SEA00IA069
2000-04-11 · TACOMA, Washington, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport TIW
Current FAA registration · N1298M
- Make / Model
- CESSNA 182P
- Year of manufacture
- 1975 · 25 years old at event
- Engine
- CONT MOTOR O-470 SERIES (230 hp)
- Seats / Engines
- 4 seats · 1 engine
- Last airworthiness date
- 19751021
- ADS-B equipped
- Yes — Mode-S A0789D
Source: FAA Aircraft Registry (releasable master file).
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
Flap attachment failure. Restricted movement of the aileron was a factor.
Factual narrative
On April 11, 2000, approximately 1009 Pacific daylight time, a Cessna 182P, N1298M, registered to and operated by the Ft. Lewis Army Flying Club, experienced a flight control interference while on final approach to Port Orchard, Washington. The pilot diverted to Tacoma, Washington, where an emergency landing was made without further incident. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and a military visual flight rules flight plan was filed. The aircraft received minor damage and the flight instructor and commercial pilot were not injured. The flight originated from Ft. Lewis, Washington, about 40 minutes prior to the incident. In a written statement, the flight instructor reported that the purpose of the flight was for the commercial pilot's annual flight check. A simulated emergency landing, with partial engine power, was being performed to the Port Orchard Airport. The commercial pilot was at the controls for the approach. Flaps were extended to 10 degrees for the downwind leg. While on the base leg, 20 degrees of flaps were extended, and while on final approach, 40 degrees for flaps were extended. The flight instructor then initiated a go-around with full power to climb at 80 mph. The flaps were retracted to 20 degrees. Once a positive rate was established, the remainder of the flaps were retracted. The instructor noted a lack of performance and found that the flap indicator was down approximately 1/4 inch from the fully retracted position. The flight instructor also noted that the right side flap was extended about one to two inches. The flap handle was verified in the up position. The instructor then noted that the circuit breaker was out. The circuit breaker was reset and the flap handle was moved to coincide with the flap extension. The instructor tried to retract the flap and the circuit breaker again tripped. At this time, the left side flap was noted to be extended about four to six inches, and the leading edge of the flap was visibly bent. The left side aileron was also restricted. The aircraft wanted to roll to the left and the pilot used rudder trim to maintain control. The flight then diverted to Tacoma where the pilot declared an emergency, landing without further incident. A Federal Aviation Administration inspector from the Seattle, Washington, Flight Standards District Office inspected the aircraft. The inspector reported that the inboard left side flap track was cracked and broken. The flap had deformed and contacted the aileron, restricting its movement. (See attached excerpt from the Cessna Parts Catalog and photographs). During the climb-out from a simulated emergency landing, the flaps were retracted. The pilot noted a lack of climb performance and found that the flaps were not fully retracted even though the flap handle indicated that they were retracted. The pilot also found that the circuit breaker was out. The pilot noted that the left side flap was extended slightly more than the right, and that the flap was visibly bent. The left side flap was also restricting the left side aileron movement. The flight was diverted to a controlled airport where the pilot declared an emergency before landing without further incident. It was later found that the inboard left side flap track was cracked and broken. The flap had deformed and contacted the aileron, restricting its movement. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database (Pre-2008 Archive) Retrieved: 2026-02-12
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2000_SEA00IA069.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). All research papers
- 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…