FLIGHT FINDINGSAVIATION OCCURRENCE MAP
Back to map

ERA18LA270 · Maule M7 235C

11 Sept 2018 · Floresville, TX, United States

Maule M7 235C · Accident: landing gear collapse

From Floresville, TX to Floresville, TX

Report a problem

Event

NTSB case
ERA18LA270
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

Maule M7 235C

Aircraft type
Maule M7
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
N969AW
Operator
Unknown
Onboard fatalities
Unknown
Route
From Floresville, TXTo Floresville, TX
Aircraft age
About 15 years (built 2003)
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
Landing · landing roll
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
Landing gear collapse
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 systems

Approximate · Coordinates as recorded by the NTSB; no uncertainty radius is established.

NTSB narrative

The flight instructor and the private pilot-rated student, who was in the left seat and was also the airplane owner, were practicing approaches. Upon landing, the pilots heard a loud popping noise, and the instructor then initiated a go-around. Subsequently, the pilot felt vibration under the floorboard. The pilots thought that a tire might have blown. The instructor flew the approach and conducted a three-point landing, and just before the airplane came to a stop, the left main landing gear (MLG) collapsed, which resulted in substantial damage to the left wing.

An examination of the left MLG revealed that its inboard attachment bolt and nut were missing. After the accident, the bolt was found along the path of the landing rollout. Examination of the attachment bolt revealed that the bolt threads were undamaged. The attachment nut was not found. The right MLG's inboard attachment bolt and nut were found still attached; however, they were loose, with only two to three threads visible past the nut.

The inboard attachment bolts were upgraded high-strength bolts. The airframe manufacturer had issued a service letter (SL) that stated that, when using the high-strength bolts, the outboard attachment bolts required the same amount of torque as indicated in the airplane maintenance manual but that the inboard attachment bolts required a higher torque amount than the standard bolts. However, a review of the maintenance manual revealed that it did not include the new, higher torque requirements specified in the SL. Therefore, mechanics who only follow the maintenance manual may not be aware that higher torque values are required.

A review of the airplane maintenance records revealed that its last annual inspection was completed about 6 months before the accident. The mechanic who performed the inspection reported that he did not verify the torque on the bolts, that he only used his hands to confirm that they were secure, and that he did not reference the SL during the inspection. It could not be determined whether the mechanic's failure to verify the torque on the bolts or the insufficient torque values in the MM led to the torque on the left inboard MLG attachment bolt being insufficient and the resultant collapse of the left MLG.

Probable cause

The separation of the left inboard main landing gear (MLG) attachment bolt due to insufficient torque, which resulted in the collapse of the left MLG.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset

Sources

NTSB record ERA18LA270
Event ID
20181011X61348
Case number
ERA18LA270
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: 182f38c461dfda0492f2a967ce8d568a183216aa3eab602e3d73e926a2b269c2; retrieved 2026-09-16T08:19:57.112Z.