NTSB CAROL · Event
Event LAX02LA034
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
the failure of the AT-401 pilot to maintain clearance with the AT-402 airplane during landing. Contributing factors were the unreliable communication radio in the AT-401, the AT-401 pilot's continued flight with known communication radio problems, and the glare of the sun.
Factual narrative
On November 30, 2001, at 1546 Pacific standard time, an Air Tractor AT-401B, N9186J, landed on top of an Air Tractor AT-402A, N139LA, on runway 19R at the McCarren International Airport, Las Vegas, Nevada. The AT-402A sustained substantial damage to the rudder, while the AT-401B sustained minor damage. Neither the commercial pilot onboard the AT-401B, or the airline transport pilot onboard the AT-402A were injured. The AT-401B was registered to Southeastern Aerial Corp Service Inc., Fort Pierce, Florida, and the AT-402A was registered to Air Tractor Inc., Olney, Texas. Air Tractor operated both airplanes under the provisions of 14 CFR Part 91. The two airplanes were part of a flight of three airplanes that departed the Olney Municipal Airport, Olney, approximately 0845 en route to Las Vegas, where the airplanes were to be displayed at the National Agricultural Aviation Association's annual convention. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident, and a flight plan had not been filed for the cross-country flight. For purposes of this report, the three airplanes will be referred to as the AT-401, AT-402, and AT-502. According to the AT-401 pilot, the AT-401 was equipped with a "ferry radio package that contained a single com[munication] radio and transponder with encoder." The pilot tested the radio with a radio check over the unicom frequency located at the departure airport. The AT-401 pilot indicated the response to his radio check was, "loud and clear." The AT-401 pilot experienced a gradual loss of radio communication capability when the flight neared Albuquerque, New Mexico (ABQ). The ABQ approach controller indicated the airplane's communications were, "weak, but readable." The AT-401 pilot could hear the communications from the AT-502 pilot; however, he could not hear any communications from AT-402 pilot. The AT-401 pilot indicated that communications were possible (on a limited basis) when the airplanes were aligned adjacent to each other; however, no communications were possible if the airplanes were in trail. As the flight of three neared its destination, with the AT-401 in lead, the AT-402 next, and the AT-502 in the trailing position, plans were made to enter Las Vegas' class C airspace. It was determined that if the AT-401 could not establish communications with Las Vegas air traffic control, the AT-502 would take the lead, establish communications for the three airplanes, and take the flight to the runway. The AT-401 could not establish communications with Las Vegas approach control and the lead was transferred to the AT-502. The AT-401 then took up the number 2 position echelon off the AT-502 right wing. The AT-401 pilot changed radio frequencies, along with the AT-502. The AT-502 pilot relayed to the other pilots the headings assigned by air traffic control. The AT-401 pilot indicated that as they approached the airport, the sun was low on the horizon and "now a factor in visibility." Approach control had cleared the flight of three to make a left base approach to runway 19R. The AT-401 pilot made visual contact with the number 3 airplane (AT-402), and determined he was "roughly in trail with the lead aircraft, several hundred yards behind." As as the AT-401 turned from base leg to final, the AT-401's heading passed through the glare of the setting sun. The AT-401 pilot maintained his position relative to the lead aircraft (AT-502). He indicated he followed the lead aircraft onto final, landed behind it, and taxied off the active runway. According to the AT-402 pilot, he was originally in the number 2 position behind the AT-401; however, when the AT-401 experienced radio communication problems, a plan was made to deal with the situation. The AT-402 pilot indicated that plan "A" would be: if the AT-401 pilot obtained airspace clearance, then the landing order would be the AT-401, followed by the AT-402, and then the AT-502. However, as the radio communications degraded on the AT-401, the plan was changed to plan "B," which had the AT-502 obtain the clearance and land, followed again by the AT-402, then the AT-401. The AT-402 remained in the number 2 position in both plans. The AT-402 pilot indicated he landed number 2 behind the AT-502, and was rolling out with all wheels firmly on the ground, when he felt the aircraft shudder. He observed both main wheels of the AT-401 "come past the cockpit, flying exactly over the top of me." The AT-401 was flying straight and level and landed ahead of the AT-402. The AT-402 pilot scanned his instrument panel, powered up, taxied clear of the runway, and parked the airplane. The pilot of the AT-401 reported he had 2 years (and approximately 200 hours) of formation flying experience in T-6 trainers with the Confederate Air Force. In the Pilot/Operator Aircraft Accident Report (NTSB Form 6120.1/2), under the section titled "Recommendation (How Could This Accident Have Been Prevented," the AT-401 pilot listed "formal formation training and qualification check for all pilots in group. Proper installation of ferry radio equipment." Three airplanes, an AT-401, an AT-402 and an AT-502 were making a cross-country formation flight. Originally, the AT-401 was the lead airplane, the AT-402 was in the number 2 position, and the AT-502 was the trailing airplane. The AT-401 experienced radio communication problems during the flight. When the AT-401 pilot was unable to establish radio communications with air traffic control at the destination airport, he turned the lead over to the AT-502. The AT-401 pilot thought he was to transition to the number 2 position with the AT-402 taking the trail position. The pilot of the AT-402 thought the AT-401 was to take the trail position after the AT-502 assumed the lead, and he was to remain the number 2 airplane in the formation/landing sequence. According to the AT-401 pilot, the transition from base leg to final approach brought his airplane through the glare of the setting sun, and he concentrated on maintaining his relative position to the lead airplane. He landed behind the AT-502 and taxied off the runway. The AT-402 pilot indicated he landed behind the AT-502, and during the roll out, felt his airplane shudder as the AT-401 impacted his vertical stabilizer/rudder, passed over his airplane and landed on the runway ahead of him. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database (Pre-2008 Archive) Retrieved: 2026-02-12
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2001_LAX02LA034.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 (stall). 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 2026 · Conference Paper
Computational Analysis of Steady State Aerodynamics of Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Configuration in Deep Stall
This study presents a computational investigation of steady state aerodynamics of the Subsonic Ultra-Green Aircraft Research (SUGAR) Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) configuration over a wide range …
- arXiv 2023 · arXiv preprint
Automating Bird Diverter Installation through Multi-Aerial Robots and Signal Temporal Logic Specifications
This paper tackles the task assignment and trajectory generation problem for bird diverter installation using a fleet of multi-rotors.
- arXiv 2023 · arXiv preprint
Variation of Critical Crystallization Pressure for the Formation of Square Ice in Graphene Nanocapillaries
Two-dimensional square ice in graphene nanocapillaries at room temperature is a fascinating phenomenon and has been confirmed experimentally.
- arXiv 2023 · arXiv preprint
Polycrystallinity enhances stress build-up around ice
Damage caused by freezing wet, porous materials is a widespread problem, but is hard to predict or control. Here, we show that polycrystallinity makes a great difference to the stress build-up process…
- arXiv 2022 · arXiv preprint
Enhanced Prediction of Three-dimensional Finite Iced Wing Separated Flow Near Stall
Icing on three-dimensional wings causes severe flow separation near stall. Standard improved delayed detached eddy simulation (IDDES) is unable to correctly predict the separating reattaching flow due…
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2021 · Journal article (JAAER)
Analysis on the Negative Emotional, Physiological, and Cognitive Responses Elicited from of the Activation of a Stall Alarm
Failing to identify an aerodynamic stall can lead to the inability of an aircraft to sustain flight. To warn pilots of an impending or fully-developed stall, many aircraft have safety devices installe…
Browse the full corpus — academia portal ↗