• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
General Aviation News

General Aviation News

Because flying is cool

  • Pictures of the Day
    • Submit Picture of the Day
  • Stories
    • News
    • Features
    • Opinion
    • Products
    • NTSB Accidents
    • ASRS Reports
  • Comments
  • Classifieds
    • Place Classified Ad
  • Events
  • Digital Archives
  • Subscribe
  • Show Search
Hide Search

Training flight in the mountains proves fatal

By NTSB · May 5, 2016 ·

A witness reported that he observed the Cessna 150 at an altitude of between 800 to 1,000 feet above ground level about two miles from his location.

About the same time, he also heard the airplane’s engine sputter, and he then observed the airplane in a vertical, nose-down attitude for three to four seconds before it went out of sight behind a hill.

The wreckage was found about two hours later in remote mountainous, rocky terrain near Santa Clara, Utah. Both occupants of the plane were killed in the crash.

An on-site examination of the airframe and engine revealed that the airplane hit terrain upright in a flat orientation on a 27° downslope.

Based on observed impact signatures, the airplane’s forward momentum was negligible just before it hit terrain.

Based on the witness’s observations and the physical evidence observed at the accident site, it is likely that the airplane was in a steep descent at a low altitude and that the flight instructor failed to pull the airplane up and out of the nose-down attitude at a sufficient altitude to preclude impact with terrain.

The NTSB determined the probable cause as the flight instructor’s failure to arrest the airplane’s descent and maintain clearance from mountainous terrain while maneuvering at a low altitude.

NTSB Identification: WPR14FA183

This May 2014 accident report is provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. Published as an educational tool, it is intended to help pilots learn from the misfortunes of others.

About NTSB

The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent federal agency charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation accident in the United States and significant events in the other modes of transportation, including railroad, transit, highway, marine, pipeline, and commercial space. It determines the probable causes of accidents and issues safety recommendations aimed at preventing future occurrences.

Reader Interactions

Share this story

  • Share on Twitter Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook Share on Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit Share on Reddit
  • Share via Email Share via Email

Become better informed pilot.

Join 110,000 readers each month and get the latest news and entertainment from the world of general aviation direct to your inbox, daily.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Curious to know what fellow pilots think on random stories on the General Aviation News website? Click on our Recent Comments page to find out. Read our Comment Policy here.

Comments

  1. Sarah A says

    May 7, 2016 at 3:53 am

    Somehow the whole conclusion of making a steep descent and not pulling out in time just does not sound like it fits. They noted negligible forward velocity and the witness saw the aircraft in a vertical nose down attitude. If it was a steep descent than an attempt to pull out under such drastic conditions would probably tear the airplane apart prior to impact which did not happen. And a vertical attitude does not sound like any steep descent I ever did in a C150. It is just my own wild but educated guess that either there was a serious control system failure or it was intentional, I really cannot come to any other conclusions based on the limited data.

  2. ATPBill says

    May 6, 2016 at 5:08 pm

    Without reading the full NTSB report………. and only reading the information provided in the article…. what does the headline…… training flight in the mountains have to do with the accident…….???????? And, by the way, one cannot train in the mountains… one can train around the mountains, one can train above the mountains…. one can fly over the mountains…. but one cannot train “IN” the mountains….. one can train in what the FAA has designated as mountainous terrain.
    Are you implying that thin air and the consequence of less horsepower by the engine, less air for the propeller to move, the lessened ability of the wing to move enough air molecules and maybe the effect of less oxygen to the PIC’s brain were all factors in the results found by the persons who went to the wreckage…????? If that is the case… then why not state that in your headline and help aviators understand that it might have been the poor judgement or lack of understanding upon the PIC regarding the situation the PIC put the aircraft into……… soooooo…. maybe a headline like the following may have been appropriate. “PIC makes poor decisions, two dead” or “Investigators believe PIC used poor judgement, two dead”

    • Ken says

      July 1, 2016 at 12:37 am

      You are pedantic, ad nauseam.

      *yawn

  3. bernie machado says

    May 6, 2016 at 3:05 pm

    Pray tell, what maneuvers would one do in a mountainous area at such a low altitude.

© 2025 Flyer Media, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy.

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Comment Policy
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Writer’s Guidelines
  • Photographer’s Guidelines