CEN24FA024 · Lancair 320
Lancair 320 · Accident: controlled flight into terrain/object (CFIT) en route
From Jesse Viertel Memorial Airport (VER) to Manitowoc County Airport (MTW)
Event
- NTSB case
- CEN24FA024
- 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
Lancair 320
- Aircraft type
- Lancair 320
- 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
- N320P
- Operator
- Unknown
- Onboard fatalities
- Unknown
- Route
- From Jesse Viertel Memorial Airport (VER), Boonville, MOTo Manitowoc County Airport (MTW), Manitowoc, WI
- Aircraft age
- About 30 years (built 1993)
- 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 · 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
- Controlled flight into terrain/object (CFIT)
- 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
- Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena
- Personnel issues › Action/decision
- Personnel issues › Task performance
Approximate · Coordinates as recorded by the NTSB; no uncertainty radius is established.
NTSB narrative
The airplane was operated on a personal cross-country flight. Recorded data indicated that the airplane made an approach to an airport but did not land and the airplane apparently diverted due to the instrument meteorological weather conditions (IMC) present at that airport. The airplane then flew toward another airport about 60 nautical miles away. The airplane was aligned with the extended runway centerline but impacted trees and terrain about 2.5 miles from the diversion airport. The weather conditions at the diversion airport were night IMC with a 400-ft ceiling. Data indicated that the originally intended destination was IMC at the time of the airplane’s departure. The pilot did not request weather information from known sources, and it is unknown what weather information, if any, the pilot checked or received before or during the flight. During the flight, the airplane’s transponder beacon code was set to 1200, indicating that the airplane was operating as a visual flight rules flight, and the investigation did not find record of communication with any air traffic control facility. Based on the flight track data it appeared that the pilot was attempting an approach to the diversion airport when the accident happened. The airplane was configured with one navigation radio that was approved for instrument flight navigation. It also was equipped with a handheld GPS receiver that was capable of monitoring approaches but was not approved for instrument flight navigation. Investigators could not determine which system the pilot was using to navigate. Examination of the airplane and engine did not reveal any pre-accident mechanical failures or malfunctions that would have precluded normal operation. Exhaust gas temperature recordings from the airplane’s engine monitoring system indicated that the engine was operating at the time of the accident. Additionally, the engine monitor recorded fuel pressure until the end of the recorded data, indicating that the airplane’s engine was still receiving fuel. ADS-B data showed that the airplane was descending at 900 ft/min during the final portion of the flight. Based on the available information, the experienced pilot chose to operate in instrument meteorological conditions without an instrument flight rules clearance and without communicating with any air traffic control facility. He then executed an unapproved instrument approach. During the approach the airplane descended into trees and terrain. There was no indication of any failure or malfunction of the airplane that contributed to the accident.
Probable cause
The pilot’s decision to continue the visual flight rules flight into instrument meteorological conditions and failure to maintain clearance from trees and terrain during an unapproved instrument approach. Contributing to the accident was the pilot’s inadequate preflight weather planning.
Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset
Sources
NTSB record CEN24FA024
- Event ID
- 20231026193308
- Case number
- CEN24FA024
- 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: 7288ec2944c7ceb2964a58978ecfcf467590bc37a94e98c674cb7986f9dab205; retrieved 2026-09-15T08:07:31.502Z.