• 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

Instructional flight ends in fatalities

By NTSB · February 12, 2024 ·

The pilot receiving instruction owned the Beech 35-C33 and had successfully completed the commercial pilot written examination. The purpose of the flight was to prepare him for the commercial pilot practical examination.

A review of Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) data revealed that the airplane departed Doylestown Airport (KDYL) in Pennsylvania, about 1626.

The data also showed that the airplane, while maneuvering at an altitude of about 2,000 feet mean sea level (about 1,600 feet above ground level), began to descend.

A witness to the accident was a private pilot who tended to look up at the sky as small airplanes flew over. When he was standing in his neighbor’s driveway, he heard a single-engine airplane overhead and thought the airplane’s engine was loud and the airspeed was slow, which indicated to him that the airplane was most likely in a steep climb to practice a stall.

By the time he looked up at the sky again, he saw the airplane “diving, almost straight down” and “twisting toward the ground.”

The airplane was out of the witness’ view after it descended behind a tree line. The witness then saw “a black ball of smoke.”

The airplane hit a residential street near Hilltown Township, Pennsylvania.

During the impact, a propeller blade separated and landed in a home.

The wreckage came to rest upright, oriented about 125° magnetic and no debris path was observed. A post-impact fire consumed most of the wreckage.

Both the CFI and pilot/owner died in the crash.

The pilot’s logbook was not recovered. On an application for his commercial pilot certificate, dated Feb. 15, 2022, he reported a total flight experience of 733 hours.

During a previous insurance renewal quote for the accident airplane, he reported 385 hours of flight experience in the make and model airplane.

Review of the flight instructor’s logbook revealed that he had a total flight experience of approximately 11,500 hours, including, 8,000 hours providing flight instruction.

Probable Cause: The pilots’ exceedance of the airplane’s critical angle of attack while practicing maneuvers during an instructional flight, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall and a loss of airplane control.

NTSB Identification: 104702

To download the final report. Click here. This will trigger a PDF download to your device.

This February 2022 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. DA says

    February 13, 2024 at 1:53 pm

    I knew the CFI and he was not a cowboy pilot either. He was a good man and a good pilot. The recent heart attack troubles me; perhaps it was too soon to resume flying.

    • Jim C says

      February 17, 2024 at 6:16 am

      Dear Friend,

      Having had a heart attack, heart failure and stents placed, I’m 6 weeks out and resuming normal duties. If the CFI was cleared to fly, presumably, I would suggest his MI did not impact his decision making. Every heart attack is its own event, and each recovery and rehabilitation determine when one can resume duties.

      Inspired oxygen can be a factor. As measured by pulse oximetry normal oxygen saturation is 97% or greater at sea level. As is mine at 1250 ft ASL in the PA mountains. Assuming he was at 4000 feet ASL, a normal healthy man should have an oxygen saturation of about 95% at rest, according to this study:

      “Reference values for oxygen saturation from sea level to the highest human habitation in the Andes in acclimatised persons”

      https://thorax.bmj.com/content/73/8/776

      Are we assuming he approved low level maneuvers in this aircraft? I believe you when you say he was a good guy. None of this makes sense to me.

      Best wishes to all.

  2. Glenn Miller says

    February 13, 2024 at 1:26 pm

    Did this airplane have dual controls?

  3. Sky King says

    February 13, 2024 at 11:39 am

    I read about countless mishaps such as this one where poor judgment and headwork are the primary casual factors. As mentioned by others, performing power on or off stalls, including slow flight to induce a stall, are clearly relegated to the category called – “highwork.” How a CFI with 11,500 hrs., with 8000 hrs. instructing, allows this to happen is beyond me. Again, no matter how skilled and experienced, if a person exercises poor judgment and headwork, it often results in these king of tragedies.

  4. Dick Gecko says

    February 13, 2024 at 8:06 am

    More aviation jackassery. Are there no fields to practice over in PA? And we wonder why homeowners around airports are fearful of us. Low, slow, & over their homes.

  5. Cary Alburn says

    February 13, 2024 at 6:24 am

    Accelerated stalls are part of commercial training, if I recall correctly, but practicing them at only 1600’ AGL seems unwise, especially in a high performance airplane not known for its docile stall behavior. More altitude would have given a better chance for recovery from an inadvertent spin.

    • Dan Kelly says

      February 14, 2024 at 12:48 am

      Always practice 3 mistakes high!

  6. George says

    February 13, 2024 at 6:14 am

    Three thoughts: This plane was too low to be practicing stalls, especially over a populated area. More right rudder! I am currently enrolled in an upset/spin series and can state with certainty that every CFI needs this training with refresher flights maybe every 6 months. It takes a few spins before one is able to cognitively process how to recover as your world is a spinning blur. I bet both occupants were just along for the ride or worse, maybe one or both were reacting by inputting controls to recover from a stall. This will only make the spin faster and tighter.

  7. Sam Parsons says

    February 13, 2024 at 5:50 am

    This one scares me. With that much experience, who does power on stalls at 1600 feet agl? Is that normal for a Commercial Check Ride? To let the stall develop into a full spin seems unreasonable for that much experience. The CFI’s daughter said he had just recovered from a massive heart attack…did he have another during the stall sequence and did that distract the pilot? That seems so remote probabilistically but I am having trouble seeing a perfectly good airplane with experienced pilots drilling into a neighborhood.

    • Wylbur Wrong says

      February 13, 2024 at 8:40 am

      The report showed that they started at 4000, and got down to 1600.

      I wasn’t sure if they were practicing slow flight and got into a stall spin by retracting the flaps too soon during recovery out of slow flight. I would not do those manuovers at less than the minimum altitude listed for recovery from an incidental spin.

    • Darrell Hay says

      February 13, 2024 at 9:26 am

      I agree fully. Something happened in that cockpit, possibly medical. It does not add up. They would not start stalls that low. This was not some cowboy solo student pilot.

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

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