West Coast Charters Cessna 560XL accident
Cessna 560XL · Accident: airframe, component or system failure while taxiing
From Chicago Executive Airport (PWK) to John Wayne Orange County International Airport (SNA)
Event
- NTSB case
- CHI04FA031
- Event typeAccident: someone killed or seriously injured, or the aircraft substantially damaged (NTSB definition). Incident: an occurrence that affected or could have affected safety, short of that. Glossary
- Accident
- InvestigationHow far the investigation had got when the record was published: preliminary, ongoing, final or completed. Unknown where the source does not say. Glossary
- Completed
- API-reported fatalities
- 0 · all aircraft and ground
- Ground fatalities
- Unknown
- OperationWhat kind of flying it was, grouped by the rules it flew under: airline (US Part 121), air taxi and commuter (Part 135), general aviation (Part 91 and similar), military or government. Glossary
- Charter & commuter
- WeatherVisual meteorological conditions (VMC): good enough to fly by looking outside. Instrument conditions (IMC): cloud or low visibility, flying by instruments. Glossary
- Visual Meteorological Cond
Cessna 560XL
- Aircraft type
- Cessna 560
- Category
- Airplane
- RegistrationThe aircraft's tail number, such as N12345 or G-ABCD. Registrations are reissued, so the same one years apart can be a different aircraft. Glossary
- N789CN
- Operator
- West Coast Charters
- Onboard fatalities
- Unknown
- Route
- From Chicago Executive Airport (PWK), Wheeling, ILTo John Wayne Orange County International Airport (SNA), Santa Ana, CA
- Aircraft age
- Not recorded
- Flight rulesThe regulations the flight operated under: in the US, Part 91 (general aviation), Part 121 (airlines), Part 135 (air taxi and commuter) and others; for flights abroad, the NTSB's coarser commercial or non-commercial code. Glossary
- Part 135: Air Taxi & Commuter
- Phase of flightThe stage of the flight when things started to go wrong: standing, taxi, takeoff, initial climb, en route, maneuvering, approach or landing. Glossary
- Taxi · to runway
- First occurrenceThe single coded event the NTSB judges best describes what happened (records from 2008 on). Older records name the first occurrence in the sequence instead. Glossary
- Airframe, component or system failure
- DamageDestroyed: beyond practical repair. Substantial: damage that affects the structure, performance or handling and normally needs major repair. Minor: less than that. Glossary
- Substantial
Cause areas
- Flightcrew › Aborted takeoff, delayed
- Flightcrew › Operation with known deficiencies in equipment, intentional
- Flightcrew › Procedures/directives, not complied with
Approximate · Coordinates from the NTSB case API, which marks them as estimated or does not say; no uncertainty radius is established.
NTSB narrative
The airplane was substantially damaged when it overran the departure end of the runway during an aborted takeoff. The crew attempted to reject the takeoff when the pilot flying could not rotate normally. The aircraft is equipped with a two-position horizontal stabilizer system, which acts to reduce elevator control forces by repositioning the stabilizer two-degrees down for takeoff or landing. The normal (cruise) position corresponds to one-degree up. There are no intermediate positions. The stabilizer is commanded to move to the takeoff position when the crew moves the cockpit flap handle out of the 0-degree (flaps up) detent. The stabilizer was observed in the cruise position during the post-accident inspection. Two independent warning systems are designed to alert the flight crew in the event that the horizontal stabilizer is not properly positioned for takeoff or landing. A stabilizer mis-compare (STAB MIS COMP) annunciator warning is displayed when the flap handle and horizontal stabilizer are not in corresponding positions. In addition, a no-takeoff warning (NO TAKEOFF) will be displayed when the aircraft is on the ground and the horizontal stabilizer is not in the proper position for takeoff. As the throttles are advanced forward of the climb thrust setting, the no-takeoff annunciator light (NO TAKEOFF) will begin to flash and a master caution will be displayed. A warning horn will sound associated with the no takeoff indication. During the post-accident investigation, electrical power was applied to the aircraft. Without changing any cockpit control settings, the STAB MIS COMP and NO TAKEOFF lights on the annunciator panel were illuminated. Initial attempts to reposition the horizontal stabilizer were not successful. Subsequent inspection of the aft fairing feedthru connector revealed an unseated (pushed-back) pin. The pin provided electrical power to the hydraulic arming valve in order to allow repositioning of the horizontal stabilizer. Further examination of the pin showed black marks near the tip consistent with electrical arcing. When a new pin was installed, the horizontal stabilizer repositioned from cruise to takeoff/landing position as expected. The stabilizer miscompare and no-takeoff warning systems were subsequently tested and performed in accordance with the flight and operating manual parameters. The warning horn associated with the no-takeoff indication was heard over the cockpit speaker when the thrust levers were brought above the climb thrust setting. The flight manual BEFORE TAKEOFF checklist noted that all annunciator lights should be extinguished except the ground idle light prior to initiating a takeoff. The flight manual abnormal procedures checklist stated that when illuminated on the ground a STAB MISCOMP indication must be corrected prior to flight. In addition, a no-takeoff indication required the takeoff be aborted. The cockpit voice recorder was downloaded and transcribed. The transcript revealed that the crew was aware that the horizontal stabilizer was not in the takeoff position prior to initiating the takeoff roll. In addition, a sound similar to the no-takeoff warning horn was recorded over the cockpit area microphone during the takeoff roll and sounded for approximately twelve seconds before a rejected takeoff was initiated.
Probable cause
The flight crew's intentional operation with know deficiencies in the aircraft and their delay in aborting the takeoff when a no-takeoff warning was presented. An additional cause was the crew's failure to comply with flight manual procedures concerning stabilizer miscompare and no-takeoff indications. Contributing factors were the inoperative two-position horizontal stabilizer system due to the intermittent electrical connection at the aft fairing connector, as well as the runway approach lights impacted during the overrun.
Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset
Sources
NTSB record CHI04FA031
- Event ID
- 20031117X01913
- Case number
- CHI04FA031
- Dataset
- historical-pre2008
- Source SHA-256
- 89e2df6d848e7ab3b42e7d7c7a03ff403303057a26ca04c95b3ea67201c3ce74
Source notes (4)
- Unreviewed is an editorial label, not an investigation status. API-sourced is not report-checked or human-reviewed. Explicit event totals are used without summing aircraft injury tables; onboard allocation is withheld. Unknown values remain unknown. The operation category is mapped from the NTSB-reported FAR part and has not been reviewed.
- Filled from the NTSB case API where the bulk record had no value: investigation status, coordinates. Values present in the bulk record are kept.
- The date is the local date, which is the same as the UTC date the NTSB stores.
- API snapshot SHA-256: c48a3b449e902095334c94273d2f5adc0f2e99e423a3d2b53d58c26c2db51ff5; retrieved 2026-09-18T15:36:42.020Z.