LAX00LA339
2000-08-28 · HOLBROOK, Arizona, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport P14
Current FAA registration · N210DL
- Make / Model
- CESSNA P210N
- Year of manufacture
- 1978 · 22 years old at event
- Engine
- CONT MOTOR TSIO-520 SER (300 hp)
- Seats / Engines
- 6 seats · 1 engine
- Last airworthiness date
- 19780922
- ADS-B equipped
- Yes — Mode-S A1B9D8
Source: FAA Aircraft Registry (releasable master file).
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The lack of elevator control during final approach, for undetermined reasons, that resulted in a hard landing.
Factual narrative
On August 28, 2000, about 1550 mountain standard time, a Cessna 210E, N210DL, made a hard landing at the Holbrook, Arizona, airport. The airplane was owned and operated by the pilot under the provisions of 14 CFR Part 91. The commercial pilot and one passenger were not injured; the airplane sustained substantial damage. The personal flight departed Dalhart, Texas, about 1330 central daylight time. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and no flight plan had been filed. The Safety Board was notified of the accident on September 21, 2000, following confirmation of the degree of damage. The pilot stated that he flew the approach as he had normally done in the past, with the landing gear extended, wing flaps partially extended, and elevator trim set at the full nose up position. He utilized power to stay on glideslope and maintained airspeed of about 85 miles per hour until short final, when he slowed to about 75 miles per hour. The pilot stated that on this approach he began to preflare about 500 feet from the landing threshold. He applied backpressure to the elevator, but stated that nothing happened. He applied more back elevator with no effect. He began adding power about 20 feet above the runway to arrest the airplane's descent, but was still nose low. He added power to bring the nose up, but the airplane began to climb. By this time, he approximated that he was 1,500 to 2,000 feet down the runway. He felt that he did not have elevator control and thought it would be too risky to attempt a go-around and approach with that condition. He elected to land, even though it would probably result in damage to the airplane. He reduced power and the airplane touched down on the nose wheel and began to porpoise. On the third bounce, the nose wheel collapsed and the airplane came to a stop on the runway. The pilot removed the rear cabin panel in order to turn off the emergency locator transmitter. He noticed that the elevator cables were loose and sagging. He checked the cables to the tail cone and noted that they appeared to be intact and connected. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) accident coordinator examined the airplane, and reported that he did not observe any mechanical anomalies that would account for the loss of elevator effectiveness. The pilot reported that the firewall was pushed in. During the repair process, he said maintenance personnel discovered one pulley that would not move, and another pulley on the firewall exhibited scratch marks. However, they did not observe any cable or pulley wear. Figure 82A of the Cessna 210 illustrated Parts Catalog illustrates the elevator control system. The Safety Board investigator examined another Cessna 210 of the same model, and observed that one of the pulleys in the elevator control system was attached to the engine firewall. During a porpoise and hard landing, the nose wheel collapsed and the firewall was pushed in. The pilot began to preflare about 500 feet from the landing threshold. He applied backpressure to the elevator, but nothing happened. He applied more back elevator with no effect. He began adding power about 20 feet above the runway to arrest the airplane's descent, but was still nose low. He added power to bring the nose up, but the airplane began to climb. By this time, the pilot approximated that he was 1,500 to 2,000 feet down the runway. He felt that he did not have elevator control and thought it would be too risky to attempt a go-around and approach with that condition. He elected to land, even though it would probably result in damage to the airplane. He reduced power and the airplane touched down on the nose wheel and began to porpoise. On the third bounce, the nose wheel collapsed and the airplane came to a stop on the runway. The pilot removed the rear cabin panel, and noticed that the elevator cables were loose and sagging. He checked the cables to the tail cone and noted that they appeared to be intact and connected. The post accident examination of the airplane did not reveal any mechanical anomalies that would account for the loss of elevator effectiveness. During the repair process, maintenance personnel discovered one pulley that would not move, and another pulley on the firewall exhibited scratch marks. However, they did not observe any cable or pulley wear. One of the pulleys in the elevator control system was attached to the engine firewall. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database (Pre-2008 Archive) Retrieved: 2026-02-12
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2000_LAX00LA339.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, maintenance). All research papers
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2026 · Journal article (IJAAA) From Reactive to Predictive: A hybrid Trust-Mediated Adoption Framework for Data-Driven Maintenance in Distributed-Authority Aviation Environments
Modern aviation maintenance operates within increasingly data-intensive technological environments, yet the operational integration of predictive maintenance into routine decision-making remains incon…
- Semantic Scholar 2026 · Article (Reliability Engineering & System Safety) Understanding human error in military aviation maintenance: The role of Performance shaping factors, cognitive workload and error orientation
- 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.
- Semantic Scholar 2025 · Article (Applied Sciences) Decision-Making Framework for Aviation Safety in Predictive Maintenance Strategies
The implementation of predictive maintenance (PM) in aviation presents unique challenges due to strict safety requirements, complex operational environments, and regulatory constraints.
- Semantic Scholar 2024 · Article (Defence Science Journal) Modelling of Human Factors in Aviation Maintenance Using HFACS ME Human Factors Analysis and Classification System Maintenance Extension and Bayesian Network
Aircraft maintenance is a complex task involving a skilled human workforce, spare parts, and various other resources. Human factors are an inherent element of the human workforce.
- 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…