NTSB CAROL · Event
Event GAA19CA068
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The pilot’s failure to see and avoid the airplane on the runway while landing and the pilot receiving instruction’s and flight instructor's failure to properly scan the approach before pulling onto the runway during takeoff.
Factual narrative
The pilot in the low-wing airplane reported that, while in the traffic pattern at the non-towered airport, he made continuous reports on the common traffic advisory frequency (CTAF). He added that, on final, he observed a high-wing airplane positioned adjacent to the runway he was approaching. On short final, "the runway was clear" and he heard no radio transmissions. The low-wing airplane impacted the high-wing airplane on the runway. The low-wing airplane yawed right, the high-wing airplane became visible, and the low-wing airplane came to rest nose down in front of the right wing of the high-wing airplane. The pilot receiving instruction in the high-wing airplane reported that, after performing a run-up, she and the flight instructor taxied to and held short of the departure runway. She added that, during the taxi, she and the instructor did not hear radio transmissions on CTAF from other aircraft in the traffic pattern. Before departure, they visually cleared final and base and reported on the CTAF their departure intentions. They lined up on the runway for a short field takeoff, held the brakes, and applied full power. She released the brakes and about 3 to 5 seconds into the takeoff roll, they heard a loud noise and the airplane was pushed left. The high-wing airplane came to rest with the low-wing airplane "dangling off the right side" of the high-wing airplane. The low-wing airplane sustained substantial damage to the left wing. The high-wing airplane sustained substantial damage to the right wing and empennage. Two eyewitnesses in the same airplane reported that while taxiing, they heard the high-wing airplane make a radio transmission that they were "taking the runway" and departing. They observed the high-wing airplane lined up on the runway but did not see any aircraft on base or final. Several moments later, they looked back and saw the high-wing airplane still on the runway, and also a low-wing airplane on final. One of the witnesses made a call on the "unicom" frequency warning the low-wing airplane that another airplane was on the runway but heard no response. He made another call to the low-wing airplane to perform a go around, and then they observed the low-wing airplane land on top of the high-wing airplane. The pilots of the low-wing and high-wing airplanes reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the respective airplanes that would have precluded normal operation. The pilot in the low-wing airplane reported that, while in the traffic pattern at the nontowered airport, he made continuous reports on the common traffic advisory frequency (CTAF). He added that, on final, he observed a high-wing airplane positioned adjacent to the runway he was approaching. He added that, on short final, "the runway was clear," and he heard no radio transmissions. The low-wing airplane impacted the high-wing airplane on the runway. The low-wing airplane yawed right and came to rest nose down in front of the right wing of the high-wing airplane. The pilot receiving instruction in the high-wing airplane reported that, after performing a run-up, she and the flight instructor taxied to and held short of the departure runway. She added that, during the taxi, she and the instructor did not hear radio transmissions on the CTAF from other aircraft in the traffic pattern. Before departure, they visually cleared final and base and reported their departure intentions on the CTAF. They lined up on the runway for a short-field takeoff, held the brakes, and applied full power. She released the brakes and about 3 to 5 seconds into the takeoff roll, they heard a loud noise, and the airplane was pushed left. Despite reporting not hearing the other pilots on the CTAF, all the pilots reported that they used the same frequency. The low-wing airplane sustained substantial damage to the left wing. The high-wing airplane sustained substantial damage to the right wing and empennage. Two witnesses in the other airplane reported that, while taxiing, they heard the pilots in the high-wing airplane transmit that they were "taking the runway" and departing. They observed the high-wing airplane line up on the runway but did not see any aircraft on base or final. Several moments later, they looked back and saw the high-wing airplane still on the runway and the low-wing airplane on final. One of the witnesses made a call on the CTAF warning the low-wing airplane pilot that another airplane was on the runway but heard no response. He made another call to the low-wing airplane pilots to suggest that they perform a go-around, and then they observed the low-wing airplane land on top of the high-wing airplane. The pilots of the low- and high-wing airplanes reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with their airplanes that would have precluded normal operation. 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 Environmental issues-Physical environment-Object/animal/substance-Aircraft-Effect on operation - C
- C Personnel issues-Psychological-Attention/monitoring-Monitoring other aircraft-Pilot - C
- C Personnel issues-Psychological-Attention/monitoring-Monitoring environment-Pilot of other aircraft - C
- C Personnel issues-Psychological-Attention/monitoring-Monitoring environment-Instructor/check pilot - C
- C Personnel issues-Psychological-Attention/monitoring-Monitoring environment-Student/instructed pilot - C
- C Personnel issues-Psychological-Attention/monitoring-Monitoring other aircraft-Pilot of other aircraft - C
- C Environmental issues-Physical environment-Object/animal/substance-Aircraft-Effect on operation - C
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2018_GAA19CA068.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 (go-around). Sourced from NASA NTRS, NTSB Safety Studies, FAA CAMI, AOPA Air Safety Institute, Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons, arXiv, and the Semantic Scholar academic graph.
- NASA NTRS 2025 · Conference Paper
A Training Study to Improve Monitoring During A Go-Around
As part of an FAA program to improve go-around (GA) safety, we were asked to determine if we could improve the performance of the Pilot Monitoring (PM) during a GA maneuver.
- Flight Safety Foundation 2024 · FSF / AeroSafety World
Go-Around Safety Forum Findings
Foundation Go-Around Safety Forum technical findings — examines why pilots fail to execute go-arounds when criteria are met (stabilized approach gate not met, energy state out of envelope, traffic con…
- Semantic Scholar 2022 · Article (Journal of Safety Research)
Go-around accidents and general aviation safety.
INTRODUCTION Changes in General Aviation (GA) accident rates, specifically in the go-around phase, are examined by comparing the number of accidents, the proportion of fatal accidents, and the proport…
- Semantic Scholar 2021 · Article (Aerospace)
Classification and Analysis of Go-Arounds in Commercial Aviation Using ADS-B Data
Go-arounds are a necessary aspect of commercial aviation and are conducted after a landing attempt has been aborted. It is necessary to conduct go-arounds in the safest possible manner, as go-arounds …
- NASA NTRS 2021 · Accepted Manuscript (Version with final changes)
Go-Around Criteria Refinement for Transport Category Aircraft
Presently, airline pilots are trained to go around if, when lower than 500 ft above the ground, they are outside of a handful of parameters such as airspeed, position, and rate of descent.
- NASA NTRS 2019 · Conference Paper
Validation of Proposed Go-Around Criteria Under Various Environmental Conditions
This paper evaluates the effects of environmental conditions on touchdown performance under varying approach states and validates proposed go-around criteria developed using data from a previously con…
Browse the full corpus — academia portal ↗