CEN11IA146
2010-12-24 · Milsap, Texas, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport MWL
Current FAA registration · N921DZ
- Make / Model
- COLUMBIA AIRCRAFT MFG LC41-550FG
- Year of manufacture
- 2006 · 4 years old at event
- Engine
- CONT MOTOR TSIO-550-C (310 hp)
- Seats / Engines
- 4 seats · 1 engine
- Last airworthiness date
- 20060921
- ADS-B equipped
- Yes — Mode-S ACC244
Source: FAA Aircraft Registry (releasable master file).
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
A total loss of engine power in flight due to a loss of engine oil for reasons that could not be determined during a postaccident teardown examination of the engine.
Factual narrative
On December 24, 2010, about 1440 central standard time, N921DZ, a Columbia LC41-550FG, single engine airplane, received minor damage after an off-airport forced landing near Milsap, Texas. The solo pilot was not injured. The airplane was registered to and operated by a private individual. Instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) prevailed at the time of the accident and an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan had been filed for the 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight. The airplane departed Bourland Field Airport (50F), Cresson, Texas, about 1415 destined for Phoenix Deer Valley Airport (DVT), Phoenix, Arizona. The airplane was at 9,000 feet mean sea level (msl) in a climb to 16,000 feet msl when the pilot noticed that the engine was not producing full power and the engine oil pressure had dropped to an unacceptable level. The pilot declared an emergency and requested a descent and vectors for an instrument approach to runway 31 at Mineral Wells Airport (MWL), Mineral Wells, Texas. The airplane was in IMC when the “engine quit” about 3,000 feet msl. The airplane broke out of the clouds about 500 feet above ground level (agl) and the nose gear collapsed during the engine out landing in an open field. The airplane had recent maintenance performed when the engine was partially removed to replace the starter adapter. Aircraft logbook entries show that the maintenance activity was inspected after completion and that a ground run of the engine was satisfactory with no leaks noted. The pilot reported that after the maintenance was complete he flew the airplane twice and had no leaks and no problems. A teardown examination of the engine showed there was a breach in the crankcase with several areas inside the engine that exhibited lubrication distress, thermal distress, and mechanical damage. There was mechanical damage to several connecting rods and to the crankshaft and counterweight assembly. The examination revealed no other preincident mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operations. The reason for the in-flight loss of engine oil could not be determined. The airplane was climbing through about 9,000 feet mean sea level (msl) when the pilot noticed that the engine was not producing full power and that the engine oil pressure had dropped. The pilot declared an emergency and asked an air traffic controller for a descent and vectors for an instrument approach to a nearby airport. While descending through about 3,000 feet msl in instrument meteorological conditions, the “engine quit.” The airplane descended out of the clouds about 500 feet above ground level, the pilot made an engine-out landing in an open field, and the nose gear collapsed. A review of the airplane’s maintenance documents showed that the engine had recently been partially removed during replacement of the starter adapter. According to the airplane’s maintenance logbooks, the airplane was inspected after this maintenance activity, and a subsequent ground run of the engine was satisfactory, with no leaks noted. Further, the pilot reported that after the maintenance was completed, he flew the airplane twice and had no leaks and no problems. A postaccident teardown examination of the engine revealed a breach in the crankcase and several areas inside the engine that exhibited lubrication distress, thermal distress, and mechanical damage. The examination revealed no other preincident mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. The reason for the in-flight loss of engine oil could not be determined. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12
NTSB Findings
FAA avdata. C = Cause, F = Factor.
- C Aircraft-Fluids/misc hardware-Fluids-Oil-Fluid level - C
- C Not determined-Not determined-(general)-(general)-Unknown/Not determined - C
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2010_CEN11IA146.txt.
Findings + structured fields enriched from FAA avall.mdb.
Full investigation docket on
data.ntsb.gov ↗.
Search this event elsewhere
External sources are reported, not agency: signal that something happened, not fact about what happened.
- TallyAero Live Wire Aviation press
- NTSB CAROL Agency ↗
- NTSB Docket Agency ↗
- Aviation Safety Network Aviation press ↗
- Kathryn's Report Aviation press ↗
- Aviation Herald Aviation press ↗
- AVweb Aviation press ↗
- Pilots of America Community ↗
- Reddit /r/flying Community ↗
- FlightAware Aviation press ↗
- AOPA accident database Aviation press ↗
- Google News News ↗
- DuckDuckGo News ↗
Related research
Matched on aircraft type or causal vocabulary (imc, maintenance). All research papers
- 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 2026 · Article (Reliability Engineering & System Safety) Understanding human error in military aviation maintenance: The role of Performance shaping factors, cognitive workload and error orientation
- 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.
- Semantic Scholar 2024 · Article (Defence Science Journal) Modelling of Human Factors in Aviation Maintenance Using HFACS ME Human Factors Analysis and Classification System Maintenance Extension and Bayesian Network
Aircraft maintenance is a complex task involving a skilled human workforce, spare parts, and various other resources. Human factors are an inherent element of the human workforce.
- 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 (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…