FLIGHT FINDINGSAVIATION OCCURRENCE MAP
Back to map

CEN21LA030 · Cessna 210

26 Oct 2020 · Lubbock, TX, United States

Cessna 210 · Accident: loss of control in flight on approach

From Belen Regional Airport (BRG) to C David Campbell Field Corsicana Municipal Airport (CRS)

Report a problem

Event

NTSB case
CEN21LA030
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
0
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

Cessna 210

Aircraft type
Cessna 210
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
N9622T
Operator
Unknown
Onboard fatalities
Unknown
Route
From Belen Regional Airport (BRG), Belen, NMTo C David Campbell Field Corsicana Municipal Airport (CRS), Corsicana, TX
Aircraft age
About 60 years (built 1960)
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 · IFR final approach
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
Loss of control in flight
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

  • Aircraft › Aircraft handling/service
  • Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability
  • Aircraft › Aircraft systems
  • Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena
  • Personnel issues › Action/decision
  • Personnel issues › Physical

Approximate · Coordinates from the NTSB case API, which marks them as estimated or does not say; no uncertainty radius is established.

NTSB narrative

The instrument-rated pilot had recently purchased the accident airplane, which was not equipped for icing conditions, and was in the process of flying it back to his home base. During the first flight after purchase, he flew at 11,000 ft and was reportedly sick during and after the flight. The pilot was sick and miserable all weekend with symptoms to include queasiness, fatigue, dizziness, and a general malaise. Following a discussion with friends regarding the forecast icing conditions along the route, the pilot departed for his destination airport. While en route, the pilot requested from air traffic control permission to divert to another airport “for fuel considerations” and stated that he had been flying in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) for a while. The controller directed the pilot to an instrument approach fix but the pilot did not intercept the fix in time, so the controller rerouted him to the east to attempt the approach from the other side. At this time, the pilot would have been in icing conditions, but he did not express concern to the controller. During the approach, the pilot stated that he was experiencing “freezing rain”, but he continued the approach. Based on the airplane’s flightpath it is likely that the autopilot was engaged. The airplane’s flight track revealed that after the airplane passed the final approach fix the airspeed decreased below 50 knots and the airplane made a sharp left descending turn. The airplane impacted the ground behind a residence and a postimpact fire consumed a majority of the fuselage. Available weather data revealed that the airplane was in IMC, icing conditions, and likely encountered supercooled liquid droplets during the flight. These conditions would have created an environment favorable for structural icing. A review of the pilot’s flight planning account revealed that he had requested a weather briefing and would have had access to the most accurate and updated weather information. The pilot reported to his girlfriend that he “wanted to beat the weather” on the day of the accident. This statement is consistent with the pilot’s self-induced pressure to complete the flight due to the incoming adverse weather conditions. A postaccident examination of the airplane revealed thick chunks of ice on and near the leading edges of the airplane that were consistent with structural ice. While the pilot reported an autopilot issue, it is likely that the airplane had accumulated enough structural ice that the autopilot had difficulty functioning properly. Based on the evidence, the accident is consistent with the pilot not able to maintain control of the airplane. The examination revealed that the cabin air heat exchanger had preaccident cracking, which allowed exhausts gases to mix with the cabin air. Based on the condition of the exhaust system and heat exchanger, it is likely that the system was not adequately inspected during the last annual inspection. The pilot’s toxicology revealed an elevated carboxyhemoglobin level. It is likely that the pilot was impaired by the effects of carbon monoxide poisoning and this impairment contributed to the pilot’s overall confusion, willingness to continue flight in icing conditions, and to the circumstances of the accident.

Probable cause

The pilot’s improper decision to fly into icing conditions with an airplane that was not equipped for icing, which led to structural icing and a subsequent loss of airplane control, and the pilot’s impairment from carbon monoxide poisoning due to a cracked heat exchanger. Contributing to the accident was the pilot’s self-induced pressure to complete the flight due to the incoming adverse weather conditions and the inadequate inspection of the cabin air heat exchanger.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset

Sources

NTSB record CEN21LA030
Event ID
20201026102196
Case number
CEN21LA030
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, coordinates, cause areas. 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: d19eafb4a2ccbe776df489bf07d3b8e929b7f191315c31e6100860a37fc71402; retrieved 2026-09-15T07:21:39.726Z.