Length5390 ft
Runway Width100 ft
Flight Plan FiledIFR
Flight Plan ActivatedYes
Aircraft FireNo
Aircraft ExplosionNo

Aircraft

AircraftAero Commander 500 B
Tail NumberN107DF
Aircraft CategoryAir
DamageSubstantial
OperatorCentral Air Southwest
Operating RulePart 91
Engines2
Engine TypeReciprocating
Engine DetailsLycoming · io-540 · Reciprocating · 290 | Lycoming · io-540 · Reciprocating · 290
Seats2

People & Injuries

Injury Summary1 injury (1 serious injury)
Fatal0
Serious1
Minor0
Uninjured0
Total1
Crew 1Age 25 · Second Class · Serious

Conditions

ConditionsVMC
LightDusk
WindCalm
Visibility10 sm
CeilingOvercast 10000 ft
Temperature / Dew Point54 F / 23 F
Altimeter30.28 inHg
Observation Time23:55
Weather SourceWFAC

Appendix: Source Data