NYC00LA018
1999-10-25 · HOPEDALE, Massachusetts, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport 1B6
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The nose landing gear was not locked in the extended position.
Factual narrative
On October 25, about 1020 Eastern Daylight Time, a Piper PA-34-200, N16397, was substantially damaged while landing at Hopedale Industrial Park Airport (1B6), Hopedale, Massachusetts. The certificated flight instructor and student pilot were not injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan was filed for the local instructional flight conducted under 14 CFR Part 91. The flight instructor stated that his student completed some airwork, they returned to the airport for landing, and the student flew the airplane. The landing gear was extended as the airplane was entering the traffic pattern, at 1,300 feet. Checklist items, including confirmation of three green landing gear lights were completed, and the approach was normal. The airplane settled from about 5 feet in the air onto the runway. The airplane touched down on the main landing gear first, followed by the nose gear, then the nose gear collapsed. It skidded about 600 feet, and came to rest on the runway. The instructor added that the landing was not soft, but he would not consider it a hard landing. He stated that he had experienced harder landings in the past. He believed that the nose gear may have encountered harder landings in the past, and failed during the landing. The student pilot stated that she completed some airwork and was returning to the airport. She reduced power on both engines below 14 inches of manifold pressure, and heard a landing gear warning horn. About 5,000 feet, she extended the landing gear to silence the horn. She descended, flew a normal traffic pattern, and completed the checklist items. Three green landing gear lights were confirmed upon entry into the traffic pattern. The airplane settled onto the runway from about 5 feet in the air, and the nose gear collapsed. The wreckage was examined by a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Inspector. The Inspector observed damage to both propellers and sections of the fuselage. He added that the nose landing gear actuator had separated. No other damage to the nose landing gear was observed. The actuator was sent to the Safety Board for further examination. The actuator was examined by a Metallurgist at the Safety Board's Materials Laboratory. According to the Materials Laboratory Factual Report, "Examination with a scanning electron microscope showed that most of the fracture face contained quasi-cleavage features typical of an overstress separation." According to a representative from the airplane manufacturer, there were only two scenarios in which the landing gear actuator could separate, without any other damage to the nose landing gear. Either the landing gear was improperly rigged, or it was still in travel as the airplane landed on the runway. The FAA inspector reviewed the airplane maintenance records. According to the records, the rigging of the landing gear was checked during the last annual inspection, and no maintenance work was performed on the landing gear between the annual inspection and the accident. The pilots stated that the landing gear was extended prior to entering the traffic pattern. The approach was normal, and the airplane settled from about 5 feet in the air, onto the runway. The main gear touched down first, followed by the nose landing gear, then the nose landing gear collapsed. The airplane skidded approximately 600 feet, and came to rest on the runway. The nose landing gear actuator separated, but there was no other damage to the nose landing gear. Examination of the actuator, by a Safety Board Metallurgist, revealed a failure consistent with overstress. According to the airplane manufacturer, the nose landing gear could not be extended and locked, if only the actuator was damaged. Either the landing gear was improperly rigged, or the gear was still in travel as the airplane landed. According to maintenance records, the rigging of the landing gear was checked during the last annual inspection, and no maintenance work was performed on the landing gear between the annual inspection and the accident. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database (Pre-2008 Archive) Retrieved: 2026-02-12
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_1999_NYC00LA018.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 (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
- 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.
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2024 · Journal article (JAAER) A New Trajectory in UAV Safety: Leveraging Reinforcement Learning for Distance Maintenance Under Wind Variations
In the field of aviation, safety is a critical cornerstone, and the operation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) systems is deeply connected with this principle.
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2024 · Journal article (JAAER) Low-Resource Automatic Speech Recognition Domain Adaptation – A Case-Study in Aviation Maintenance
With timeliness and efficiency being critical in the aviation maintenance industry, the need has been growing for smart technological solutions that optimize and streamline the different underlying ta…