WPR23LA239
2023-06-25 · Alturas, California, United States · Minor · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport AAT
Current FAA registration · N6430P
- Make / Model
- PIPER PA-24-250
- Year of manufacture
- 1959 · 64 years old at event
- Engine
- LYCOMING 0-540 SERIES (250 hp)
- Seats / Engines
- 4 seats · 1 engine
- Last airworthiness date
- 19591116
- ADS-B equipped
- Yes — Mode-S A872C6
Source: FAA Aircraft Registry (releasable master file).
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
A loss of engine power due to the failure of the right magneto distributor gear and the pilot’s decision to conduct a test flight with known mechanical issues.
Factual narrative
On June 25, 2023, at 0900, Pacific daylight time, a Piper PA-24-250, N6430P, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Alturas, California. The pilot sustained minor injuries. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight. The pilot reported that, after departure from Alturas Municipal Airport (AAT), with two passengers onboard, the engine began to miss and run rough. He returned to the airport, landed uneventfully, parked, and exited the airplane. He stated that he performed a full preflight inspection of the airplane, which included sampling fuel from all four fuel tanks and checking for “loose spark plugs, mags, [etc].” All engine components “looked good.” The pilot stated that he wanted to do an engine run up and test flight without his passengers before continuing the flight to their intended destination. The pilot stated that the pre-takeoff engine run up was normal, and he departed from runway 21. After climbing “a couple hundred feet,” the engine began to violently shake. The pilot initiated a left turn back to the airport and the engine lost all power. The airplane descended, landed hard, and came to rest upright in the grass adjacent to the runway. The on-site examination revealed that the airplane remained upright and intact with substantial damage to the fuselage, both wings and the right horizontal stabilizer. Postaccident examination of the airframe revealed no preimpact mechanical malfunctions that would have precluded normal operation. Postaccident examination of the engine revealed several pin holes in the exhaust tube surrounding the exhaust gas temperature (EGT) probe hole. Mechanical and valvetrain continuity was established via manual rotation of the propeller. However, when the propeller was rotated, spark from the ignition harness No. 5 top lead was not present. Both magnetos were intact and secure at their respective mounting pads. The right magneto was removed and a functional test garnered intermittent spark. The left magneto was also removed and functionally checked with no discrepancies. Both magnetos were shipped to Continental Aerospace Technologies with no discrepancies noted during a bench test. The right magneto was disassembled and about 1/4 of the distributor gear teeth were found separated from the distributor gear. No evidence of any additional mechanical anomalies was observed with either magneto. No maintenance records for the magnetos, engine or airframe were made available during the investigation. The pilot reported that, shortly after takeoff, the airplane’s engine began to run rough, so he returned to the airport, landed uneventfully, parked the airplane, and deplaned his passengers to conduct another preflight inspection. The pilot sampled the fuel, checked for loose spark plugs, and checked the magnetos. The pilot then decided to do an engine run-up and test flight before departing the area with the passengers. After takeoff, about 100 ft above ground level (agl), the engine began to shake violently, and he initiated a turn back to the airport. The engine lost total power, and the airplane landed hard and came to rest upright in the grass adjacent to the runway, resulting in substantial damage to fuselage, both wings, and the right horizontal stabilizer. Postaccident examination of the engine established mechanical and valvetrain continuity. When the propeller was rotated, the No. 5 ignition harness top lead did not spark. The right magneto was removed and functionally tested with an intermittent spark. The left magneto was also removed, and spark was obtained on all posts during the functional check. Further testing revealed that the intermittent spark from the right magneto could not be duplicated. Disassembly of right magneto revealed about 1/4 of the teeth were separated from the distributor gear, which would likely result in a partial loss of engine power and a rough running engine. No additional evidence of any preexisting mechanical malfunctions that would have precluded normal operation were observed with either magneto. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12
NTSB Findings
FAA avdata. C = Cause, F = Factor.
- — Personnel issues-Action/decision-Info processing/decision-Decision making/judgment-Pilot
- — Aircraft-Aircraft power plant-Ignition system-Magneto/distributor-Failure
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2023_WPR23LA239.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
- 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.
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2024 · Journal article (JAAER) Low-Resource Automatic Speech Recognition Domain Adaptation – A Case-Study in Aviation Maintenance
With timeliness and efficiency being critical in the aviation maintenance industry, the need has been growing for smart technological solutions that optimize and streamline the different underlying ta…