CEN12FA251 · Cirrus Design Corp SR22
Photopheresis Cirrus Design Corp SR22 · Accident during an uncontrolled descent
From Somerset Airport (SMQ) to The Ohio State University Airport - Don Scott Field (OSU)
Event
- NTSB case
- CEN12FA251
- 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
- 1 · 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
- Instrument Meteorological Cond
Cirrus Design Corp SR22
- Aircraft type
- Cirrus SR22
- 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
- N110EB
- Operator
- Photopheresis
- Onboard fatalities
- Unknown
- Route
- From Somerset Airport (SMQ), Somerset, NJTo The Ohio State University Airport - Don Scott Field (OSU), Columbus, 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
- Uncontrolled descent
- Defining eventThe 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
- Unknown or undetermined
- 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
- Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability
- Aircraft › Aircraft systems
- Not determined › Not determined
- Personnel issues › Psychological
- Personnel issues › Task performance
Approximate · Coordinates as recorded by the NTSB; no uncertainty radius is established.
NTSB narrative
About 5 minutes before the accident, when the airplane was in cruise flight in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC), at 8,000 ft mean sea level (msl), and at 156 knots ground speed, an air traffic controller updated the altimeter setting via the radio. The pilot acknowledged the call, and his voice sounded normal. No other radio transmissions were received from the pilot, and he made no distress calls. Radar data showed that the airplane then began a descending right turn, that the airspeed increased slightly through the turn, and that the airspeed then suddenly decreased to 61 knots as the turn radius decreased. The airplane had turned about 270 degrees and descended to an altitude of 4,900 ft msl before radar contact was lost. A witness reported seeing the airplane coming out of the low clouds (the cloud ceiling was about 700 to 800 ft above ground level) in a nose-down descent with the wings about level before it disappeared behind a tree line. Examination of the airframe and engine did not reveal any preimpact anomalies.
Data from the on-board recoverable data module (RDM) showed an anomaly in the electrical bus voltages, autopilot mode changes, and a momentary dropout of the pilot transmission frequency. Specifically, the RDM data showed that the airplane was flying at 8,000 ft pressure altitude at an airspeed of 148 knots with the autopilot on when alternator 1 dropped offline followed by alternator 2 dropping offline; the airplane is equipped with a two-alternator, two-battery, 28-volt direct current electrical system. About 3 seconds later, the autopilot disengaged. The RDM data confirmed that the airplane then entered a descending right turn with the airspeed increasing slightly and then suddenly decreasing. The data further showed that the airplane then rolled right and that the pitch attitude sharply decreased. The airspeed then increased, and both the roll and pitch reversed back toward wings level before the data ended.
The bolster switches for alternator 1, alternator 2, battery 1, battery 2, and the avionics were cycled "on" and "off" on an exemplar airplane to determine what may occur in the cockpit when the bolster switches are manually moved. Seven sets of various electrical bolster switch activations and deactivations were documented. During the tests, bolster switch operation on the exemplar airplane yielded recorded data similar to the accident flight data; however, the reason for the recorded electrical anomalies could not be determined because the RDM does not record the physical position of either the bolster switches or circuit breakers. The data did reveal that the airplane began its deviation off course and its subsequent descending right turn in IMC conditions a few seconds after the alternators went offline and that the pilot was likely attempting to troubleshoot the electrical anomaly with bolster switch activations and deactivations as the airplane descended and turned through the clouds. The electrical anomalies likely distracted the pilot and led to his subsequent loss of airplane control. The witness's statement that the airplane came out of the low clouds with the wings about level and the RDM data indicate that the pilot may have been able to recover from the turn and rapid descent to some degree but that there was insufficient altitude for a full recovery.
Probable cause
The pilot’s loss of airplane control in instrument meteorological conditions due to his distraction by electrical system anomalies, which resulted in an uncontrolled descent. The reason for the electrical system anomalies could not be determined.
Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset
Sources
NTSB record CEN12FA251
- Event ID
- 20120421X43732
- Case number
- CEN12FA251
- Dataset
- full-current
- Source SHA-256
- 5cf380f0061817c0331a6b2d8cc7e0ee3a79bea469a1001dc5c10e56f35f5ab3
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. 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: 711344fbeada781bffdaa6f2bf5a6059460bcba70335599f59d8a35b563b179f; retrieved 2026-09-13T22:19:11.100Z.