CEN20LA269
2020-07-03 · Weldon, Arkansas, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The total loss of engine power during cruise flight for reasons that could not be determined based on the available evidence.
Factual narrative
On July 3, 2020, about 1700 central daylight time, an Air Tractor AT-602 airplane, N602NY, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Weldon, Arkansas. The pilot was not injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 137 aerial application flight. The pilot stated that he departed from a private airstrip with about 75 gallons of Jet A fuel and a load of dry granular fertilizer. The pilot reported that the aerial application portion of the flight was uneventful but that, about 10 minutes into the flight, as the airplane was returning to its base, the engine "spooled down" and the airplane had a total loss of engine power. At the time, the airplane was about 3 miles from the airstrip and was established in cruise flight about 400 ft above ground level. The pilot was unable to restore engine power by moving the power and propeller levers to full forward and activating the fuel boost pump and ignitors. He did not recall looking at the cockpit engine gauges after the loss of engine power. The pilot stated that he made a “firm” forced landing in an open field but lost directional control of the airplane. The aft fuselage sustained substantial damage when the tailwheel separated during the ground loop. Three days after the accident, before notifying the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) or Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) of the accident, the pilot’s aviation mechanic examined the airplane at the accident site to begin a repair estimate. The mechanic stated that ample fuel was in the fuel tanks and that he was able to start and run the engine at the accident site. The mechanic noted that the engine responded to his power lever inputs and that his movement of the propeller lever cycled the propeller without any anomalies with an rpm of 1,500. The mechanic stated that all observed engine parameters were nominal during the engine test run. The FAA and the NTSB were subsequently notified about the accident. The airplane was partially disassembled and recovered from the field to a repair station for repairs and examinations. The recovery crew reported that about 56 gallons of fuel was drained from the wing tanks and that the recovered fuel was evenly distributed between the wing fuel tanks. Subsequent examination of the airplane revealed that the fuel lines, fuel tank inlet screens, and fuel filters showed no evidence of any blockage, water, or significant particles. The airplane's digital fuel management system indicated that 50.3 gallons of fuel remained in the fuel tanks after the postaccident engine test run at the accident site. A second engine ground test was completed in the presence of a FAA maintenance inspector after the airframe was repaired. The engine started and operated without any anomalies during the ground test. Additional testing did not reveal any anomalies with the mechanical airframe fuel pump, electric fuel boost pump, or engine Py line. The engine had accumulated 1,521.6 hours since new and 141 hours since its last inspection on May 1, 2020. During an aerial application flight, the pilot was returning to the airplane’s base when the engine "spooled down” and lost total power. The pilot stated that, when the total loss of engine power occurred, the airplane was established in cruise flight at an altitude of about 400 ft above ground level. He was unable to restore engine power by moving the power and propeller levers to full forward and activating the fuel boost pump and ignitors. The pilot made a “firm” forced landing in an open field. The airplane made a ground loop, which caused the tailwheel to separate and resulted in substantial damage to the aft fuselage. Postaccident examination of the fuel system revealed ample fuel remaining and no evidence of contamination. The engine operated normally during two postaccident ground tests. Thus, the reasons for the total loss of engine power during the accident flight could not be determined with the available evidence from the investigation. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12
NTSB Findings
FAA avdata. C = Cause, F = Factor.
- — Not determined-Not determined-(general)-(general)-Unknown/Not determined
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2020_CEN20LA269.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 (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…