Event WPR21FA353

Factual narrative

HISTORY OF FLIGHTOn September 26, 2021, about 1922 mountain daylight time, a Beech S35 airplane, N354M, was destroyed when it was involved in an accident near Billings, Montana. The pilot was seriously injured, and the two passengers were fatally injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight. The pilot reported that he was conducting a cross-country flight from Colorado to a private airstrip in Montana. As the airplane neared the intended destination, the pilot voiced his concern to one passenger (who was pilot rated) about the dusk conditions with no runway lights at the airstrip, and the passenger reassured the pilot about the landing. As the airplane entered the airport traffic pattern, the pilot was feeling “okay” and conducted the checklist. The pilot stated that, as the airplane was landing, one passenger knew something was wrong and told the pilot to “add power.” Subsequently, the airplane turned left and impacted trees, and a postimpact fire ensued. The pilot reported that he did not know what happened when the airplane touched down or why the airplane turned toward the trees. Regarding the airplane’s left turn after landing, the pilot “chalk[ed] it up to floating the landing somehow” and stated that everything was normal until the airplane turned left. He added that “something made the left wing hit the ground first, instead of the wheels.” Witnesses located near the accident site reported observing the airplane on final approach for the runway from the northeast. One witness stated that the airplane appeared to be “slightly high and slightly fast” while on final and that the airplane had “floated down the runway” before a “hard” touchdown. Another witness stated that the left wing appeared to have stalled and that the airplane landed hard on the left main landing gear first. A witness further stated that the airplane began to “wobble” and then depart the left side of the runway, which was followed by the sound of an increase in engine power. This witness stated that the airplane accelerated through a field in a nose-high attitude while doing what he described as a “duck waddle.” The witness indicated that engine power remained on as the left wingtip was dragged across the ground about halfway through an attempted go-around. AIRCRAFT INFORMATIONThe airplane was equipped with a single control yoke. The left side was equipped with rudder pedals and brakes, and the right side was equipped with rudder pedals only. AIRPORT INFORMATIONThe airplane was equipped with a single control yoke. The left side was equipped with rudder pedals and brakes, and the right side was equipped with rudder pedals only. WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATIONThe airplane came to rest within a tree line that was about 450 ft north of the runway and about 1,938 ft northeast of the approach end the runway. All major structural components of the airplane were located within about 40 ft of the main wreckage. Examination of the runway revealed that the first identified point of contact was a tire mark, consistent with the left main landing gear, about 882 ft from the approach end of the runway. An additional mark, consistent with the right main landing gear, was located about 924 ft from the approach end of the runway. A solid black track, consistent with main tire material transfer, originated from both marks and progressed toward the left side of the runway. The tracks exited the runway surface about 1,078 ft from the approach end of the runway, as shown in figure 1. Figure 1.: Runway marks. A ground scar, consistent with the left wing, was about 60 ft in length and was located about 1,500 ft from the approach end of the runway and 91 ft left of the runway edge. Additional ground scars, consistent with the main landing gear, were observed about 68 ft beyond the left wing ground scar and in an arc toward the north and main wreckage, as shown in figure 2. Figure 3. Aerial view of the accident site, with ground scars and runway marks annotated. (Source: Witness to the accident). The fuselage was significantly damaged by the postimpact fire from the firewall to just behind the baggage area. Flight control continuity was established from the ailerons to the control column. Elevator control continuity was established from the forward spar to the control surfaces. Examination of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of any preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation of the airplane. The pilot reported that he was conducting a cross-country flight with an intended destination that did not have runway lighting. As the airplane neared the intended destination, the pilot voiced his concern to one passenger (who was pilot rated) about the dusk conditions with no runway lights and the passenger reassured him about the landing. The pilot stated that, as the airplane was landing, the pilot-rated passenger knew something was wrong and told the pilot to “add power.” The airplane subsequently made a left turn and impacted trees in a nose-high attitude; a postimpact fire ensued. Witnesses located near the accident site reported observing the airplane on final approach. One witness stated that the airplane appeared to be “slightly high and slightly fast” while on final approach to the runway and that the airplane had “floated down the runway” before a hard touchdown. Another witness stated that the left wing appeared to have stalled, and that the airplane landed hard on the left main landing gear first. One of the witnesses further stated that the airplane began to “wobble” and depart the left side of the runway, which followed by an increase in engine power and a go-around attempt. The witness added that engine power continued as the left wingtip was dragged across the ground about halfway through the go-around attempt. Postaccident examination of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of any preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. Based on the runway and ground marks, and witnesses’ observations of the landing, the pilot continued an unstabilized landing approach, and delayed execution of a go-around, which resulted in a hard landing and subsequent loss of airplane control. 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).

• — Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Landing flare-Incorrect use/operation
• — Aircraft-Aircraft oper/perf/capability-Performance/control parameters-Lateral/bank control-Not attained/maintained
• — Personnel issues-Task performance-Use of equip/info-Use of equip/system-Pilot