NTSB CAROL · Event
Event CEN11FA597
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The pilot's failure to obtain adequate familiarization with the accident airplane type before the accident flight, which resulted in his failure to maintain airplane control during takeoff.
Factual narrative
HISTORY OF FLIGHTOn August 25, 2011, at 1856 eastern daylight time, a Nichols model Lancair 235 airplane, N777BN, was destroyed when it impacted trees and terrain during initial climb from Newark-Heath Airport (VTA), Heath, Ohio. The pilot was fatally injured. The airplane was registered to and operated by the private pilot under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 without a flight plan. Day visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the local flight that was originating at the time of the accident. According to a witness, who was located on the airport, the airplane had used runway 27 for the accident takeoff. The witness stated that the airplane appeared to be "very unstable" after it became airborne, alternately rolling right and left while remaining only a few feet above the runway. The witness remarked that it appeared that the pilot was not in control of the airplane. The airplane then turned left and proceeded off the runway directly toward the witness. The witness noted that the airplane continued to fly erratically, with continuous pitch, yaw, and roll changes, and cleared a row of airport hangars by about 10 feet. The airplane then continued the climb to 100-150 feet above the ground before it banked sharply to the left and entered a nose-down descent into trees. The witness stated that the engine sounded normal throughout the entire flight, with no observed hesitations or misfires. PERSONNEL INFORMATIONAccording to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) records, the pilot, age 50, held a private pilot certificate with a single engine land airplane rating. His last aviation medical examination was completed on October, 20, 2010, but his eligibility to be issued a medical certificate required additional review by the FAA Aerospace Medical Certification Division. On August 5, 2011, the FAA provided the pilot with a special issuance of his third-class medical certificate with the restriction for corrective lenses. The special issuance of the medical certificate also stipulated that the medical would not be valid after October 31, 2012. A search of FAA records showed no previous accidents, incidents, or enforcement proceedings. The most recent pilot logbook entry was dated August 16, 2011. At that time, the pilot had accumulated 121.5 hours total flight time, of which 63.9 hours were as pilot-in-command. The logbook indicated that all of his flight experience had been completed in single-engine land airplanes. The pilot had not logged any flights in the accident airplane or a similar Lancair airplane. He had logged two flights, totaling 1.9 hours, during the previous year. The first flight was completed on October 9, 2010, and consisted of a 1.1 hour flight review in a Cessna model 172S. The second flight was completed on August 16, 2011, in the same Cessna model 172S, and consisted of 0.8 hours of dual instruction to satisfy insurance requirements to rent the airplane. The pilot's flight logbook included an endorsement to operate high-performance airplanes, which was dated April 6, 2004. The logbook did not contain an endorsement for complex airplanes. According to the former owner and builder of the accident airplane, he provided a demonstration flight for the accident pilot before he sold the airplane on September 14, 2010. The former owner allowed the pilot to fly the airplane during portions of the demonstration flight; however, the pilot did not complete any takeoffs or landings. (The demonstration flight was not logged in the accident pilot's logbook.) The pilot reportedly asked if the former owner would like to fly with him in the future, presumably to gain additional familiarization with the airplane. The former owner offered to fly with the pilot, but they did not fly together again following the sale of the airplane. As a suggestion to gain familiarization with ground handling characteristics of the airplane, the former owner told the pilot to complete a lot of taxiing in the airplane before he attempted to takeoff. The flight instructor who flew with the pilot on August 16, 2011, 9 days before the accident, stated that when asked about the accident airplane, the pilot replied that he had not flown the accident airplane since he bought it. AIRCRAFT INFORMATIONThe accident airplane was a 1990 Nichols model Lancair 235 amateur-built airplane, serial number (s/n) 334. A 135-horsepower Lycoming model O-290-D2 reciprocating engine, s/n 6293-21, powered the airplane. The airplane was equipped with a fixed-pitch, two blade, Prince model P-Tip carbon-fiber covered wood propeller. The airplane had a retractable tricycle landing gear and a maximum takeoff weight of 1,500 pounds. On August 10, 1990, the accident airplane was issued an experimental airworthiness certificate and associated operating limitations. The airplane hour meter indicated 251 hours at the accident site. The airframe had accumulated a total service time of 1,131 hours at the time of the accident. The engine had accumulated a total service time of 2,758 hours, and 1,131 hours since a field overhaul on February 10, 1988. The engine had accumulated 273 hours since a top-overhaul on May 28, 2004. The last condition inspection was completed on August 7, 2010, at 1120 total airframe hours. There were no maintenance entries recorded since the last condition inspection. A postaccident review of the maintenance records found no history of unresolved airworthiness issues. The pilot reportedly had not flown the airplane since he purchased it from the original builder on September 14, 2010. He reportedly had expressed concerns with the airplane's ground-handling characteristics. He was observed performing several high-speed ground tests in the weeks preceding the accident. METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATIONAt 1853, the airport's automated surface observing system (ASOS) reported: wind 330 degrees at 7 knots, visibility 10 miles, broken ceiling at 5,500 feet above ground level (agl), temperature 25 degrees Celsius, dew point 17 degrees Celsius, and an altimeter setting of 29.95 inches of mercury. AIRPORT INFORMATIONThe accident airplane was a 1990 Nichols model Lancair 235 amateur-built airplane, serial number (s/n) 334. A 135-horsepower Lycoming model O-290-D2 reciprocating engine, s/n 6293-21, powered the airplane. The airplane was equipped with a fixed-pitch, two blade, Prince model P-Tip carbon-fiber covered wood propeller. The airplane had a retractable tricycle landing gear and a maximum takeoff weight of 1,500 pounds. On August 10, 1990, the accident airplane was issued an experimental airworthiness certificate and associated operating limitations. The airplane hour meter indicated 251 hours at the accident site. The airframe had accumulated a total service time of 1,131 hours at the time of the accident. The engine had accumulated a total service time of 2,758 hours, and 1,131 hours since a field overhaul on February 10, 1988. The engine had accumulated 273 hours since a top-overhaul on May 28, 2004. The last condition inspection was completed on August 7, 2010, at 1120 total airframe hours. There were no maintenance entries recorded since the last condition inspection. A postaccident review of the maintenance records found no history of unresolved airworthiness issues. The pilot reportedly had not flown the airplane since he purchased it from the original builder on September 14, 2010. He reportedly had expressed concerns with the airplane's ground-handling characteristics. He was observed performing several high-speed ground tests in the weeks preceding the accident. WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATIONA postaccident examination of the airport property revealed that the airplane had veered off the left side of the runway, about 1,700 feet from the approach threshold, while still on the ground. The airplane nose landing gear collided with a runway edge light and the observed tire tracks continued on a southwesterly heading for about 100 feet before the airplane became airborne. The airplane collided with several trees and a residential backyard located immediately south of the airport property. All airframe structural components and aerodynamic control surfaces were accounted for at the accident site. Flight control continuity could not be established due to the extent of the damage; however, all observed flight control system discontinuities were consistent with overstress. The landing gear was observed to be extended. No preimpact anomalies were noted with the main landing gear braking system that was used for directional control during ground operations. The airplane was not equipped with nose-wheel steering. The engine remained attached to the firewall. Internal engine and valve train continuity was confirmed as the engine crankshaft was rotated. Compression and suction were noted on all cylinders in conjunction with crankshaft rotation. The upper spark plugs were removed and exhibited features consistent with normal engine operation. Both magnetos provided spark on all leads when rotated. There were no obstructions between the air filter housing and the carburetor inlet. The fuel supply line to the carburetor contained liquid consistent in appearance and odor with 100-low lead aviation fuel. A fuel sample was free of any water or particulate contamination. The carburetor inlet screen was free of any particulate contamination. Mechanical continuity was confirmed from the engine components to their respective cockpit engine controls. The propeller remained bolted to the engine crankshaft. Fragments of one propeller blade were found throughout the accident site. The other propeller blade remained attached to the engine and exhibited leading edge damage. The postaccident examination of the airplane revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. A handheld GPS device was recovered from the wreckage; however, the device did not contain any track data for the accident flight. No additional data sources were located at the accident site or in the recovered wreckage. MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATIONOn August 26, 2011, an autopsy was performed on the pilot at the Licking County Coroner's Office, located in Newark, Ohio. The cause of death for the pilot was attributed to blunt-force injuries sustained during the accident. The FAA's Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI) in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, performed toxicology tests on samples obtained during the pilot's autopsy. No carbon monoxide, cyanide, ethanol, or drugs were detected. The accident occurred during the pilot's first flight in the experimental amateur-built airplane since he purchased it about 1 year earlier. A witness stated that the airplane appeared to be "very unstable" after it became airborne. He stated that the airplane continued to fly erratically, with continuous attitude changes, and cleared a row of airport hangars by about 10 feet. The airplane then continued the climb to between 100 and 150 feet above the ground before it banked sharply left and entered a nose-down descent into trees. The witness stated that the engine sounded normal throughout the entire flight. A postaccident examination of the airport property revealed that the airplane had veered off the left side of the runway before it became airborne. The postaccident examination of the airplane revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. It is likely that, because this was the pilot's first flight in the airplane and he had not logged any flights in a similar airplane, he failed to maintain directional control during takeoff and did not subsequently gain control. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12
NTSB Findings
Hierarchical cause / factor breakdown from the FAA bulk avdata database. Each finding tagged C (Cause) or F (Factor).
- C Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Aircraft control-Pilot - C
- C Personnel issues-Experience/knowledge-Experience/qualifications-Total experience w/ equipment-Pilot - C
- C Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-(general)-Not attained/maintained - C
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2011_CEN11FA597.txt.
Findings + structured fields enriched from FAA avall.mdb.
Full investigation docket on
data.ntsb.gov ↗.
Beyond the agency record
Search this event elsewhere.
Pre-filled searches into the sources where news + community discussion of aviation events lives. External sources are reported, not agency. Treat them as signal that something happened, not as fact about what happened.
Entity-clustered aviation events in the press — last 24 hr + 30-day archive.
Official agency record + docket.
Investigative docket: factual reports, photos, transcripts.
Long-running aviation incident database (Flight Safety Foundation).
Community NTSB synthesis blog — often has photos and witness reports.
Gold-standard aviation incident blog.
Aviation industry news search.
GA pilot forum — informed but rumor-prone.
GA pilot subreddit search.
Tail-number page — flight history (free tier limited).
AOPA Air Safety Institute search.
Mainstream press coverage. Recent events only.
Privacy-preserving news search.
External links open in a new tab. We don't ingest their content; we deep-link search queries.
Related research
What the literature says.
Academic papers and agency reports matching this event's aircraft type or causal vocabulary (maintenance). Sourced from NASA NTRS, NTSB Safety Studies, FAA CAMI, AOPA Air Safety Institute, Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons, arXiv, and the Semantic Scholar academic graph.
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2026 · Journal article (IJAAA)
From Reactive to Predictive: A hybrid Trust-Mediated Adoption Framework for Data-Driven Maintenance in Distributed-Authority Aviation Environments
Modern aviation maintenance operates within increasingly data-intensive technological environments, yet the operational integration of predictive maintenance into routine decision-making remains incon…
- Semantic Scholar 2025 · Article (Applied Sciences)
Decision-Making Framework for Aviation Safety in Predictive Maintenance Strategies
The implementation of predictive maintenance (PM) in aviation presents unique challenges due to strict safety requirements, complex operational environments, and regulatory constraints.
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2024 · Journal article (JAAER)
Low-Resource Automatic Speech Recognition Domain Adaptation – A Case-Study in Aviation Maintenance
With timeliness and efficiency being critical in the aviation maintenance industry, the need has been growing for smart technological solutions that optimize and streamline the different underlying ta…
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2024 · Journal article (JAAER)
A New Trajectory in UAV Safety: Leveraging Reinforcement Learning for Distance Maintenance Under Wind Variations
In the field of aviation, safety is a critical cornerstone, and the operation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) systems is deeply connected with this principle.
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2024 · Journal article (IJAAA)
Just Culture in Aviation: A Metaphorical Study on Aircraft Maintenance Students
Just Culture, a sub-dimension of safety culture, has been a prominent and debated topic in aviation safety in recent years.
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2024 · Journal article (IJAAA)
Performance PRISM: A Comprehensive Framework For Performance Measurement In Aircraft Maintenance
Aircraft maintenance is governed by rigorous safety requirements and high operational complexity, demanding robust performance measurement frameworks to ensure optimal maintenance practices.
Browse the full corpus — academia portal ↗