WPR24FA124 · Gulfstream Corporation 695A
Gulfstream Corporation 695A · Accident: structural icing en route
From Stockton Metropolitan Airport (SCK) to Chino Airport (CNO)
Event
- NTSB case
- WPR24FA124
- 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
Gulfstream Corporation 695A
- Aircraft type
- Gulfstream 695
- 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
- N965BC
- Operator
- Unknown
- Onboard fatalities
- Unknown
- Route
- From Stockton Metropolitan Airport (SCK), Stockton, CATo Chino Airport (CNO), Chino, CA
- Aircraft age
- About 40 years (built 1984)
- 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
- Structural icing
- 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 oper/perf/capability
- Aircraft › Aircraft systems
- Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena
- Personnel issues › Action/decision
- Personnel issues › Task performance
Approximate · Coordinates from the NTSB case API, which marks them as estimated or does not say; no uncertainty radius is established.
NTSB narrative
The accident pilot had been in a recurrency training program in the accident airplane the week before the accident flight, which was the return flight after completing the week with the instructor. According to the instructor, the pilot wanted to proceed home so they had planned for the accident pilot to depart on that leg of the flight no later than 1830 for a route of flight that remained west of specific terrain due to weather forecasts and that would arrive at the destination airport before dark. The pilot subsequently departed about 30 minutes past the planned departure time and flew a route east of the terrain that had been discussed, which placed the airplane in severe weather conditions after dark. While descending from its cruising altitude, the airplane encountered turbulence and the autopilot disengaged. For the remainder of the flight, multiple transmissions were recorded between air traffic control (ATC) and the pilot regarding course corrections, altitudes, icing conditions, and issues with the airplane’s autopilot. ATC offered vectors from the arrival procedure; however, the accident pilot declined the vectors. After receiving another pilot’s report of airframe icing from ATC, the accident pilot confirmed to ATC that he had accumulated moderate rime ice and agreed when ATC offered a lower altitude. When ATC asked, the pilot confirmed that the airplane remained in icing conditions during the continued descent, and the airplane subsequently leveled at 7,200 ft above mean sea level (msl). ATC instructed the pilot to climb the airplane to the last assigned altitude of 7,400 ft msl; however, the airplane remained at 7,200 ft msl for 29 seconds and began a right turn. During flight at 7,200 ft msl, the airplane’s groundspeed slowed from 124 kts to 84 kts. ATC asked the pilot if he was ready to turn back to the left and the pilot responded “turning.” The airplane subsequently began a rapid descent from which the pilot did not recover. Recorded weather closest to the accident site reported wind from the southwest at 15 kts, with gusts to 23 kts, rain, and a cloud ceiling of 1,100 ft above ground level (agl). Multiple AIRMETS and SIGMETS were in effect throughout the planned route of flight, and areas of moderate to severe icing were forecast. The airplane flew its descent in instrument meteorological conditions and moderate to severe icing conditions, including supercooled liquid droplets (SLD). Given the conditions, the airplane likely encountered serious icing during the descent. The pilot continued to use the airplane’s autopilot system while flying in sustained moderate to severe icing conditions. It is likely that either the autopilot masked the effects of the ice accretion on the airframe until it either reached its limits of use and disengaged at a low attitude or that it remained engaged until the airplane exceeded its critical angle of attack and entered an aerodynamic stall. The sudden onset of a rapid descent and subsequent near-vertical impact are consistent with a loss of control due to an aerodynamic stall. Postaccident examination of the airframe and engines revealed no evidence of any preexisting mechanical failures or anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. Medical review indicated that the pilot had used a cannabis product and it is possible that he could have been experiencing associated impairing effects at the time of the accident. However, the exact timing of his last cannabis use or level of impairment could not be determined from muscle tissue results alone.
Probable cause
The pilot’s continued use of the airplane’s autopilot after flight into moderate to severe icing conditions, which resulted in an exceedance of the airplane’s critical angle of attack and an aerodynamic stall.
Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset
Sources
NTSB record WPR24FA124
- Event ID
- 20240414194082
- Case number
- WPR24FA124
- 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, coordinates, cause areas. Values present in the bulk record are kept.
- The date is the local date; the NTSB stores the UTC date 2024-04-14.
- API snapshot SHA-256: c771179d6ad4fe65c7895c9111399a18ffe6f4487dfe316d689ebfd65f0d8a9e; retrieved 2026-09-15T08:12:37.012Z.