CEN22LA402
2022-08-29 · Pearland, Texas, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport LVJ
Current FAA registration · N1576F
- Make / Model
- MD HELICOPTERS INC 369FF
- Year of manufacture
- 2006 · 16 years old at event
- Engine
- ROLLS-ROYC 250-C30 (650 hp)
- Seats / Engines
- 4 seats · 2 engines
- Last airworthiness date
- 20260527
- ADS-B equipped
- Yes — Mode-S A0E760
Source: FAA Aircraft Registry (releasable master file).
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The pilot receiving instruction’s failure to maintain aircraft control, and the flight instructor’s delayed remedial action, which resulted in a hard landing.
Factual narrative
On August 29, 2022, about 2155 central daylight time, an MD Helicopters 369E, N1576F, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident at the William P. Hobby Airport, Houston, TX. The flight instructor and pilot receiving instruction were not injured. The helicopter was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 instructional flight. The flight was conducted by a flight instructor and a commercial pilot who was receiving instruction. The fight instructor reported that he and the pilot receiving instruction were conducting a simulated power recovery autorotation with a 90° turn. The maneuver was started at 800 ft above ground level (agl) and between 75 and 80 knots (kts) airspeed, and the instructor stated that he was commanding the throttle while the pilot receiving instruction commanded the cyclic, anti-torque, and collective controls. The instructor reduced the throttle and the pilot receiving instruction reduced airspeed to about 60-65 kts. When the helicopter descended to 300 ft agl, the flight instructor increased engine throttle and the pilot receiving instruction continued the autorotation, flared, and leveled the helicopter about 10 ft agl. The flight instructor waited for the pilot receiving instruction to increase collective, but he did not feel the collective control move, so he pulled up on the collective, but the helicopter struck the ground before it could ascend. The helicopter then slid to a stop and the flight instructor pulled the emergency fuel cutoff to shut down the engine. After exiting the helicopter, the instructor saw that the tail boom had separated from the helicopter. The pilot receiving instruction reported that he had set the helicopter up for a simulated autorotation with a 90° turn and power recovery. He counted down from 3 to begin the autorotation. The throttle was rolled to idle, and the pilot receiving instruction lowered the collective and depressed right pedal. He pitched the helicopter to maintain 60 kts while making a 90° turn to align with the runway. He maintained rotor speed by slightly raising and lowering the collective control. As the helicopter descended through about 150 ft agl, he began to flare. He felt the throttle increase but did not feel the power increase like he had felt on previous autorotations. The helicopter sank fast and struck the runway, skidding to a stop. He noted that the flight instructor pulled the fuel cutoff to stop the engine. Examination of the helicopter and a subsequent engine test run in a test cell did not reveal any anomalies that would explain a loss of engine power. The flight instructor reported that he and the commercial pilot receiving instruction were practicing simulated autorotations with power recovery. During one autorotation, as the helicopter was flared at the conclusion of the autorotation, the flight instructor increased the engine throttle and waited for the pilot receiving instruction to increase collective. When he did not feel the collective control move, the flight instructor pulled up on the collective, but the helicopter struck the ground before it could ascend. The pilot receiving instruction stated that during the flare, he did not feel the engine power increase like he had felt on previous autorotations; the helicopter sank fast and struck the ground. The main rotor of the helicopter severed the tail boom during the hard landing. Examination of the helicopter and a subsequent engine test run in a test cell did not reveal any anomalies that would explain a loss of engine power. Based on the available evidence, the accident was the result of the pilot receiving instruction’s failure to increase collective at the conclusion of the autorotation and the flight instructor’s delayed remedial response, which resulted in a hard landing. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12
NTSB Findings
FAA avdata. C = Cause, F = Factor.
- — Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Aircraft control-Pilot
- — Personnel issues-Action/decision-Action-Delayed action-Instructor/check pilot
- — Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Prop/rotor parameters-Not attained/maintained
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2022_CEN22LA402.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 (icing). All research papers
- arXiv 2026 · arXiv preprint Enabling Beyond-Visual-Line-of-Sight Drones Operation over Open RAN 5G Networks with Slicing
Among the foretold claims of the transition from 5G to 6G, Beyond-Visual-Line-of-Sight (BVLoS) drone operation has emerged as a prominent Internet-of-Robots enabler.
- NASA NTRS 2026 · Contractor Report (CR) Icing Physics Studies Using the 3D SIDRM Test Article: 2023 Icing Tests Analysis
In-flight icing is an important safety issue and is a factor that affects aircraft design and performance. Newer regulations are driving a need for improvements in airframe and engine icing simulation…
- arXiv 2025 · arXiv preprint Multi-Agent Deep Reinforcement Learning for UAV-Assisted 5G Network Slicing: A Comparative Study of MAPPO, MADDPG, and MADQN
The growing demand for robust, scalable wireless networks in the 5G-and-beyond era has led to the deployment of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) as mobile base stations to enhance coverage in dense urb…
- NASA NTRS 2025 · Presentation NASA Icing Update – March 2025
This NASA Icing Update was prepared for presentation to the SAE International AC-9C Inflight Icing Technology Committee. This update includes the following topics: planned Rotational Icing Scaling tes…
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2025 · Journal article (JAAER) A Mathematical Model on the Temporal Dynamics of Aviation Competitive Pricing
This study investigates the competitive dynamics of airport pricing using U.S. airport data to validate the findings. It employs linear and nonlinear ordinary differential equation models to analyze t…
- arXiv 2024 · arXiv preprint An energy-stable phase-field model for droplet icing simulations
A phase-field model for three-phase flows is established by combining the Navier-Stokes (NS) and the energy equations, with the Allen-Cahn (AC) and Cahn-Hilliard (CH) equations and is demonstrated ana…