ERA12LA425
2012-06-29 · Lakewood, New Jersey, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport N12
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The loss of engine power during climb for reasons that could not be determined during postaccident examination of the engine and engine systems or during postaccident operational testing of the engine.
Factual narrative
On June 29, 2012, about 1645 eastern daylight time, a Piper PA-28-140, N449FL, was substantially damaged following a partial loss of engine power and collision with terrain near Lakewood Airport (N12), Lakewood, New Jersey. The certificated airline transport pilot and three passengers were not injured. The airplane was registered to a private individual and was operated by the pilot under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 as a personal flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and no flight plan was filed. The local flight originated at N12 about 1630. The pilot reported that he was taking three children for a ride in the airplane. He reported a gross takeoff weight of 1,987 pounds with a maximum allowable takeoff weight of 2,150 pounds. The first two takeoffs were uneventful. During the initial climb after the third takeoff, he observed a loss of engine performance and the airplane would not maintain the proper climb speed. Unable to continue the climb, he set up for a forced landing past the departure end of the runway. Just prior to ground contact, he pulled the mixture control and turned off the master switch. The airplane struck trees and a fence, resulting in substantial damage to the fuselage and both wings. A Federal Aviation Administration inspector responded to the accident site and examined the wreckage. The inspector confirmed substantial damage to the wings and fuselage. Flight control continuity was established from the cockpit controls to all flight control surfaces. The wreckage was recovered to a local maintenance facility where a subsequent examination of the engine was performed. The magnetos were turned and produced spark at each spark plug lead. Fuel was present in the fuel gascolator. The engine crankshaft was turned manually to check for cylinder compression. The numbers 1, 3, and 4 cylinders produced 68, 74, and 79 pounds per square inch (psi) of compression, respectively. The number two cylinder would only produce 16 psi. Other than some oil leaking from the cylinder when the lower spark plug was removed, there were no other anomalies noted with the cylinder. The FAA inspector reported that the number 4 cylinder was replaced in March, 2012, at the last annual inspection, due to low compression. At that time, the number 2 cylinder produced 75 psi compression. At the time of the accident, the engine total time was 3,571 hours, and 1,276 hours since the last major overhaul. Following the examination by the FAA inspector, a test run on the engine was performed by a certificated airframe and powerplant mechanic with inspection authorization. The engine was started several times and all engine parameters were normal. The engine ran normally using the engine driven fuel pump. The electric fuel boost pump operated when energized by a battery. Both magneto checks were satisfactory. Oil pressure was observed inside the green arc. After the engine was warmed up, a compression check was accomplished and all cylinders showed normal compression. The pilot reported that the first two takeoffs were normal. However, during the initial climb after the third takeoff, the pilot observed a loss of engine performance and the airplane would not maintain the proper climb speed. Unable to continue the climb, the pilot set up for a forced landing beyond the departure end of the runway. After touchdown, the airplane struck trees and a fence, resulting in substantial damage to the fuselage and both wings. A postaccident examination of the engine revealed lower than normal compression on the number 2 cylinder when the engine was cold; however, compression on all cylinders was normal after the engine was allowed to warm up. The engine was test run and no anomalies were noted. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12
NTSB Findings
FAA avdata. C = Cause, F = Factor.
- C Not determined-Not determined-(general)-(general)-Unknown/Not determined - C
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2012_ERA12LA425.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…