ERA22LA079
2021-11-29 · Cornelia, Georgia, United States · Minor · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport AJR
Current FAA registration · N172MA
- Make / Model
- NEW PIPER AIRCRAFT INC PA-46-500TP
- Year of manufacture
- 2006 · 15 years old at event
- Engine
- P&W CANADA PT6A-42A (850 hp)
- Seats / Engines
- 6 seats · 1 engine
- Last airworthiness date
- 20060813
- ADS-B equipped
- Yes — Mode-S A121AF
Source: FAA Aircraft Registry (releasable master file).
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The pilot’s failure to maintain directional control during the landing, which resulted in a runway excursion and collision with terrain.
Factual narrative
On November 29, 2021, about 1447 eastern standard time, a Piper PA-46-500TP, N172MA, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Cornelia, Georgia. The airline transport pilot and two passengers sustained minor injuries. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight. The pilot reported that he performed a straight-in visual approach to runway 6, a 5,500 ft-long, 100 ft-wide, asphalt runway at Habersham County Airport (AJR), Cornelia, Georgia. He added that the airplane was on a correct glidepath and correct airspeed of 120 knots on short final approach. The main landing gear touched down first, followed by the nose landing gear. As soon as the nosewheel touched down, the airplane pulled to the left. The pilot initially corrected with right rudder input, but the airplane pulled again to the left and the pilot again put in right rudder deflection. The pilot relaxed right rudder pressure a second time and then the airplane pulled very aggressively to the left. He set the throttle to beta, applied both brakes, and right rudder, but the airplane departed the left side of the runway about halfway down the runway. The airplane traveled into a ditch and came to rest upright in a grass area next to the runway. Although runway 6 was 5,500 ft long, it had a displaced threshold of 1,392 ft. Review of skid marks revealed that the airplane touched down about halfway down the remaining 4,108-ft runway. The skid marks consisted of nose gear tire and right main gear tire, but no left main gear tire, consistent with touchdown in a left crab angle. As the skid marks neared the left edge of the runway, the left skid mark became visible, and all three tire marks were visible in the grass off the left side of the runway. Examination of the wreckage by a Federal Aviation Administration inspector and a representative from the airframe manufacturer revealed that the left wing had separated from the airframe during impact with the ditch. Steering control continuity was confirmed from the rudder pedals to the steering horn. A primary flight display (PFD), multifunction display, and a fractured section of the lower nose landing gear trunnion were retained and forwarded to National Transportation Safety Board laboratories for further examination. Metallurgical examination of the nose landing gear lower trunnion revealed fracture features consistent with overstress, and no evidence of fatigue. Review of PFD data revealed that the airplane was flying about 110 knots for 25 seconds on final approach. It crossed the displaced runway threshold about 100 knots, the 1,000-ft marker at 85 knots, and the midpoint of the available runway about 73 knots. Review of a pilot’s operating handbook for the make and model airplane revealed a published landing speed of 85 knots indicated airspeed (and 70 knots stall speed in the landing configuration). The wind was recorded as calm at AJR about the time of the accident. The pilot of the single-engine turboprop airplane stated that he flew a straight-in visual approach to the 5,500 ft-long asphalt runway. He added that the airplane was on a correct glidepath and correct airspeed of 120 knots on short final approach. The main landing gear touched down first during the landing, followed by the nose landing gear. As soon as the nosewheel touched down, the airplane pulled to the left. The pilot corrected with right rudder input, but the airplane pulled again to the left and the pilot again applied right rudder. The pilot relaxed right rudder pressure a second time and the airplane again pulled aggressively to the left. He set the throttle to beta, applied both brakes, and right rudder, but the airplane departed the left side of the runway about halfway down the runway. The wind was recorded as calm at the time of the accident. The runway had a displaced threshold of 1,392 ft; skid marks on the runway (consisting of the nose gear tire and right main gear tire) indicated that the airplane touched down about halfway down the remaining 4,108 ft of the runway. The lack of skid marks for the left main landing gear tire was consistent with the airplane touching down in a left crab angle. As the skid marks neared the left edge of the runway, a skid mark corresponding to the left main landing gear tire became visible, and all three tire marks were visible in the grass off the left side of the runway. Examination of the wreckage did not reveal any preimpact mechanical malfunctions. Given all available information, it is likely that the airplane was in a crab to the left when it touched down, which resulted in the subsequent loss of directional control and runway excursion. 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
- — Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Yaw control-Not attained/maintained
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2021_ERA22LA079.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 (stall, runway excursion). All research papers
- NASA NTRS 2026 · Conference Paper Computational Analysis of Steady State Aerodynamics of Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Configuration in Deep Stall
This study presents a computational investigation of steady state aerodynamics of the Subsonic Ultra-Green Aircraft Research (SUGAR) Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) configuration over a wide range …
- SKYbrary (Eurocontrol) 2024 · SKYbrary article Runway Excursion — SKYbrary Knowledge Base
SKYbrary runway excursion review — RE-OE (overruns) + RE-LO (lateral). Risk drivers: long landing, high approach speed, contaminated surface, tailwind, mis-set autobrakes.
- arXiv 2023 · arXiv preprint Automating Bird Diverter Installation through Multi-Aerial Robots and Signal Temporal Logic Specifications
This paper tackles the task assignment and trajectory generation problem for bird diverter installation using a fleet of multi-rotors.
- arXiv 2023 · arXiv preprint Variation of Critical Crystallization Pressure for the Formation of Square Ice in Graphene Nanocapillaries
Two-dimensional square ice in graphene nanocapillaries at room temperature is a fascinating phenomenon and has been confirmed experimentally.
- arXiv 2023 · arXiv preprint Polycrystallinity enhances stress build-up around ice
Damage caused by freezing wet, porous materials is a widespread problem, but is hard to predict or control. Here, we show that polycrystallinity makes a great difference to the stress build-up process…
- arXiv 2022 · arXiv preprint Enhanced Prediction of Three-dimensional Finite Iced Wing Separated Flow Near Stall
Icing on three-dimensional wings causes severe flow separation near stall. Standard improved delayed detached eddy simulation (IDDES) is unable to correctly predict the separating reattaching flow due…