Skip to content

GAA18CA174

2018-02-20 · Jacksonville, Florida, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed

Airport CRG

Current FAA registration · N81MT

Make / Model
CESSNA P210N
Year of manufacture
1981 · 37 years old at event
Engine
CONT MOTOR TSIO-520 SER (300 hp)
Seats / Engines
6 seats · 1 engine
Last airworthiness date
19820129
ADS-B equipped
Yes — Mode-S AB0828

Source: FAA Aircraft Registry (releasable master file).

Aircraft involved

Probable cause & findings

The pilot’s failure to extend the landing gear before landing. Contributing to the accident were pilot fatigue and his failure to use the before landing checklist.

Factual narrative

The pilot in the retractable landing gear-equipped airplane reported that he had been flying an instrument flight rules cross-country flight for about six continuous hours. He reported that he felt fatigued and anxious to get out of the airplane, so he decided to refuel enroute and contacted a nearby tower, and at that time he was notified of two aircraft in the pattern. He was able to identify only one of the airplanes before he initiated the approach. During the approach about 100ft AGL, tower informed the pilot that he needed to go around but did not say why. The pilot felt it to be unwise to abort the landing because he did not know the location of the second airplane in the pattern and continued the approach and landing. He reported that he did not accomplish the GUMPS checklist because of the distractions and the airplane touched down with the landing gear retracted. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the lower fuselage longerons and bulkhead. The pilot reported that there were no mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. The pilot in the retractable landing gear-equipped airplane reported that he had been flying an instrument flight rules cross-country flight for about 6 continuous hours. He reported that he felt fatigued and anxious to get out of the airplane, so he decided to refuel enroute. He contacted a nearby tower, and, at that time, he was notified of two aircraft in the pattern. He was able to identify only one airplane before he initiated the approach. During the approach about 100ft above ground level, the tower controller informed the pilot that he needed to go around but did not say why. The pilot thought it to be unwise to abort the landing because he did not know the location of the second airplane in the pattern and continued the approach and landing. He reported that he did not accomplish the GUMPS (Gas Undercarriage Mixture Props) checklist because of the distractions, and the airplane touched down with the landing gear retracted. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the lower fuselage longerons and bulkhead. The pilot reported that there were no mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12

NTSB Findings

FAA avdata. C = Cause, F = Factor.

  • C Aircraft-Aircraft systems-Landing gear system-Landing gear/wheel fairing-Not used/operated - C
  • C Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Use of equip/system-Pilot - C
  • F Personnel issues-Physical-Alertness/Fatigue-(general)-Pilot - F
  • F Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Use of checklist-Pilot - F
  • C Aircraft-Aircraft systems-Landing gear system-Gear extension and retract sys-Not used/operated - C
  • — Personnel issues-Psychological-Attention/monitoring-Task monitoring/vigilance-Pilot

Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file NTSB_2018_GAA18CA174.txt. Findings + structured fields enriched from FAA avall.mdb. Full investigation docket on data.ntsb.gov ↗.

Related research

Matched on aircraft type or causal vocabulary (pilot fatigue). All research papers