FLIGHT FINDINGSAVIATION OCCURRENCE MAP
Back to map

CEN20LA419 · Cessna 172S

24 Sept 2020 · San Marcos, TX, United States

Cessna 172S and Team Rockets F1 · Accident: midair collision on approach

Report a problem

Event

NTSB case
CEN20LA419
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
Event fatalities
Unknown
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 172S

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
N108VK
Operator
Unknown
Onboard fatalities
Unknown
Route
From Lockhart Municipal Airport (50R), Lockhart, TXTo not recorded
Aircraft age
About 19 years (built 2001)
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
Approach · VFR pattern final
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
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
Substantial

Aircraft 2 · Team Rockets F1

Aircraft type
Team Rockets F1
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
N540LK
Operator
Unknown
Onboard fatalities
Unknown
Route
From not recordedTo not recorded
Aircraft age
About 6 years (built 2014)
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
Approach · VFR pattern final
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
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

  • Personnel issues › Action/decision

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

NTSB narrative

A low-wing Team Rockets F1 airplane and a high-wing Cessna 172 airplane were involved in a mid-air collision on final approach for landing. The airplanes entered the downwind leg of the traffic pattern within one minute of each other, with the F1 in front of the Cessna. There were four other airplanes in the traffic pattern or communicating on the airport’s common traffic frequency at that time. Shortly after entering the traffic pattern, the F1 pilot announced and performed a right 360° turn to increase spacing with the preceding airplane. The instructor onboard the trailing Cessna could not see the F1 and asked if the F1 had completed the turn. The F1 pilot responded that he was about to turn base, but he saw a Cessna below him and that he would extend downwind before turning to final.

The instructor onboard the Cessna began a turn to base and reported that they saw the F1. About 45 seconds later, the F1 pilot reported that he was on final approach over a highway about 2 miles from the runway, which indicates he did not extend his downwind sufficiently to attain sufficient separation. The Cessna crossed the highway about the same time and also reported a 2-mile final. About 45 seconds later, the F1 pilot reported a 1 mile final. The instructor onboard the Cessna then reported a .8-mile final. Shortly after the last radio calls from the two airplanes, the F1 impacted the Cessna on the Cessna’s top left side. Both airplanes impacted the ground short of the runway. The Cessna flipped over and the F1 came to rest against a fence and caught fire. The Cessna sustained substantial damage and the F1 was destroyed.

The F1 pilot recalled an airplane making position calls on final, which he assumed was behind him. He said that he had a clear view of the runway while on final and he did not see any traffic between him and the runway. It is likely that the low-wing configuration of the F1 prevented the F1 pilot from seeing the Cessna below him. Likewise, the occupants of the high-wing Cessna were restricted from seeing the F1 above them.

Although the F1 pilot stated that he would extend his downwind leg, he did not extend it enough to gain safe separation from the Cessna, which resulted in the F1 and the Cessna arriving at nearly the same geographical point on 2- mile final at the same time. The standard position reports issued by both pilots were sufficient for the pilots to have had awareness of each other’s position on final; however, neither comprehended the conflict between their airplanes, possibly due to the high volume of radio calls from other aircraft in the traffic pattern and both pilots’ increased attention on preparing for landing.

Probable cause

The F1 pilot’s failure to see and avoid the lower altitude Cessna while on final approach for landing. Contributing to the accident were the restrictions to pilot visibility inherent to low- and high-wing airplanes, and both pilots’ failure to recognize the conflict that developed between their airplanes.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset

Sources

NTSB record CEN20LA419
Event ID
20200928102041
Case number
CEN20LA419
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: local date, investigation status, cause areas. Values present in the bulk record are kept.
  • The date is the local date; the NTSB stores the UTC date 2020-09-25.
  • API snapshot SHA-256: edd985c1acc0c55a780ffce9a097242925b4605bdcd61aeb0b7fa1311c9b7f94; retrieved 2026-09-13T18:35:08.338Z.