NTSB CAROL · Event
Event ERA19FA106
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
A total loss of left engine power for reasons that could not be determined, and the instructor's failure to maintain airspeed while maneuvering for a forced landing, which resulted in a loss of control. Contributing to the accident was the instructor's decision to conduct a simulated engine failure at low altitude.
Factual narrative
HISTORY OF FLIGHTOn February 23, 2019, about 1243 eastern standard time, a STOL Aircraft Corp UC-1 amphibious airplane, N65NE, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident in Winter Haven, Florida. The flight instructor was fatally injured, the commercial pilot sustained minor injuries, and one person on the ground was seriously injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 instructional flight. The pilot receiving instruction, was receiving initial multiengine-sea training from the flight instructor in the accident airplane. The pilot stated that the instructor advised him before takeoff that he would introduce a simulated engine failure at some point during the takeoff or climb. Shortly after takeoff, about 200 to 300 ft above ground level (agl), the instructor reduced the throttle on the left engine, and the left engine subsequently lost all power. The pilot stated that he and the instructor identified the failed engine and the instructor took control of the airplane and selected a forced landing site. The pilot stated they were unable to get "any single engine climb performance," he was in the process of retracting the landing gear and did not have time to retract the flaps. During the descent, the instructor unsuccessfully attempted to restart the engine before determining that the airplane would not reach the selected forced landing site. The instructor then chose a lake to the airplane's left as an alternate site. The pilot stated that during the left descending turn, the airplane slowed to Vmc (minimum control speed with one engine inoperative), the left wing dropped, and the airplane impacted a house, seriously injuring one of its occupants. A witness in a fuel truck at the departure airport stated that she watched the airplane fly overhead. She saw both propellers rotating and watched as the left propeller stopped rotating. The witness said she then watched as the airplane "sank" in a descending left turn until it disappeared from view. AIRCRAFT INFORMATIONOn January 23, 2019, 1 month before the accident, the engine total time since major overhaul was 2,113.9 hours. A Lycoming Service Instruction stated that the time between overhaul for the engine model was 2,000 hours. AIRPORT INFORMATIONOn January 23, 2019, 1 month before the accident, the engine total time since major overhaul was 2,113.9 hours. A Lycoming Service Instruction stated that the time between overhaul for the engine model was 2,000 hours. WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATIONThe airplane came to rest inside a house in a near-vertical, nose-down attitude. All major components were accounted for at the scene. The cockpit area was destroyed and crushed inward. The top of the fuselage between the engines was crushed inward. The fuselage beyond the fifth seat was intact and undamaged. The throttle quadrant, which ran along the top of the cockpit, was separated during the impact sequence. The wings remained attached and were removed for recovery. The flaps were found in the takeoff position. After recovery of the airplane, control continuity was traced from the cockpit through several cable breaks to all flight control surfaces. The right wing leading edge inboard of the engine was crushed inward. The front and inboard side of the cowling was crushed. The right engine propeller blades displayed chordwise scratching and tip curling. The right wing outboard of the engine was undamaged. The left wing leading edge inboard of the engine was crushed. The left propeller blades were feathered and undamaged. The outboard portion of the left wing displayed wrinkled skin and upward folding of the wing and skin. The wingtip was crushed inward. Both engines were rotated by hand at their propeller hub, and continuity was confirmed through the powertrain to the valve train and accessory section. Compression was confirmed on all cylinders of both engines. All of the ignition harness leads were intact and undamaged. The right engine's magnetos were manually rotated and produced spark at all terminal leads. A test run of the left engine was attempted. An external battery and engine controls were connected, and an external fuel tank was plumbed directly to the fuel pump inlet. The engine started immediately, accelerated smoothly, and ran continuously at all selected power settings without interruption. No evidence of preimpact mechanical malfunction was noted during the examination of the recovered airframe and engines. ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONFAA pamphlet FAA-P-8740-66, Flying Light Twins Safely, defines the critical engine as the engine whose failure would most adversely affect the airplane's performance or handling qualities. On twin-engine airplanes with both engines turning in a conventional, clockwise rotation (viewed from the cockpit), the left engine is critical. Vmc is defined as the minimum flight speed at which the aircraft is directionally controllable with a bank of no more than 5° when the critical engine is inoperative (windmilling) and the remaining engine is operating at takeoff power. Regarding one engine inoperative (OEI) climb performance and simulated engine failures, the pamphlet states: …the light twin with OEI will perform marginally at best and may not be capable of climbing at all under existing conditions. There is no requirement that a light twin in the takeoff or landing configuration must be able to maintain altitude, even at sea level, with OEI. Low altitude engine failure is never worth the risks involved. Multiengine instructors should approach simulated engine failures below 400 feet agl with extreme caution, and failures below 200 ft agl should be reserved for simulators and training devices. MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATIONThe autopsy of the flight instructor was performed by the Polk County Medical Examiner, Winter Haven, Florida. The cause of death was blunt impact injuries. Toxicology testing performed at the FAA Forensic Sciences Laboratory was negative for carbon monoxide and ethanol. Amlodipine, a prescription blood pressure medication that is not considered impairing, was identified. The pilot and flight instructor were conducting an instructional flight in the amphibious multi-engine airplane. The instructor briefed the pilot before the flight that he would simulate an engine failure at some point after takeoff. The pilot stated that, after takeoff, about 200 to 300 ft above ground level, the instructor reduced power on the left engine, and the engine subsequently lost all power. The flight instructor took control of the airplane and unsuccessfully attempted to restart the engine as the airplane continued to descend. The pilot stated that he was in the process of retracting the landing gear and did not have enough time to retract the flaps. The instructor was unable to establish a climb and upon realizing that the airplane would not reach the selected forced landing site, the instructor selected a closer landing site; however, as he turned the airplane left toward the site, the airplane likely slowed below its single-engine minimum control airspeed, the left wing dropped, and the airplane impacted a house. Examination of the wreckage revealed that the left propeller was in the feather position. There was no evidence of any preexisting mechanical malfunctions or anomalies that would have precluded normal operation of the airplane, and the left engine performed with no anomalies during a test run; therefore, the reason for the total loss of left engine power could not be determined. The instructor's decision to simulate a failure of the airplane's critical engine at low altitude allowed little margin for securing the failed engine and configuring the airplane for optimum single-engine performance following the actual loss of engine power. His subsequent failure to maintain airspeed while maneuvering for a forced landing resulted in a loss of 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 Aircraft-Aircraft power plant-Engine (reciprocating)-(general)-Simulated malf/failure - C
- C Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Airspeed-Not attained/maintained - C
- C Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Aircraft control-Instructor/check pilot - C
- F Personnel issues-Action/decision-Info processing/decision-Decision making/judgment-Instructor/check pilot - F
- — Not determined-Not determined-(general)-(general)-Unknown/Not determined
- — Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Altitude-Incorrect use/operation
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2019_ERA19FA106.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 (loss of control, engine failure). 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 2025 · Journal article (JAAER)
A Scoping Review of Aviation Loss of Control Inflight Research
Loss of control – inflight (LOC-I) contributes to aircraft accidents at unacceptably high rates. Significant industry efforts and research have aimed to improve LOC-I prevention, detection, and recove…
- SKYbrary (Eurocontrol) 2024 · SKYbrary article
Loss of Control In-Flight (LOC-I) — SKYbrary Knowledge Base
SKYbrary comprehensive knowledge-base entry on Loss of Control In-Flight — definitions, contributing factors, accident case studies (Air France 447, Colgan 3407), and prevention strategies.
- NTSB Aircraft Accident Reports 2022 · Accident report
Loss of Control on Takeoff in Icing Conditions — Citation 560XL
Cessna Citation 560XL fatal takeoff icing accident, March 2018. Investigation of a Citation 560XL loss-of-control takeoff accident in icing conditions.
- arXiv 2022 · arXiv preprint
Multi-level Adaptation for Automatic Landing with Engine Failure under Turbulent Weather
This paper addresses efficient feasibility evaluation of possible emergency landing sites, online navigation, and path following for automatic landing under engine-out failure subject to turbulent wea…
- Semantic Scholar 2021 · Article (Aviation)
ANALYSIS OF GENERAL AVIATION FIXED-WING AIRCRAFT ACCIDENTS INVOLVING INFLIGHT LOSS OF CONTROL USING A STATE-BASED APPROACH
Inflight loss of control (LOC-I) is a significant cause of General Aviation (GA) fixed-wing aircraft accidents. The United States National Transportation Safety Board’s database provides a rich source…
- NASA NTRS 2021 · Presentation
Use of Design of Experiments in Determining Neural Network Architectures for Loss of Control Detection
Abstract—We describe empirical methods for selecting a neural network architecture to implement belief state inference on generic commercial transport aircraft.
Browse the full corpus — academia portal ↗