NYC00LA114
2000-04-15 · CINCINNATI, Ohio, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport LUK
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
A partial power loss for undetermined reasons.
Factual narrative
On April 15, 2000, about 1415 Eastern Daylight Time, a Sidewinder, a homebuilt airplane, N13545, was substantially damaged while departing Cincinnati Municipal Airport, Cincinnati, Ohio. The certificated private pilot was not injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and no flight plan was filed for the personal flight conducted under 14 CFR Part 91. The flight was destined for Capital City Airport, Frankfort, Kentucky. The pilot stated that he performed a normal run-up, and departed on Runway 21L. About 200 feet in the air, the engine ran rough and lost partial power. Between 30 and 50 feet above the ground, the airplane stalled and impacted terrain approximately 500 feet beyond the runway. The pilot added that he was not sure why the engine lost power, but suspected that it may have been "vapor lock" or a "clogged finger screen." According to a witness and Air Traffic Control Specialists, the accident flight was the pilot's second takeoff attempt. About 15 minutes before the accident, he aborted a takeoff due to "engine problems" and taxied back to the ramp. The pilot inspected brakes, fuel, oil, and the engine. After he could not find any anomalies, he taxied out for the second takeoff attempt. When first interviewed by a FAA inspector, the pilot failed to mention the first takeoff attempt. However, in a subsequent written statement, the pilot stated "the aircraft acceleration seemed slow" during the first takeoff attempt. When asked about the engine, the pilot stated that he did not know the date of manufacture, or total flight time of the engine. When asked why, the pilot stated that he purchased the airplane in 1984, and "there were no papers on the engine." He did know that it was overhauled sometime before 1984. An Air Safety investigator at Textron Lycoming was provided with the engine serial number. He stated that the serial number corresponded to a O-290-G1B engine that was manufactured during the 1940's and 1950's. The investigator added that the engine was not manufactured for use in aircraft. It was primarily sold to the military as a ground power unit for generators or pumps. According to FAA Flight Standards Service Release 462, the following components of the engine were considered ineligible for use in a certificated aircraft engine: connecting rod assembly, piston, piston pin, piston ring-top compression, piston ring-2nd compression, and oil regulating ring. However, the engine was not required to meet certification standards as it was used in an airplane with an experimental certificate. A FAA inspector examined the engine. He noted that the fuel tank was approximately 1/2 full, and a fuel sample did not contain any visible contamination. The fuel gascolator screen, carburetor inlet screen, and fuel bowl were absent of debris. The carburetor float needle and seat appeared to be in good condition. When the inspector rotated the propeller by hand, thumb compression was attained on all cylinders. Valve train continuity was confirmed, and all spark plugs produced a spark at the lead. The pilot aborted his first takeoff attempt due to 'engine problems.' He taxied back to the ramp and inspected the brakes, fuel, oil, and the engine. About 15 minutes later, after he could not find any anomalies, he attempted a second takeoff. During the second takeoff, about 200 feet in the air, the engine lost partial power and the airplane impacted terrain. The pilot did not know the flight time, or date of manufacture of the accident engine. He purchased the airplane in 1984 without any records on the engine. According to the engine manufacturer, it was originally produced as a ground power unit for the military, and not certificated for aircraft use. Specifically, the FAA noted that pistons, piston rings, and the connecting rod assembly were ineligible for use in certificated engines. Examination of the engine by a FAA inspector did not reveal the cause of the partial power loss. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database (Pre-2008 Archive) Retrieved: 2026-02-12
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2000_NYC00LA114.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 (stall). All research papers
- 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…