LAX06FA106 · Cessna 172RG
Cessna 172RG and Cessna 182Q · Accident: midair collision en route
Event
- NTSB case
- LAX06FA106
- 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
- 3 · 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
- General aviation
- 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
Aircraft 1 · Cessna 172RG
- Aircraft type
- Cessna 172
- 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
- N9531B
- Operator
- Unknown
- Onboard fatalities
- Unknown
- Route
- From Gillespie Field (KSEE), El Cajon, CATo Brown Field Municipal Airport (KSDM), Brown Field, 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 91: General Aviation
- 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
- En route · climb to cruise
- 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
- Midair collision
- DamageDestroyed: beyond practical repair. Substantial: damage that affects the structure, performance or handling and normally needs major repair. Minor: less than that. Glossary
- Destroyed
Aircraft 2 · Cessna 182Q
- Aircraft type
- Cessna 182
- 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
- N759KE
- Operator
- William Kupiec
- Onboard fatalities
- Unknown
- Route
- From Gillespie Field (KSEE), El Cajon, CATo Brown Field Municipal Airport (KSDM), San Diego, 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 91: General Aviation
- 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
- En route · climb to cruise
- 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
- Midair collision
- DamageDestroyed: beyond practical repair. Substantial: damage that affects the structure, performance or handling and normally needs major repair. Minor: less than that. Glossary
- Destroyed
Cause areas
- Pilot in command › Visual lookout, inadequate
- Pilot in command(cfi) › Visual lookout, inadequate
- Pilot of other aircraft › Visual lookout, inadequate
Approximate · Coordinates from the NTSB case API, which marks them as estimated or does not say; no uncertainty radius is established.
NTSB narrative
A Cessna 182Q and a Cessna 172RG, were operating in class D airspace and departed from the same airport. The Cessna 172RG was operating under instrument flight rules as an instructional flight (IFR) and receiving radar service from an approach control facility, while the Cessna 182 was operating under visual flight rules (VFR) and had been released from communication with air traffic control. The pilot undergoing instruction in the Cessna 172RG was most likely wearing a view limiting device which tasked the certified flight instructor seated in the right seat to serve as both an instructor and a safety pilot. The Cessna 172RG departed first, performing a right 260-degree turn over the airport and was assigned a southwest heading by the controller. The Cessna 182Q departed to the west and made a left turn, while climbing in a southeasterly direction. The heading assigned to the Cessna 172RG put it on a direct collision course with the Cessna 182Q, with a collision angle of 40 degrees. Following a discussion with the controller about the pilot's intentions upon completion of an approach, the controller instructed the Cessna 172RG to fly heading 190. The pilot read back, "One nine" and no further transmissions were received from the Cessna 172RG. In class D airspace, there is no specified separation requirement between VFR and IFR aircraft. However, controllers still have a responsibility to be vigilant for potential collisions between aircraft under these circumstances. This accident occurred after the controllers in communication with the Cessna 172RG had received a sustained conflict alert involving the Cessna 172RG and Cessna 182Q (operating on a VFR transponder code), but failed to recognize or resolve the conflict. Comparisons of the calculated convergence angles of the two airplanes showed that for an 85th percentile male seated in the left seat (Cessna did not create pilot view angles for pilots seated in the front right seat), the Cessna 172RG pilot was about 15 degrees outside of the right view angle and the Cessna 182Q pilot was within about 6 degrees of the left view angle.
Probable cause
The pilots of both airplanes failure to maintain an adequate visual lookout due to their relative flight paths, which limited the available visual cues. Factors were the failure of the air traffic controller(s) to issue a conflict alert to the Cessna 172RG after repeated visual and aural warnings of an impending collision and the task load of the certified flight instructor.
Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset
Sources
NTSB record LAX06FA106
- Event ID
- 20060215X00204
- Case number
- LAX06FA106
- 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: local date, investigation status, coordinates. Values present in the bulk record are kept.
- The date is the local date; the NTSB stores the UTC date 2006-02-09.
- API snapshot SHA-256: fd4b9e0d599976743d238e651b056c54ddaf5e6033877aa93c6b6fcc2f003251; retrieved 2026-09-20T17:32:35.990Z.