NTSB CAROL · Event
Event ERA23FA174
Registry · N869AC
FAA Aircraft Registry record.
Make / Model
CESSNA 525B
Year of manufacture
2005 · 18 years old at event
Engine
WILLIAMS FJ 44 SERIES
Seats / Engines
8 seats · 2 engines
Last airworthiness date
20051123
ADS-B equipped
Yes — Mode-S ABF049
Registrant of record
MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT LEASING SERVICES INC
Source: FAA Aircraft Registry (releasable master file).
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The separation of the left wing extension and winglet for reasons that could not be determined based on the available evidence.
Factual narrative
HISTORY OF FLIGHTOn March 30, 2023, about 1815 eastern daylight time, a Cessna 525B, N869AC, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident over the Gulf of Mexico. The airline transport pilot was not injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 corporate flight. The flight originated about 1647 from Walnut Ridge Regional Airport (ARG), Walnut Ridge, Arkansas, and was destined for Page Field Airport (FMY), Fort Myers, Florida. The pilot reported that the airplane was in a cruise descent at an indicated airspeed of about 275 knots with the autopilot engaged. Before the descent, the weather was clear with no turbulence. The airplane was descending from flight level (FL) 310 to FL 270 to meet an altitude crossing restriction at the OGGER intersection. When the airplane was near FL 300, the pilot felt “two jolts of sudden turbulence” that he described as a negative G followed by a significant positive G twice in the span of about 1 second. Afterward, the pilot reduced the throttle in case of further turbulence. He felt the airplane yaw, which he initially thought was asymmetrical thrust, but the engine instruments showed no anomalies. The pilot then looked out the leftside window and saw that the left winglet had separated from the wing (the right winglet remained attached). The pilot disconnected the autopilot, reduced engine power further, and declared an emergency. The pilot made an emergency landing at Tampa International Airport (TPA), Tampa, Florida, without further incident. The pilot did note that he had felt some binding of the ailerons occurred during final approach. AIRCRAFT INFORMATIONThe airplane was equipped with a Tamarack Aerospace Group Active Technology Load Alleviation System (ATLAS) via Federal Aviation Administration supplemental type certificate. The Tamarack ATLAS installation was completed in December 2022. Each wing had a wing extension; a winglet; and a Tamarack Active Camber Surface (TACS), which was actuated by a TACS control unit (TCU). The TACS were aerodynamic control surfaces mounted on the wing extensions that automatically deployed to counteract measured structural loads. The TCUs were replaced in February 2023 as a result of fault alerts observed during two previous flights. The pilot of those flights reported no flight control anomalies associated with the fault alerts. During each flight, the pilot opened and reset the circuit breaker to the system, which cleared the faults, and he subsequently landed the airplane without further incident. No additional anomalies were reported after the TCUs were replaced. AIRPORT INFORMATIONThe airplane was equipped with a Tamarack Aerospace Group Active Technology Load Alleviation System (ATLAS) via Federal Aviation Administration supplemental type certificate. The Tamarack ATLAS installation was completed in December 2022. Each wing had a wing extension; a winglet; and a Tamarack Active Camber Surface (TACS), which was actuated by a TACS control unit (TCU). The TACS were aerodynamic control surfaces mounted on the wing extensions that automatically deployed to counteract measured structural loads. The TCUs were replaced in February 2023 as a result of fault alerts observed during two previous flights. The pilot of those flights reported no flight control anomalies associated with the fault alerts. During each flight, the pilot opened and reset the circuit breaker to the system, which cleared the faults, and he subsequently landed the airplane without further incident. No additional anomalies were reported after the TCUs were replaced. WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATIONPostaccident examination of the airplane revealed that the left-wing extension and the left aileron were substantially damaged. The left-wing extension, winglet, and TACS were missing except for about 28 inches of the leading edge of the wing extension. The left aileron had an impact mark with chipped paint on the lower surface near the outboard end, and the outboard half exhibited buckling damage. Its outboard static wick exhibited fibers consistent with aircraft sealant. The remaining ATLAS components were examined on the airplane, and no anomalies were noted. The ATLAS main circuit breaker was found in the closed position. A (functional) built-in test of the system was performed, and no anomalies were noted. After the test, the leftwing TACS bellcrank (which remained on the left wing) was between the stops in approximately a neutral position, and the right-wing TACS was in a neutral position. The left TCU, right TCU, ATLAS control unit, and Honeywell enhanced ground proximity warning system (EGPWS) were retained for further examination. The remaining left-wing extension structure was removed from the airplane and retained for further metallurgical examination. The left TCU, right TCU, and ATLAS control unit passed an acceptance test procedure at the manufacturer’s facility on May 16, 2023. Data were successfully downloaded from the EGPWS at the manufacturer’s facility. No faults were recorded during the accident flight. (For more information, see the Systems Group Chair’s Factual Report in the public docket for this accident.) Portions of the left-wing extension assembly and the left winglet assembly were recovered from the Gulf of Mexico 11 days after the accident and provided to the National Transportation Safety Board’s Materials Laboratory, Washington, DC. The left TACS, which is normally installed on the left wing extension, was not recovered. Metallurgical examination of the recovered components revealed features consistent with overstress, with no fatigue observed. TESTS AND RESEARCHThe NTSB conducted a performance study for this accident. The study included a review of automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast and GPS data. Those data revealed that, during the airplane’s descent, its airspeed was 2 knots outside the airplane manufacturer’s maximum operating speed (VMO/MMO) performance envelope. The study found that, at the time of the winglet separation, the airplane was descending about 5,300 ft per minute through FL 300 at 275 knots calibrated airspeed. The business jet was equipped with wing extensions (via supplemental type certificate) that included winglets and wing extension-mounted aerodynamic control surfaces that automatically deployed to counteract measured structural loads. Before the airplane’s descent from flight level (FL) 310, the weather was clear with no turbulence. When the airplane was descending through FL 300 for FL 270, the pilot felt “two jolts of sudden turbulence” that he described as a negative G followed by a significant positive G twice in the span of about 1 second. The pilot noted that the airplane was yawing, and he subsequently observed that the left winglet had separated, resulting in substantial damage to the airplane. He declared an emergency and landed without further incident at a nearby airport. Review of automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast and GPS revealed that, during the airplane’s descent, its airspeed was slightly outside the airplane manufacturer’s maximum operating speed (VMO/MMO) performance envelope. At the time of winglet separation, the airplane was descending about 5,300 ft per minute at 275 knots calibrated airspeed. Eleven days after the accident, the separated winglet was recovered from the Gulf of Mexico; however, the section of the left wing extension that included the aerodynamic control surface was not recovered. Metallurgical examination of the recovered components revealed overstress features and no evidence of fatigue. Additionally, systems testing of the aerodynamic control surface control units, the system computer, and the enhanced ground proximity warning system revealed no anomalies. Because the aerodynamic control surface on the left wing extension was not recovered, the reason for the left wing extension and winglet separation could not be determined. 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).
- — Not determined-Not determined-(general)-(general)-Unknown/Not determined
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2023_ERA23FA174.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 (stall, turbulence, autopilot). 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 2021 · Journal article (IJAAA)
Comparative Study on the Prediction of Aerodynamic Characteristics of Mini - Unmanned Aerial Vehicle with Turbulence Models
When dealing with CFD simulations the turbulent nature is seen on most of the engineering flows and these flows need to be solved.
- arXiv 2020 · arXiv preprint
Numerical Simulation of Iced Wing Using Separating Shear Layer Fixed Turbulence Models
Aerodynamic prediction of glaze ice accretion on airfoils and wing is studied using the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes method.
- NASA NTRS 2019 · Conference Paper
Prediction of stall and post-stall behavior of airfoils at low and high Reynolds numbers
An interactive boundary-layer method, together with the e(super n)-approach to the calculation of transition, has been used to predict the stall and post-stall behavior of airfoils at low and high Rey…
- arXiv 2026 · arXiv preprint
Direct Numerical Simulations of Ice-Ocean Boundary Turbulence
Turbulent heat and freshwater transport at ice-ocean interfaces controls glacier and iceberg melt rates, yet the underlying physics remains poorly constrained.
- 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 …
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2025 · Journal article (JAAER)
Political Turbulence and Aviation Safety: A Cross-National Analysis of Political Stability's Effects on Aviation Accidents
To what extent does political stability affect aviation safety? This research aims to link domestic political conditions and public safety through the consideration of aviation accident frequency.
Browse the full corpus — academia portal ↗