FLIGHT FINDINGSAVIATION OCCURRENCE MAP
Back to map

CEN22LA250 · Beech 58 UNDESIGNAT

8 Jun 2022 · Evansville, IN, United States

Nea Industrial Beech 58 UNDESIGNAT · Incident: part(s) separation from aircraft en route

From Kirk Field (PGR) to James M. Cox Dayton International Airport (DAY)

Report a problem

Event

NTSB case
CEN22LA250
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
Incident
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
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
Visual Meteorological Cond

Beech 58 UNDESIGNAT

Aircraft type
Beechcraft 58
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
N78KL
Onboard fatalities
Unknown
Route
From Kirk Field (PGR), Paragould, ARTo James M. Cox Dayton International Airport (DAY), Dayton, OH
Aircraft age
About 32 years (built 1990)
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
En route
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
Part(s) separation from aircraft
DamageDestroyed: beyond practical repair. Substantial: damage that affects the structure, performance or handling and normally needs major repair. Minor: less than that. Glossary
Minor

Cause areas

  • Aircraft › Aircraft propeller/rotor
  • Personnel issues › Psychological
  • Personnel issues › Task performance

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

NTSB narrative

The airplane was about 1 hour into the cross-country flight when the pilot heard a “boom” noise. The airframe began vibrating, and the airplane yawed to the left. The pilot contacted approach control and stated that he needed to land the airplane immediately. The pilot was directed to divert, and he landed the airplane without incident. After exiting the airplane, the pilot noticed that one of the aluminum propeller blades on the left engine had separated about midspan, resulting in minor damage. The “boom” that the pilot heard was likely the blade separating in flight. Examination of the fracture surface revealed signatures consistent with high-cycle fatigue failure. The fatigue origin area was coincident with an area of damage that was covered with a thick black paint. The paint had a slightly different composition than the thinner layer of black paint on the rest of the blade. No evidence indicated any repair in the area of the damage and investigators were unable to determine when the damage was painted. Although the investigation could not determine, based on the available evidence for this incident, when the damage that led to the fracture occurred, or when the damage was painted, it is likely the damaged area was present at the airplane’s most recent 100-hour inspection, which occurred 28 hours before the incident. The presence of the black paint could have made it difficult to detect the damage during the mechanic’s visual inspection of the blade surface during the airplane’s most recent 100-hour inspection. Had the damage been detected during the 100-hr inspection it should have triggered maintenance of the propeller blade. The damage was also hidden but detectable during the preflight inspection conducted by the pilot before the accident flight. Had the damage been detected by the pilot, it should have triggered further examination and maintenance of the propeller blade.

Probable cause

The failure of the propeller blade due to high-cycle fatigue that originated from damage that occurred at an unknown time. Contributing to the accident was the failure to identify the damage before the accident flight.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset

Sources

NTSB record CEN22LA250
Event ID
20220615105266
Case number
CEN22LA250
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, 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: 387f6c3de8e2b024b02887ac8a7548eac6a54639d8370c86c80191beeda48a2a; retrieved 2026-09-16T15:20:12.380Z.