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.
Deland, FL
The pilot earlier that day had performed a total of six landings equally divided at two separate airports in the tailwheel-equipped airplane with no issues reported. After the last landing, he returned to the original departure airport. Prior to entering the airport traffic pattern, he listened to the automated weather observing system. Although he recalled the wind being from 250° at 7 knots, a surface weather observation taken about 4 minutes before the accident reported the wind from 200° at 7 knots. While on approach to runway 23 with crosswind correction consisting of right aileron and left rudder inputs, the airplane touched down and bounced no more than a few inches. He maintained full aft control stick and right aileron, and the airplane’s nose yawed left. He applied left aileron and right rudder for what he thought was the new wind direction but when the yaw continued, he added power to regain control without getting airborne. The airplane departed the left side of the runway and after regaining control he reduced power. While on the ground, the outer portion of the left horizontal stabilizer impacted a runway identification sign. He brought the airplane to a stop, then after recognizing no engine or flight control issues existed, taxied to a non-movement area on the airport. The pilot stated that there was no preimpact failure or malfunction of the flight controls. Postaccident inspection of the airplane revealed substantial damage to aft empennage tubing on the right side of the airplane. Inspection of the tailwheel assembly by an airframe and powerplant mechanic revealed no evidence of preimpact failure or malfunction. Although 1-minute Automated Weather Observing Systems (AWOS) observations were not archived, a review of 5-minute archived AWOS observations revealed that about 37 seconds after the accident and 6 minutes after the accident, the wind was from 200° at 4 kts and 170° at 5 kts, respectively. Thus, it is likely that a left crosswind existed during the accident approach and landing, and there was no wind shift.
Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Directional control-Not attained/maintained
The pilot earlier that day he had performed a total of six landings equally divided at two separate airports in the tailwheel-equipped airplane with no issues reported. After the last landing he returned to the original departure airport. Prior to entering the airport traffic pattern he listened to the automated weather observing system. Although he recalled the wind being from 250° at 7 knots, a surface weather observation taken about 4 minutes before the accident reported the wind from 200° at 7 knots. While on approach to runway 23 with crosswind correction consisting of right aileron and left rudder inputs, the airplane touched down and bounced no more than a few inches. He maintained full aft control stick and right aileron, and the airplane’s nose yawed left. He applied left aileron and right rudder for what he thought was the new wind direction but when the yaw continued, he added power to regain control without getting airborne. The airplane departed the left side of the runway and after regaining control he reduced power. While on the ground the outer portion of the left horizontal stabilizer impacted a runway identification sign. He brought the airplane to a stop, then after recognizing no engine or flight control issues existed, taxied to a non-movement area on the airport. The pilot stated that there was no preimpact failure or malfunction of the flight controls. Postaccident inspection of the airplane revealed substantial damage to aft empennage tubing on the right side of the airplane. Inspection of the tailwheel assembly by an airframe and powerplant mechanic revealed no evidence of preimpact failure or malfunction. Although 1-minute Automated Weather Observing Systems (AWOS) observations were not archived, a review of 5-minute archived AWOS observations revealed that about 37 seconds after the accident and 6 minutes after the accident, the wind was from 200° at 4 kts and 170° at 5 kts, respectively. Thus, it is likely that a left crosswind existed during the accident approach and landing, and there was no wind shift.