WPR24LA068 · Cessna 421C
Double R Aviation Cessna 421C · Accident: airport occurrence before flight
From Van Nuys Airport (VNY) to an unrecorded destination
Event
- NTSB case
- WPR24LA068
- 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
Cessna 421C
- Aircraft type
- Cessna 421
- 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
- N421TP
- Operator
- Double R Aviation
- Onboard fatalities
- Unknown
- Route
- From Van Nuys Airport (VNY), Van Nuys, CATo not recorded
- Aircraft age
- About 47 years (built 1977)
- 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
- Prior to flight
- 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
- Airport occurrence
- 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
- Environmental issues › Operating environment
- Organizational issues › Management
- Personnel issues › Action/decision
Approximate · Coordinates as recorded by the NTSB; no uncertainty radius is established.
NTSB narrative
The pilot was conducting a return flight at night to his original departure airport on an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan. Before departing he checked the weather at his destination and the Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs) and there were no restrictions to returning to the non-towered airport. After the pilot departed for his destination, a second pilot landed at the destination airport after business hours. That pilot lost control during landing and that airplane slid off the side of runway 27 and came to rest with the left wing partially blocking the runway. That pilot contacted flight service (FS), who notified the airport manager of the blocked runway and issued a notice to airmen (NOTAM) that the runway was closed. Airport personnel were contacted to respond to the disabled airplane and a resident near the airport was contacted to monitor the airport’s common traffic advisory frequency (CTAF) and notify any inbound aircraft that the runway was closed. The first airport employee to arrive at the airport proceeded to the disabled airplane so he could transport the pilot and his dog to the airport terminal. After they returned to the terminal, a second airport employee arrived. The first employee and the pilot then returned to the disabled airplane to take photographs. The second employee remained at the terminal to watch the pilot’s dog. Airport personnel did not immediately update the Automated Weather Observation System (AWOS) recording to warn incoming aircraft of the runway closure or put closed runway lighting in place on the runway. While enroute, the pilot checked the weather and AWOS and there were no warnings of the runway closure at his destination. Due to the reported weather and because there was not an instrument approach approved for night use at his destination, he instead changed his plan and route of flight to fly an instrument approach to a nearby airport to use it as a waypoint, then cancel IFR once he was below the weather and continue the flight to his original destination under visual flight rules(VFR). The pilot did not inform air traffic control (ATC) of his plans, nor was he required to, so they did not provide available NOTAM information that the runway was closed at his destination. The pilot flew the IFR approach, canceled his IFR clearance and proceeded to the destination airport under VFR as planned. The pilot rechecked the AWOS as he neared the destination airport and made a 10-mile position call on the CTAF. The airport resident monitoring the airport’s CTAF frequency heard someone attempt to activate the runway lights and heard the pilot’s 10-mile position call. The resident attempted to contact the pilot on the radio multiple times, but did not receive a reply. Airport personnel, who had handheld and vehicle mounted radios, did not hear either the pilot’s or the resident’s radio transmissions. The pilot did not hear any radio transmissions on the Unicom frequency warning of the runway closure and subsequently landed. He was unaware of the airplane blocking the runway until he hit it. The left winglet on the landing airplane had impacted the airplane blocking the runway, substantially damaging the landing airplane’s left aileron. The airport’s emergency response plan did not provide for specific actions to be taken by personnel in the event of a non-accident runway closure event. The emergency response plan was updated following this accident with specific actions for personnel to take in the event of an aircraft accident or incident, including the issuance of a NOTAM and updating AWOS to advise of any closure or hazard at the airport. The airport manager stated it would take about 5 minutes for someone inside the terminal to update the AWOS. The pilot made reasonable attempts to determine the status of the airport before landing. There was insufficient evidence to determine why the pilot did not hear the resident attempting to warn him of the runway closure. The accident is consistent with airport personnel not properly prioritizing their actions in response to the disabled airplane in order to prevent another airplane from landing on the closed runway.
Probable cause
Airport personnel’s failure to properly prioritize their response actions, including updating the airport’s automated weather observation system recording in a timely manner to notify incoming pilots of a runway closure, which resulted in an airplane striking an immobilized airplane on the runway during landing at night. Contributing to the accident was the airport’s inadequate emergency response plan.
Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset
Sources
NTSB record WPR24LA068
- Event ID
- 20240109193633
- Case number
- WPR24LA068
- 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 2024-01-08.
- API snapshot SHA-256: 2d61537ba823a57288876be7b424367a38c76952ba6932cfc578b8faced6be2e; retrieved 2026-09-16T18:25:34.540Z.