IAD96LA110
1996-07-10 · HARTFORD, Connecticut, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport HFD
Current FAA registration · N1085W
- Make / Model
- MOONEY M20M
- Year of manufacture
- 1990 · 6 years old at event
- Engine
- LYCOMING TI0-540 SER (310 hp)
- Seats / Engines
- 4 seats · 1 engine
- Last airworthiness date
- 19900226
- ADS-B equipped
- Yes — Mode-S A02588
Source: FAA Aircraft Registry (releasable master file).
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
the pilot's inadequate control of the airplane during the approach to landing/landing roll. A related factor is the pilot's inadequate remedial action (attempted go-around).
Factual narrative
On July 10, 1996, at about 1330 eastern daylight time (EDT), a Mooney M20M, N1085W, ran off the departure end of the runway, and collided with a fence after landing at Hartford-Brainard Airport, in Hartford, Connecticut. The pilot, and the one passenger reported no injuries. The airplane sustained substantial damage. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the flight, and no flight plan was filed. The flight operated under 14 CFR Part 91, and originated from Lawrence G. Hanscom Field, in Bedford, Massachusetts, at approximately 1235 EDT. The passenger of the accident aircraft stated that as the aircraft flew over the approach end of the intended landing runway, he thought that the airplane was somewhat higher above the ground than it should have been. He reported that when the pilot attempted to flare the aircraft for landing, it did not settle to the runway, "...rather that it seemed to float down the runway." The passenger stated that he looked "...down and to the left...and observed [the pilot] attempting to push the throttle in for full power... ." The passenger indicated that the power did not increase. The airplane touched down more than halfway down the runway, and veered to the right before it impacted a fence. The pilot reported that when the airplane was about 2 miles out, he recognized that the airplane "...was not slowed down enough for the final approach." The pilot requested and received air traffic control (ATC) clearance to perform a 360 degree turn to the right and rejoin final approach at a slower airspeed. The pilot stated that he performed his final approach procedures, and slowed the airplane to 75-80 knots, but when the airplane passed over the "...dike at the end of 29...[it]...caught a strong updraft...[the airplane] floated, and with 1/3 of the runway used, I attempted to [apply] full throttle for a go around, however the throttle control would not go in." The pilot stated that he decided to land the airplane. After the airplane touched down the pilot "...steered the plane toward the longest open point of ground, which was a corner of the field to the right. The left wing struck a fence post, turning the plane around into the fence." The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Inspector stated that postaccident examination confirmed that the flight controls were capable of normal operation. The FAA Inspector reported that examination of the throttle, mixture and propeller controls established that the controls were capable of normal operation. There was no evidence of preimpact mechanical anomaly. The pilot reported that the airplane was too fast on final approach to land, so he requested and received clearance to perform a 360-degree turn to slow the airplane before landing. When he flared the airplane for landing, it seemed to float. When he attempted to apply full throttle for a go-around, the throttle control would not go in. The airplane touched down more than halfway down the runway, and ran off the departure end of the runway where it collided with a fence. Postaccident examination revealed no evidence of preimpact mechanical anomaly. Flight control continuity was confirmed, and throttle, mixture, and propeller controls were examined, with no anomalies noted. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database (Pre-2008 Archive) Retrieved: 2026-02-12
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_1996_IAD96LA110.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 (go-around). All research papers
- 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…