NTSB CAROL · Event
Event IAD99LA068
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The pilot's misjudgment of speed during the landing approach. The inoperative airspeed indicator was a contributing factor.
Factual narrative
On September 21, 1999, at 1830 eastern daylight time, a Cessna 172P, N63325, was substantially damaged during a runway overrun while landing at the Potomac Airfield Airport (VKX), Friendly, Maryland. The certificated flight instructor and private pilot were not injured. Instrument meteorological conditions prevailed for the instrument training flight that originated at VKX approximately 1815. An instrument flight rules flight plan was filed for the flight conducted under 14 CFR Part 91. In a written statement, the flight instructor said the purpose of the flight was to provide instrument flight training to the private pilot. He said they experienced delays in receiving their clearance from Air Traffic Control (ATC) on the ground, and decided to pick up the clearance while airborne in the traffic pattern at Potomac Airfield. The flight instructor stated: "After performing the run-up, we took off on [runway] 6 and by 3/4 of the runway my student reported no airspeed on the dial. By now, the airplane was already airborne. At that point, an abort was impossible. We climbed normally by keeping a low angle climb and I decided to take over the controls. The traffic pattern was a little bumpy but the visibility was OK; the airport was always in sight. I decided to come back and land on [runway] 6...My first attempt was fast with about 20 [degrees] of flaps so I did a go-around. My second was a little slower but the plane was floating too long and I applied power and went back up. On the third one, I did successfully touch down but the plane was hydroplaning to the end of the runway without stopping or slowing down. I saw the ravine at the end of the runway but couldn't stop and the left wheel caught the edge of the bank and the plane skid to a stop on the left wing." In a written statement, the private pilot said: "During the takeoff I divided most of my attention to maintaining directional control of the aircraft, so I am uncertain whether or not I may [have] had a reading on the airspeed indicator before rotation. After N63325 became airborne and I had positive directional control of the aircraft, I noticed the airspeed indicator was at [zero] mph and not moving at all. "[The flight instructor] attempted to land twice on runway 6. Both times we did not have enough runway left to land safely and he aborted the landings. I suggested we land at National (DCA) or Andrews (ADW) since we were fast and had no way of determining our airspeed on final. He agreed we would do that if a third landing attempt was unsuccessful." Examination of the wreckage by the operator and a mechanic revealed the pitot tube was obstructed. In a telephone interview, the operator stated he was able to clear the pitot tube with a piece of safety wire and the airspeed indicator worked when tested. The flight instructor reported 700 hours of total flight experience, 60 hours of which were in the 90 days prior to the accident. He reported 100 hours of experience in make and model. The private pilot reported 390 hours of total flight experience, 20 hours of which were in the 90 days prior to the accident. He reported 25 hours of experience in make and model. The weather reported at ADW, 5 miles northeast of Potomac Airpark, was: visibility 4 miles in light rain showers and fog. There were few clouds at 300 feet with a broken ceiling at 500 feet and an overcast layer at 1,800 feet. The winds were from 330 degrees at 14 knots. The flight instructor and private pilot departed on an instrument training flight in IFR conditions. The private pilot performed the takeoff and announced during climbout that the airspeed indicator was inoperative. The flight instructor took control of the airplane and returned for landing. The flight instructor attempted 2 landings and aborted both attempts. On the third attempt, the airplane touched down, overran the runway, and collided with a ditch. Examination of the airplane after the accident revealed an obstructed pitot tube. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database (Pre-2008 Archive) Retrieved: 2026-02-12
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_1999_IAD99LA068.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 ↗