• 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

Pilot’s misidentification of airport fatal mistake

By NTSB · August 13, 2020 ·

The commercial pilot and three passengers departed on a cross-country flight in a Beech B60. As the flight neared the destination airport, the pilot canceled his instrument flight rules (IFR) clearance.

The approach controller transferred the flight to the tower controller, and the pilot reported to the tower controller that the airplane was about 2 miles from the airport.

However, the approach controller contacted the tower controller to report that the airplane was 200 feet over a nearby joint military airport at the time.

GPS data revealed that, when pilot reported that the airplane was 2 miles from the destination airport, the airplane’s actual location was about 10 miles from the destination airport and 2 miles from the joint military airport.

The airplane hit a remote wooded area near Fort Walton Beach, Florida, about eight miles northwest of the destination airport.

All four aboard the Beech died in the crash.

At the time of the accident, thunderstorm cells were in the area. A review of the weather information revealed that the pilot’s view of the airport was likely obscured because the airplane was in an area of light precipitation, restricting the pilot’s visibility.

A review of airport information noted that the IFR approach course for the destination airport passes over the joint military airport. The FAA chart supplement for the destination airport noted the airport’s proximity to the other airport.

However, it is likely that the pilot mistook the other airport for the destination airport due to reduced visibility because of weather.

The accident circumstances were consistent with controlled flight into terrain.

Probable cause: The pilot’s controlled flight into terrain after misidentifying the destination airport during a period of restricted visibility due to weather.

NTSB Identification: CEN18FA358

This August 2018 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

    August 14, 2020 at 9:02 pm

    I learned to fly in that area and I find it difficult to see how those two airports could be confused if any sort of VFR chart had been used for reference. As for the CFIT, that area is about as flat and near to sea level as it gets so that would most likely have been a matter of not being alert while maneuvering very low to the terrain. If the aircraft had actually been near Destin then the greatest threat would have been the numerous tall condominiums in the vicinity. Just to further clarify, while they refer to Eglin AFB as a joint use airport that is just for the airliners and all civilian traffic goes to Destin. By the way Destin has not had any instrument approaches prior to the RNAV ones that I recall although they might have worked one up using the old Eglin VORTAC prior to it being wiped out by a hurricane (Opal ?). This is just a poor case of piloting in very bad weather. The pilot should have diverted to one of the other civilian airports in the area that do have instrument approaches but I am guessing that the passengers wanted to go to Destin and that is where the pilot intended to get them.

  2. Galin says

    August 14, 2020 at 5:02 pm

    I was flying that day in the same airspace at the same time this accident happened. I was talking to Eglin Approach at 9,000ft in solid IMC heading East towards St. Augustine, Florida on V198.

    I can say the weather was bad and getting worse. It got so bad I diverted to Tallahassee, spent the night and completed my trip the next day. I wrote about this incident and the divert in the remarks section of my logbook. It is sad to read the NTSB report.

  3. gbigs says

    August 14, 2020 at 5:20 am

    Why didn’t he fly the instrument approach for safety? Why cancel IFR with weather still around? Sounds like the pilot was incompetent.

    • Warren Webb Jr says

      August 14, 2020 at 10:14 am

      Was wondering the same. Things may have been different at the time of the accident, but right now the only approaches at Destin Exec are two RNAV approaches. The only GPS equipment discussed in the report is a handheld GPS 496 unit which is not suitable for RNAV approaches and may explain the reason for cancelling IFR. Reporting two miles from Destin when the airplane was actually two miles from Eglin AFB reminds me of incidents that occurred when GPS was just starting to be used and where the pilot sometimes did not realize that the unit’s active waypoint, and therefore DME distance, was on the wrong location.

      • John says

        August 14, 2020 at 12:09 pm

        Warren: Good insights. Agree with your “early GPS” observation. Still, if the rain and mist was sufficient to obscure terrain that’s “scud running”… not a never a good idea with pax, and generally not a good idea anywhere but over a perfectly flat and obstacle free giant cornfield.

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

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