WPR20LA288
2020-08-26 · Chino, California, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport CNO
Current FAA registration · N9540T
- Make / Model
- CESSNA 210
- Year of manufacture
- 1960 · 60 years old at event
- Engine
- CONT MOTOR I0-470 SERIES (260 hp)
- Seats / Engines
- 4 seats · 1 engine
- ADS-B equipped
- Yes — Mode-S AD45ED
Source: FAA Aircraft Registry (releasable master file).
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The failure of the engine-driven hydraulic pump, which resulted in the main landing gear not fully extending and locking into place during landing. Contributing to the accident was the failure of the emergency gear extension system for reasons that could not be determined.
Factual narrative
On August 26, 2020, about 0815 Pacific daylight time, a Cessna 210, N9540T, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Chino, California. The pilot was not injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight. The pilot reported that the accident flight was the first flight since the airplane had undergone landing gear maintenance. While in the airport traffic pattern, he extended the landing gear; however, he noticed that it would not lock into the down position despite multiple attempts to cycle the landing gear, which included using the emergency landing gear extension procedure. The pilot said that he by twisted the landing gear extension handle to the left to unlock, pulled the handle out, and pumped it vertically up and down about 50 times with zero resistance. The pilot was unable to obtain a positive down and locked indication. The pilot stated that during landing on runway 26R, both main landing gear collapsed, the left wing and left horizontal stabilizer impacted the runway surface, and the airplane came to rest upright on the runway. Postaccident examination of the airplane by a Federal Aviation Administration inspector revealed that the left horizontal stabilizer and elevator were substantially damaged. Subsequent examination of the landing gear revealed that the landing gear power pack fluid level was about 12 ounces low from full, and the engine-driven hydraulic pump was not operational. No issues were noted with the emergency gear extension system. The airplane was placed on jacks and a hydraulic mule was attached to the hydraulic system. The landing gear extended and locked in place normally. The landing gear was retracted, and the emergency landing gear extension system was operated, and the landing gear extended and locked into place. The engine-driven hydraulic pump was removed from the engine, and the crankshaft was rotated by hand using the propeller. No evidence of any mechanical damage was observed to the engine accessory case. A visual inspection of the hydraulic pump revealed a torn section of a seal that surrounded the pump drive shaft. Further examination of the engine-driven hydraulic pump at a repair facility revealed that the load spring was misshaped, and the oil seal was hard, brittle, and torn, which resulted in an oil leak and the pump unable to hold pressure. The pilot reported that the accident flight was the first flight since the airplane had undergone recent landing gear maintenance. While in the airport traffic pattern, he extended the landing gear; however, he noticed that it would not lock into the down position. Despite multiple attempts to cycle the landing gear, which included using the emergency landing gear extension procedure, he was unable to obtain a positive down and locked indication. While landing, both main landing gear collapsed and the left wing and left horizontal stabilizer impacted the runway surface, which resulted in substantial damage to the left elevator and horizontal stabilizer. Postaccident examination of the airplane revealed that the engine-driven hydraulic pump was not operational. No mechanical damage was observed within the engine’s accessory case. No evidence of any preexisting mechanical malfunction was observed with the airframe or emergency gear extension system. Examination of the engine-driven hydraulic pump revealed a torn section of an oil seal that surrounded the pump drive shaft. The oil seal was hard, brittle, and torn, which resulted in an oil leak that prevented the pump from holding pressure, which likely prevented the landing gear from fully extending and locking into place during landing. The reason for the emergency gear extension system not functioning could not be determined. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12
NTSB Findings
FAA avdata. C = Cause, F = Factor.
- — Aircraft-Aircraft systems-Hydraulic power system-Pump, main-Damaged/degraded
- — Not determined-Not determined-(general)-(general)-Unknown/Not determined
- — Aircraft-Aircraft systems-Landing gear system-Gear extension and retract sys-Inoperative
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2020_WPR20LA288.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
- NASA NTRS 2020 · Technical Memorandum (TM) Evaluation Issues for a Flight Deck Interface; CAST SE-210 Output 2: Report 4 of 6
This report is part of a series of reports that addresses flight deck design and evaluation, written as a response to loss of control accidents.
- 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.