CHI07LA043 · Cessna 560
Cessna 560 · Accident: airframe, component or system failure on approach
From Teterboro Airport (TEB) to Akron Canton Regional Airport (CAK)
Event
- NTSB case
- CHI07LA043
- 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 560
- 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
- N49NS
- Operator
- Unknown
- Onboard fatalities
- Unknown
- Route
- From Teterboro Airport (TEB), TETERBORO, NJTo Akron Canton Regional Airport (CAK), North Canton, 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 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
- Approach
- 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
- Hydraulic system, line › Ruptured
- Hydraulic system, line › Worn
- Landing gear, emergency extension assembly › Failure
- Landing gear, main gear › Not operating
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 on approach to the destination airport when the low hydraulic level and flow cockpit warnings annunciated in the cockpit. The flight crew was unable to extend the right main landing gear after conducting the normal and emergency landing gear extension procedures and by performing g-loading maneuvers. The airplane landed with the right wing main landing gear retracted causing substantial damage to the right wing and fuselage structures. The total loss of hydraulic power to the airplane flaps, spoilers, thrust reversers, and landing gear was caused by a ruptured hydraulic pressure hose assembly. The examinations of the accident and exemplar hoses revealed internal wear between the fiberglass within the hose's fire sleeve and the stainless steel braid. The accident hose and two of the three exemplar hoses did not show any markings or damage to the exterior of the sleeve to indicate the existence of the internal wear abrading the stainless steel braiding. Functional testing of the landing gear system revealed that the extension sequence varied during eight actuations, and, in one actuation, the left main landing gear remained retracted. Following the accident, the airplane manufacturer was in the process of amending the airplane maintenance manual rigging procedures for the landing gear system, and placing service time limits on hydraulic hoses.
Probable cause
The rupture of the hydraulic pressure hose assembly, which was caused by internal wear between the hose's fire sleeve and stainless steel braid, and the failure of the emergency landing gear assembly to deploy the right main landing gear during approach. Contributing to the accident were inadequate hydraulic hose assembly maintenance inspection procedures, the lack of a hydraulic hose life limit by the airplane manufacturer, and the inadequate landing gear rigging procedures.
Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset
Sources
NTSB record CHI07LA043
- Event ID
- 20061222X01843
- Case number
- CHI07LA043
- 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 2006-12-18.
- API snapshot SHA-256: ff07fd9d6b5f8228e6d7a8b11f8621133e8f90cf19640b0da6b96c9edfcfa047; retrieved 2026-09-18T14:48:41.475Z.