NTSB CAROL · Event
Event WPR15FA174
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
A loss of control for reasons that could not be determined, because examination of the airframe and engine revealed no anomalies that would have precluded normal operation.
Factual narrative
HISTORY OF FLIGHTOn June 1, 2015, about 2058 Pacific daylight time, a Piper PA22-135, N1348C, collided with terrain while maneuvering near Livermore Municipal Airport, Livermore, California. The airline transport pilot sustained fatal injuries, and the airplane was destroyed. The pilot/owner was operating the airplane under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91. The local personal flight departed Livermore at 2052. Night visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan had been filed. Shortly after takeoff, the pilot reported a control difficulty to air traffic control tower personnel; he stated that he was going to make a circle, and troubleshoot the issue. There were no further transmissions from the pilot. A witness about 1/2 mile away from the airport said that the airplane caught his attention when he heard the engine "cut out." He looked up, but couldn't see the airplane as it was dusk. He then heard the engine "revving to a higher rpm like a crop duster swooping down." He heard the engine sputter twice, and then increase rpm again. He finally saw two outboard lights, one on each wing, and realized that the airplane was in a nose dive. According to the witness, it was not spinning, and the engine sounded like it was at full throttle. A plot of recorded radar data indicated that the airplane climbed about on the runway heading to a maximum mode C reported altitude of 3,100 ft mean sea level. About 2 minutes into the flight, the airplane made a 180° left turn, and lost 1,100 ft of altitude in 18 seconds. The radar track continued in a straight line until it ended; the total duration of the flight was 2 minutes 48 seconds. PERSONNEL INFORMATIONThe last flight recorded in the pilot's notebook was on February 6, 2015. The pages from the previous 2 years totaled over 49 hours with none listed in the accident make and model. WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATIONA National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigator and a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspector examined the wreckage on site on June 2, 2015. The first identified point of ground contact was a series of ground scars consistent with the left and right main landing gear, gear legs, engine, cowling, left and right wing lift struts, and wings. A propeller blade had separated about 6 inches from the hub along an angular plane. The rest of the propeller was in the principal impact crater; it was not charred. The main wreckage was burned, and was in the middle of a charred area. All of the airplane's fabric covering was consumed by fire. The debris path was about 108 ft long, and oriented on a 318° magnetic heading. All major structural components of the airplane were located at the accident site. Further examination of an aileron cable distortion by the NTSB Office of Research and Engineering Materials Laboratory determined that the cable distortion was a result of overload conditions. The postaccident examination of the airplane did not reveal any mechanical anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATIONThe Alameda County Coroner completed an autopsy on the pilot, and determined that the cause of death was blunt force trauma. The FAA Bioaeronautical Sciences Research Laboratory performed toxicological testing of specimens of the pilot, which were negative for volatiles and tested drugs. The laboratory did not perform tests for carbon monoxide or cyanide. The airline transport pilot departed on a local night flight. Shortly after takeoff, he reported a control difficulty to air traffic control tower personnel; he stated that he was going to make a circle, and troubleshoot the issue. There were no further transmissions from the pilot. A witness about 1/2 mile away from the airport said that the airplane caught his attention when he heard the engine cut out. He looked up, but couldn't see the airplane as it was dusk. He finally saw two outboard lights, one on each wing, and realized that the airplane was in a nose dive. According to the witness, it was not spinning, and the engine sounded like it was at full throttle. Radar data indicated that the airplane departed about on runway heading, and about 2 minutes into the flight it began a 180° turn. The airplane lost about 1,100 ft of altitude in 18 seconds during the turn. The radar track continued in a straight line until ground impact. Postaccident examination revealed no anomalies that would have precluded normal operation of the airframe or engine or would have caused a control difficulty. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12
NTSB Findings
Hierarchical cause / factor breakdown from the FAA bulk avdata database. Each finding tagged C (Cause) or F (Factor).
- C Not determined-Not determined-(general)-(general)-Unknown/Not determined - C
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2015_WPR15FA174.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 (loss of control). Sourced from NASA NTRS, NTSB Safety Studies, FAA CAMI, AOPA Air Safety Institute, Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons, arXiv, and the Semantic Scholar academic graph.
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2025 · Journal article (JAAER)
A Scoping Review of Aviation Loss of Control Inflight Research
Loss of control – inflight (LOC-I) contributes to aircraft accidents at unacceptably high rates. Significant industry efforts and research have aimed to improve LOC-I prevention, detection, and recove…
- SKYbrary (Eurocontrol) 2024 · SKYbrary article
Loss of Control In-Flight (LOC-I) — SKYbrary Knowledge Base
SKYbrary comprehensive knowledge-base entry on Loss of Control In-Flight — definitions, contributing factors, accident case studies (Air France 447, Colgan 3407), and prevention strategies.
- NTSB Aircraft Accident Reports 2022 · Accident report
Loss of Control on Takeoff in Icing Conditions — Citation 560XL
Cessna Citation 560XL fatal takeoff icing accident, March 2018. Investigation of a Citation 560XL loss-of-control takeoff accident in icing conditions.
- Semantic Scholar 2021 · Article (Aviation)
ANALYSIS OF GENERAL AVIATION FIXED-WING AIRCRAFT ACCIDENTS INVOLVING INFLIGHT LOSS OF CONTROL USING A STATE-BASED APPROACH
Inflight loss of control (LOC-I) is a significant cause of General Aviation (GA) fixed-wing aircraft accidents. The United States National Transportation Safety Board’s database provides a rich source…
- NASA NTRS 2021 · Presentation
Use of Design of Experiments in Determining Neural Network Architectures for Loss of Control Detection
Abstract—We describe empirical methods for selecting a neural network architecture to implement belief state inference on generic commercial transport aircraft.
- NASA NTRS 2021 · Conference Paper
Use of Design of Experiments in Determining Neural Network Architectures for Loss of Control Detection
We describe empirical methods for selecting a neural network architecture to implement belief state inference on generic commercial transport aircraft.
Browse the full corpus — academia portal ↗