NYC06LA175 · Enstrom 280C
Enstrom 280C · Accident: airframe, component or system failure en route
From Logan County Airport (6L4) to Greater Portsmouth Regional Airport (PMH)
Event
- NTSB case
- NYC06LA175
- 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
- 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
Enstrom 280C
- Aircraft type
- Enstrom 280
- Category
- Helicopter
- 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
- N5691B
- Operator
- Unknown
- Onboard fatalities
- Unknown
- Route
- From Logan County Airport (6L4), Logan, WVTo Greater Portsmouth Regional Airport (PMH), Portsmouth, OH
- 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 · 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
- 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
- Rotor drive system, clutch assembly › Failure, partial
Approximate · Coordinates from the NTSB case API, which marks them as estimated or does not say; no uncertainty radius is established.
NTSB narrative
Approximately 7 minutes after takeoff, the pilot of the helicopter heard a "loud snap," and experienced a 5 to 10 degree right yaw. This occurred a second time, 5 to 8 seconds later. The pilot declared an emergency and elected to make a precautionary landing. During the approach, he experienced a third snap sound and yaw movement. The helicopter was at an airspeed below 20 knots, and about 8 to 10 feet above the ground, when the pilot heard a bang, and felt ground contact. The helicopter rolled to the left, and the main rotor blades contacted the ground. Examination of the helicopter confirmed drive train continuity to the main and tail rotor drive shafts. A ground scar, consistent with tail rotor ground contact, was observed about 60 feet from the main wreckage. The tail rotor gear box, drive shaft and blade assembly were located about 250 feet from the main wreckage. Examination of the tail rotor gearbox and adjacent components did not reveal any preexisting damage; however, it also did not reveal any indications of rotational damage. Examination of the override clutch assembly, which drove both the main transmission and the tail rotor system, revealed preexisting damage that occurred at an undeterminable time prior to the accident. The accident helicopter was involved in a previous hard landing accident about 13 months, and 87 hours of operation prior, during which, it had a tail rotor strike, and a fractured tail rotor drive shaft. The override clutch assembly was not removed for inspection after that accident; nor was it specifically required to be removed and inspected per the manufacturer's maintenance guidelines for "Special Inspection for Sudden Stoppage, Main and/or Tail Rotor Blade Strikes."
Probable cause
A partial failure of the override clutch assembly. A contributing factor to the accident was the manufacturer's inadequate inspection procedures of the override clutch assembly following a tail rotor strike.
Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset
Sources
NTSB record NYC06LA175
- Event ID
- 20060802X01072
- Case number
- NYC06LA175
- 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: b137eddd79f4b8e5ab0e3107d2603bf0ef6963261f713ef0f4946c21f2aeaf94; retrieved 2026-09-21T18:43:35.595Z.