aviation

Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

U.S. General Aviation, Calendar Year 2002

NTSB/ARG-06/02

PB2007-100696

Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

U.S. General Aviation, Calendar Year 2002

NTSB/ARG-06/02

PB2007-100696

Notation 7534E

Adopted November 29, 2006

National Transportation Safety Board

490 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20594
National Transportation Safety Board. 2006. U.S. General Aviation, Calendar Year 2002. Annual 

Review of Aircraft Accident Data NTSB/ARG-06/02. Washington, D.C.

Abstract: The National Transportation Safety Board’s 2002 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data for U.S. General 

Aviation is a statistical compilation and review of general aviation accidents that occurred in 2002 involving 

U.S.-registered aircraft. As a summary of all U.S. general aviation accidents for 2002, the review is designed to 

inform general aviation pilots and their passengers and to provide detailed information to support future government, 

industry, and private research efforts and safety improvement initiatives.

The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent Federal agency dedicated to promoting aviation, railroad, highway, marine, pipeline, and 

hazardous materials safety. Established in 1967, the agency is mandated by Congress through the Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 to investigate 

transportation accidents, determine the probable causes of the accidents, issue safety recommendations, study transportation safety issues, and 

evaluate the safety effectiveness of government agencies involved in transportation. The Safety Board makes public its actions and decisions through 

accident reports, safety studies, special investigation reports, safety recommendations, and statistical reviews.

Recent publications are available in their entirety on the Web at <http://www.ntsb.gov>. Other information about available publications also may be 

obtained from the Web site or by contacting:

National Transportation Safety Board

Records Management Division, CIO-40

490 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20594

(800) 877-6799 or (202) 314-6551

Safety Board publications may be purchased, by individual copy or by subscription, from the National Technical Information Service. To purchase this 

publication, order report number PB2007-100696 from:

National Technical Information Service

5285 Port Royal Road

Springfield, Virginia 22161

(800) 553-6847 or (703) 605-6000

The Independent Safety Board Act, as codified at 49 U.S.C. Section 1154(b), precludes the admission into evidence or use of Board reports related 

to an incident or accident in a civil action for damages resulting from a matter mentioned in the report. 
Contents

2002 General Aviation Accident Summary ....................1

Introduction ........................................................................2

Purpose of the Review .......................................................2

What Is General Aviation? .................................................2

Which Operations Are Included in this Review?....................2

Which Aircraft Are Included in this Review?..........................2

Organization of the Review ................................................3

The General Aviation Environment in 2002...................4

General Economic and Aviation Industry Indicators .............4

Fleet Makeup....................................................................5

General Aviation Activity ....................................................6

Historical Trends in Accident Data ..................................8

Accident Rates ..................................................................8

Number of Accidents and Fatalities.....................................9

Accident Rate by Type of Operation ..................................10

2002 in Depth.................................................................. 13

Location of General Aviation Accidents in 2002.................13

United States Aircraft Accidents .................................13

Foreign Aircraft Accidents .........................................14

Aircraft Type....................................................................15

Purpose of Flight .............................................................15

Flight Plan................................................................16

Airport Involvement ...................................................17

Environmental Conditions..........................................18

Lighting Conditions...................................................19

Injuries and Damage for 2002 .........................................20

Aircraft Damage .......................................................20

Accident Injuries........................................................21

Injuries by Role for 2002..................................................21

Accident Pilots.................................................................22

Rating ......................................................................22

Total Time ................................................................24

Time in Type of Aircraft ..............................................25

Age .........................................................................26

Accident Occurrences for 2002........................................27

Phase of Flight..........................................................30

Chain of Occurrences .....................................................31

Most Prevalent Causes/Factors for 2002 ...........................32

Probable Causes, Factors, Findings, and the Broad 

Cause/Factor Classification ...................................32

Human Performance........................................................36

Weather as a Cause/Factor..............................................37

Focus on General Aviation Safety: 

Stall/Spin Accidents ........................................................ 38

What is a Stall?...............................................................38

What is a Spin?...............................................................39

Stall/Spin Accidents.........................................................41

Accident Severity .............................................................42

Accident Occurrences .....................................................43

Phase of Flight ................................................................45

Type of Operation ...........................................................45

Accident Pilot Experience .................................................46

Stall/Spin Accident Causes/Factors...................................47

Human Performance........................................................49

Stall/Spin Awareness and Avoidance Training ....................49

Summary........................................................................50

Appendix A ...................................................................... 51

The National Transportation Safety Board Aviation 

Accident/Incident Database ...................................51

Appendix B ..................................................................... 52

Definitions......................................................................52

Appendix C....................................................................... 53

The National Transportation Safety Board 

Investigative Process..............................................53

Appendix D ...................................................................... 54

National Transportation Safety Board Regional Offices.......54

1 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

2002 General Aviation Accident

Summary

A total of 1,715 general aviation accidents occurred during 

calendar year 2002, involving 1,724 aircraft.1 The total number of 

general aviation accidents in 2002 was lower than in 2001, with 

a 1% decrease of 12 accidents. Of the total number of accidents, 

345 were fatal, resulting in a total of 581 fatalities. The number 

of fatal general aviation accidents in 2002 increased 6% from 

calendar year 2001, and the total number of fatalities increased 

by 3%. The circumstances of these accidents and details related 

to the aircraft, pilots, and locations are presented throughout this 

review. 

1 In this review, a collision between two aircraft is counted as a single accident. The 6 

midair collision accidents that occurred in 2002 involved 12 general aviation aircraft. 

In addition, 3 ground collision accidents involved 6 general aviation aircraft.

1 In this review, a collision between two aircraft is counted as a single accident. The 6 midair collision accidents that occurred in 2002 involved 12 general aviation aircraft. 

In addition, 3 ground collision accidents involved 6 general aviation aircraft

2002 General Aviation Accident Statistics

General Aviation Accidents 

 Total 1,715 

 Fatal 345 

 

General Aviation Accident Injuries 

Minor 448 

 Serious 297 

 Fatal 581 

 Persons involved in GA accidents with no injuries 1,817 

 

General Aviation Accident Rate 

 General Aviation Hours Flown 25,545,000 

All Accidents 6.69/100,000 hours 

 Fatal Accidents 1.33/100,000 hours 

 Accidents per Pilot 2.71/1,000 active pilots 

 Fatal Accidents per Pilot 0.55/1,000 active pilots 

 

 Federal Aviation Administration, General Aviation and Air Taxi Survey, 2002. 

 Excludes events involving suicide, sabotage, and stolen/unauthorized use. 

b

b

a

a

b
2

Introduction

Purpose of the Review 

The National Transportation Safety Board’s 2002 Annual Review 

of Aircraft Accident Data for U.S. General Aviation is a statistical 

compilation and review of general aviation accidents that occurred 

in 2002 involving U.S.-registered aircraft. As a summary of all U.S. 

general aviation accidents for 2002, the review is designed to 

inform general aviation pilots and their passengers and to provide 

detailed information to support future government, industry, and 

private research efforts and safety improvement initiatives.

The Safety Board drew on several resources in compiling data for 

this review. Accident data, for example, were extracted from the 

Safety Board’s Aviation Accident/Incident Database.2 Activity data 

were also extracted from the General Aviation and Air Taxi Activity 

Survey (GAATA Survey)3 and from U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics,4 both 

of which are published by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), 

Statistics and Forecast Branch, Planning and Analysis Division, 

Office of Aviation Policy and Plans. Additional information was 

extracted from the General Aviation Statistical Databook, published 

by the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA).

.

What Is General Aviation?

General aviation can be described as any civil aircraft operation 

that is not covered under 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

Parts 121, 129, and 135, commonly referred to as commercial air 

carrier operations.5

Which Operations Are Included in This 

Review?

This review includes accidents involving U.S.-registered aircraft 

operating under 14 CFR Part 91, as well as public aircraft6

flights that do not involve military or intelligence agencies. Aircraft 

operating under Part 91 include aircraft that are flown for recreation 

and personal transportation and certain aircraft operations that are 

flown with the intention of generating revenue,7 including business 

flying, flight instruction, corporate/executive flights, positioning or 

ferry flights, aerial application, pipeline/powerline patrols, and 

news and traffic reporting.

Which Aircraft Are Included in This Review?

General aviation operations are conducted using a wide range of 

aircraft, including airplanes, rotorcraft, gliders, balloons and blimps, 

.

2 See appendix A for more details.

3 Although included in the GAATA Survey, data associated with air taxi and air tour operations are not included in this review.

4 FAA, U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics, 2002; available online at <http://www.faa.gov/data_statistics/aviation_data_statistics/civil_airmen_statistics/>,

5 For a review of accident statistics related to air carrier operations, see National Transportation Safety Board, Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data, U.S. Air Carrier 

Operations, Calendar Year 2002 (Washington, DC: 2006), available at <http://www.ntsb.gov>,

6 Although the precise statutory definition has changed over the years, public aircraft operations for Safety Board purposes are qualified government missions that may include 

law enforcement, low-level observation, aerial application, firefighting, search and rescue, biological or geological resource management, and aeronautical research. 

7 See 14 CFR 119.1.
3 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

and registered ultralight, experimental, or amateur-built aircraft. 

The diverse set of operations and aircraft types included within the 

scope of general aviation must be considered when interpreting 

the data in this review. The type of aircraft being flown is usually 

closely related to the type of flight operation being conducted. Jet 

and turboprop aircraft are commonly used for corporate/executive 

transportation, smaller single-engine piston aircraft are commonly 

used for instructional flights, and a variety of aircraft types are used 

for personal and business flights.

Not included in this review are any accident data associated with 

aircraft operating under 14 CFR Parts 121, 129, or 135. Also not 

included are data for military or intelligence agencies, non-U.S.-

registered aircraft, unregistered ultralights, and commercial space 

launches, unless the accident also involved aircraft conducting 

general aviation operations. Crashes involving illegal operations, 

stolen aircraft, suicide, or sabotage are included in the accident 

total, but not in accident rates.8

Organization of the Review

The 2002 Annual Review is organized into four parts.

The first part summarizes general aviation accident 

statistics for 2002, economic and industry markers related 

to general aviation activity in 2002, and contextual 

statistics from previous years. 

The second part investigates trends over the past 10 years 

and provides context for such accident information as 

operation types, levels of aircraft damage, and injuries.

1.

2.

The third part focuses on specific circumstances of 

accidents that occurred during 2002. This section 

describes accident occurrences and summarizes 

the Safety Board’s findings of probable cause and 

contributing factors.

The fourth and final section presents in-depth coverage 

of a special topic important to general aviation safety. 

The 2002 Annual Review focuses on stalls/spins.

Graphics are used to present much of the information in 

this review. For readers who wish to view tabular data or to 

manipulate the data used in this review, the data set is available 

online at < http://www.ntsb.gov/aviation/Stats.htm>. 

3.

4.

8 In 2002, six accidents were attributed to pilot suicide and one to sabotage.
4

The General Aviation Environment

in 2002

General Economic and Aviation Industry 

Indicators 

Repeated throughout this review is the theme that general 

aviation accident numbers should be interpreted in light of related 

information, such as aircraft type, type of operation, and operating 

environment. Because personal and business flying account for the 

largest percentage of general aviation flying, prevailing economic 

conditions and/or trends may noticeably affect both the general 

aviation industry and flight operations.

U.S. industrial and personal incomes grew steadily from 1980 

through 2002. Between 1990 and 2002, the U.S. resident population 

increased almost 16%, the gross domestic product rose by 41%, and 

disposable personal income per capita rose by 23%. 

Economic indicators for the general aviation industry either 

declined or remained generally steady between 1980 and the 

mid-1990s. Production and sale of light piston aircraft, which 

historically account for most of the general aviation 

fleet, decreased substantially from more than 10,750 

in 1983 to about 500 in 1994, and the total number 

of new general aviation aircraft shipped in 1994 was 

about 7% of the number shipped in 1980. However, by 

2002, general aviation industry indicators had increased 

noticeably. Aircraft shipments nearly tripled between 1995 

and 2002, and the percent increase in net factory billings 

between 1995 and 2002 was equal to the total increase 

observed over the previous 20 years. This rapid growth was 

likely motivated by a combination of generally favorable 

economic conditions and increased general aviation 

aircraft production following the 1994 passage of the 

General Aviation Revitalization Act9 limiting manufacturer 

liability. 

9 The General Aviation Revitalization Act, signed into law August 17, 1994, limited the liability of general aviation manufacturers to 18 years.

General Economic and Aviation Industry Indicators,

1980-2002

1980 1990 2002

Resident Population (Millions) 227 249 288 

Gross Domestic Product (Billions) $5,162 $7,112 $10,049 

Disposable Personal Income (Billions) $3,858 $5,324 $7,562 

Disposable Personal Income Per Capita $16,940 $21,281 $26,236 

Number of GA Aircraft Sold 11,877 1,144 2,207 

Net Factory Billings for GA Aircraft (Millions) $2,486 $2,008 $7,719 

Value of New GA Aircraft Sold: Piston (Millions) $794 $92 $389 

Value of New GA Aircraft Sold: Turbine (Millions) $1,691 $1,916 $7,330 

 U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics; data are available at

 http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/2005/html/table_a.html. 

 Bureau of Economic Analysis, real gross domestic product, using chained 2002 dollars; 

 data are available at http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn/gdplev.xls. 

 Bureau of Economic Analysis, chained 2002 dollars; data are available at 

 http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn/nipaweb/.

 General Aviation Manufacturers Association, 

General Aviation Statistical Databook, 2005 (Washington, D.C.). 

a

b

c

c

d

d

d

d

a

b

c

d
5 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Fleet Makeup

Although sales of new general aviation aircraft increased 

noticeably after the mid-1990s, most general aviation aircraft in 

use in 2002 were more than 25 years old. U.S. manufacturers 

delivered 2,207 new general aviation aircraft in 2002, compared 

to an estimated total of 207,087 already in service. Single-engine 

piston aircraft currently have the highest average age of all general 

aviation aircraft types and account for the largest percentage of the 

general aviation fleet. As a consequence, any structural or design 

improvements incorporated into newly manufactured aircraft may 

not be reflected in the accident record for several years. The safety 

benefits of improved equipment, such as avionics and aircraft 

equipment, are also difficult to track because most new equipment 

is also available for installation in older aircraft.

GAMA, General Aviation Statistical Databook, 2002

Annual Shipments of U.S.-Manufactured

General Aviation Aircraft, 1983-2002

0

1,000

2,000

19831984198519861987198819891990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002

Single-engine Multi-engine Turboprop Jet

Number of Active Aircraft in General Aviation, 2002

Turboprop 6,062

Rotorcraft

6,333

Single-Engine

Piston

142,715

Multi-Engine Piston

15,949

Jet

7,670

Glider 1,951

Lighter-Than-Air

4,376

Amateur-Built

18,168

GA Fleet Age, 2002

Category Engine-Type Seats Average Age

Single-engine Piston 1-3 36

 4 33

 5-7 28

 8+ 43

Turboprop all 12

Jet all 31

Multi-engine Piston 1-3 36

 4 33

 5-7 33

 8+ 37

Turboprop all 26

Jet all 28

All Aircraft 31
The General Aviation Environment In 2002 6

General Aviation Activity

Because general aviation includes such a diverse group of 

aircraft types and operations, some measure of exposure must be 

considered to make meaningful comparisons of accident numbers. 

Flight activity is typically used to normalize accident numbers across 

different groups, with the level of activity corresponding to the level 

of exposure to potential accident risk. Total flight hours, departures, 

and miles flown are common indicators used to measure activity. 

As this graph shows, annual general aviation flight hour estimates 

began to increase in 1994 after a decline during the preceding 

years. In 2002, the estimated number of general aviation flight 

hours was 25.5 million, up slightly from 2001.10

It should be noted that activity data for general aviation are far 

less reliable than data available for commercial air carriers. 

Unlike Part 121 and scheduled Part 135 air carriers, which are 

required to report total flight hours, departures, and miles flown 

to the Department of Transportation (DOT),11 operators of general 

aviation aircraft are not required to report actual flight activity data. 

As a result, activity for this group of aircraft must be estimated using 

data from the GAATA Survey.

12 The GAATA Survey was established 

in 1978 to gather information about aircraft use, flight hours, and 

avionics equipment installations from owners of general aviation 

and on-demand Part 135 aircraft. General aviation activity data 

are considered less reliable because a limited sample13 of aircraft 

is selected from the registry of aircraft owners for use in the GAATA 

Survey, and reporting is not required.

In addition, specific general aviation activity data could not be 

calculated in many cases because the survey data represented an 

aggregate of all aircraft activity, including on-demand Part 135 

operations (which are not included in this review of general aviation 

accidents). Such aggregate data included the number of landings, 

flight hours by state or region, and flight hours by day/night or 

weather conditions. For this review, therefore, general aviation 

activity measures were determined by subtracting on-demand Part 

135 data from activity totals whenever possible. Such data are not 

included in this review.

In addition to flight-hour estimates, the number of pilots can be 

used to establish the level of exposure to risk for the various types 

of operations included in general aviation. Available measures of 

Number of General Aviation Hours

Flown Annually, 1993-2002

100,000 Hours

350

300

250

200

150

100

0

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

10 The decrease in flight hours in 2002 was partly due to decreased flight activity following the events of September 11, 2001. For about 20 days after September 11, many 

flight operations, including those of air carriers, were suspended and gradually re-introduced.

11 Part 121 operators report activity on a monthly basis, and scheduled Part 135 operators report quarterly.

12 Available at < http://www.faa.gov/data_statistics/aviation_data_statistics/general_aviation/CY2002/>. 

13 The 2002 GAATA Survey sample frame consisted of 273,870 registered aircraft, from which 29,491 records (11%) were selected in a sample stratified by state/territory 

and aircraft type. From that sample, 15,254 (54% of the sample and 6% of the total population) completed surveys were collected (GAATA Survey, Calendar Year 2002). 
7 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

the pilot population include both the number of certificates issued 

to new pilots and medical certificates issued to active pilots. The 

number of new student pilot certificates represents positive growth 

in the pilot population, and the number of medical certificates 

issued represents an informal census of all active pilots. 

From 1993 through 1996, the number of new student pilot 

certificates each year decreased steadily from 69,178 to 56,653.14

The number fluctuated after 1996, but remained generally even, 

with a total of 65,421 new student certificates issued in 2002.

Based on the number of medical certificates, the estimated total 

number of active pilots in U.S. general aviation decreased steadily 

throughout the early and mid-1990s, from 702,659 in 1990 to 

622,261 in 1996. Between 1997 and 2002, the number of active 

pilots fluctuated, with an estimated total of 631,762 active U.S. 

pilots in 2002. 

In summary, general aviation indicators—flight hours and the total 

number of active and newly issued pilot certificates—decreased 

annually between 1990 and 1996. From 1996 through 2002, the 

number of active and new student pilots fluctuated annually, with 

little overall change, during a period with a noticeable increase 

in estimated flight activity. The increase in estimated activity over 

the period had a noticeable effect on accident rate and should 

be considered when attempting to interpret the general aviation 

accident record for 2002 in the context of previous years. 

Number of New Student Pilot

Certificates Issued, 1993-2002

0

20

40

60

80

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Thousands of Certificates

Thousands of Certificates

Estimated Number of Active Pilot

Certificates, 1993-2002

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

750

700

650

600

550

500

14 U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics.
8

Historical Trends in Accident Data

Accident Rates

After 1994, the calculated general aviation accident rate declined 

overall as annual estimates of general aviation activity increased 

noticeably15 without a corresponding increase in the number of 

accidents. The rate of 6.69 accidents per 100,000 hours flown 

in 2002 was substantially lower than the 10-year high of 9.03 

accidents per 100,000 hours recorded in 1993. In fact, the 2002 

rate was only slightly higher than that of 1998, which had the lowest 

rate since the Safety Board began reporting general aviation-only 

annual accident rates in 1975.16 The relative percentage of fatal 

accidents remained fairly constant from 1993 through 2002, at 18 

to 21% of the total number of accidents. The 2002 rate of 1.33 

fatal accidents per 100,000 flight hours was only slightly higher 

than the 2001 fatal accident rate. In 2002, accident-related deaths per flight hour were 2.3 fatalities 

per 100,000 hours flown. This is slightly higher than the recent low 

of 2.1 per 100,000 hours flown in 1999 and 2000 but noticeably 

lower than the highest annual fatality-per-hour rate for the period 

in 1993 and 1994 (3.3 deaths per 100,000 hours flown). 

15 FAA estimates of annual general aviation activity increased noticeably after 1998 due to a change in GAATA Survey methodology that increased the estimated general 

aviation aircraft population by about 10%. Appendix A of the GAATA Survey, Calendar Year 2002, explains the changes in survey methodology; see <http://www.faa.gov/

data_statistics/aviation_data_statistics/general_aviation/CY2002/>.

16 Before 1975, scheduled 14 CFR 135 commuter and non-scheduled 14 CFR 135 air taxi aircraft operations were included in the Safety Board’s annual general aviation 

accident total and rate.

General Aviation Accident Rate, 1993-2002

Accidents per 100,000 Hours

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Accidents Fatal Accidents
9 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Another measure of accident distribution is the number of accidents 

per active pilot. Although this measure was considerably more 

stable from 1993 through 2002 than the per-hour accident rate, 

it did decrease slightly overall with the lowest number of accidents 

per pilot for the period occurring in the years 1999–2002.

Accident rate calculations based on flight hours require the use 

of GAATA Survey activity data extrapolated from a relatively small 

sample of aircraft owners. As a result, the calculated values are 

accurate only to the extent that the sample represents the larger 

population of general aviation operators. For this reason, accident 

rate data presented in this review typically also include raw 

frequency data for comparison. 

Number of Accidents and Fatalities

Although the number of general aviation accidents fluctuated 

slightly year to year, the number of accidents that occurred annually 

between 1993 and 2002 declined overall from 2,064 in 1993 to 

a 10-year low of 1,715 in 2002. The number of fatal accidents 

also decreased overall, from 401 in 1993 to 345 in 2002, but was 

up slightly from the 10-year low of 325 reached in 2001.

Number of General Aviation Fatalities

per 100,000 Hours Flown, 1993-2002

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Fatalities per 100,000 Hours

5

4

3

2

1

0

2.1 2.1 2.2

3.3 3.3 3.0

2.3

2.5 2.4 2.6

General Aviation Accident Distribution per

Active Pilot, 1993-2002

Accidents per 1,000 Pilots

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0

Accidents Fatal Accidents

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Historical Trends in Accident Data 10

The number of fatalities also exhibited a generally downward trend 

from the high of 744 deaths in 1993 to a low of 581 deaths in 

2002. This observed decline in fatalities was consistent with other 

trends for the 10-year period, which showed a decline in the 

number of active pilots, the number of accidents, and the number 

of fatal accidents.

Accident Rate by Type of Operation

General aviation includes a wide range of operations, each with 

unique aircraft types, flight profiles, and operating procedures. This 

diversity is evident in the accident record. However, the flight data 

collected in the GAATA Survey allow for only a coarse representation 

of the many types of general aviation operations. For some types 

of operations, such as public aircraft flights,17 no activity data are 

available. The data presented here include four operational categories 

selected because they are representative of general aviation and 

have activity information available. The categories selected as being 

typical of general aviation activity include personal/business flying,18

corporate flying, aerial application, and instructional flights.

Number of General Aviation Accidents 

1993-2002

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

Accidents Fatal Accidents

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Number of Fatal General Aviation Accidents

and Fatalities, 1993-2002

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

1,000

750

500

250

0

Fatal Accidents Fatalities

17 The Annual Review, 2002, data include 40 public aircraft accidents, 7 of which resulted in one or more fatalities. Public aircraft activity is well documented for federal 

aircraft but not for state and local government aircraft.

18 Because of the difficulty of accurately distinguishing between personal and business flying for both the activity survey and the accident record, the rate presented in this 

review is calculated using combined exposure data (hours flown).
11 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Personal flying makes up the largest portion of general 

aviation activity and includes all flying for pleasure and/or 

personal transportation. Although similar to personal flying, 

business flying includes the use of an aircraft for business 

transportation without a paid, professional crew. Personal 

and business flights are typically conducted in single- and 

multi-engine piston airplanes, but may include a range of 

aircraft including gliders, rotorcraft, and balloons. 

Corporate flying includes any business transportation with a 

professional crew and usually involves larger, multi-engine 

piston, turboprop, and jet airplanes. 

Aerial application includes the use of specially equipped 

aircraft for seeding and for spraying pesticides, herbicides, 

and fertilizer. Aerial application is unique because it requires 

pilots to fly close to the ground. 

Instructional flying includes any flight under the supervision 

of a certificated flight instructor.19 Instructional flying typically 

includes both dual training flights and student solo flights. 

Aircraft used for instruction are often similar to those used 

for personal flying. However, instructional operations are 

unique because they often involve the repeated practice of 

takeoffs and landings, flight maneuvers, and emergency 

procedures.

From 1993 through 2001, personal and business flying had the 

highest average accident rate, followed by aerial application and 

instructional flights. The lowest accident rate was for corporate/

executive transportation, which for the 10-year period ranked 

lowest overall each year. In 2002, at 0.27 accidents per 100,000 

hours, the accident rate for corporate/executive flying was only 5% 

of the rate of instructional flying, the next lowest rate.

•

•

•

•

As previously mentioned, the highest percentage of general aviation 

accidents typically involves personal and business operations. 

Between 1993 and 2002, personal/business flying accounted for 

an average of 67% of all general aviation accidents. In 2002, 68% 

of all general aviation accidents involved personal/business flying, 

a percentage consistent with the 10-year average. Instructional 

flying accounted for the next highest percentage, 14%, compared 

with a 10-year average of 14% of all general aviation accidents. 

The lowest number of accidents from 1993 through 2002 involved 

corporate/executive flights. Averaging about 10 accidents per year, 

annual totals for corporate/executive accidents are barely visible in 

comparison to accidents involving other types of operations.

19 See 14 CFR Part 61, Subpart H, for flight instructor certificate and rating requirements.

Accident Rate by

Type of Operation, 1993-2002

(per 100,000 flight hours)

Personal and Business Aerial Application

Flight Instruction Corporate/Executive

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0
Historical Trends in Accident Data 12

Throughout the 10-year period, the combined category of personal/

business flying also had the highest fatal accident rate. Except for 

2000 and 2001, the rate was typically more than double the rate 

for any other type of flying. 

An average 267 fatal accidents per year were associated with 

personal/business flying, compared to an average 23 fatal accidents 

per year related to instructional flying, 13 for aerial application, 

and 4 for corporate/executive flights. Differences in the number 

and rate of fatalities and injuries among types of operation are 

likely related to the type of aircraft and equipment, the level of pilot 

training, and the operating environments unique to each type of 

operation. The total number of fatal accidents per year among 

each type of flight operation exhibits a distribution similar to the 

total number of accidents per operation, with personal and business 

flying accounting for an average 73% of all fatal general aviation 

accidents and 74% of all fatal injuries for 1993 through 2002.

Number of Accidents by

Type of Operation, 1993-2002

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

Personal and Business Aerial Application

Flight Instruction Corporate/Executive

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Personal and Business Aerial Application

Flight Instruction Corporate/Executive

Fatal Accident Rate by

Type of Operation, 1993-2002

(per 100,000 flight hours)

3

2

1

0

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

Personal and Business Aerial Application

Flight Instruction Corporate/Executive

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Number of Fatal Accidents by

Type of Operation, 1993-2002
13 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

2002 In Depth

Location of General Aviation Accidents in 

2002

United States Aircraft Accidents 

Geographic location can contribute to general aviation accident 

totals because of increased activity due to population density or 

increased risk due to hazardous terrain, a propensity for hazardous 

weather, or a concentration of particularly hazardous flight 

operations. The number of general aviation accidents occurring 

annually in a state is related to the population, general aviation 

activity level, and flying conditions unique to that state. Although 

the specific hourly activity data needed to calculate general aviation 

accident rates for each state are not available, some assumptions 

can be made about general aviation activity levels based on 

the size and population of each state. For example, California, 

Florida, and Texas, which had the greatest number of accidents 

in 2002, are the first, second, and fourth most populous states 

in the nation, respectively.20 In addition, all three of these states 

have warm climates that favor flying year round, and all three are 

popular travel destinations that attract general aviation traffic from 

other states. These states also had the largest numbers of active 

pilots21 and active aircraft.22 These data suggest that the high 

number of accidents in California, Florida, and Texas are likely 

related primarily to a high level of activity. 

Regional differences that affect general aviation accident numbers 

may also include hazards unique to the local terrain and weather. 

For example, the operating environment, infrastructure, and travel 

requirements in Alaska present unique challenges to aviation that are 

reflected in the general aviation accident record. 23 After California,

Florida, and Texas, Alaska had the most general aviation accidents 

20 U.S. Census Bureau; data are available at <http://factfinder.census.gov/>.

21 U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics, 2002.

22 GAATA Survey, 2002.

23 For an analysis of aviation safety in Alaska, see National Transportation Safety Board, Aviation Safety in Alaska, Safety Study, NTSB/SS-95/03 (Washington, DC: 1995). 

The Safety Board is also supporting an ongoing effort to identify and mitigate risk factors specific to aviation operations in Alaska; for details, see <http://www.ntsb.gov/

aviation/AK/alaska_stat.htm>.

104

171

38

5

10

21

11 35

1

53

9

24

33

6 33

35

20

117

44

37

42

22

14 25

20

11

37

34

41

14

25

36

25

1

112

25

18

14

7

24 7

16

72

30 73

38

45

31

56

Accidents

41 to 171 (11)

34 to 40 (8) 

22 to 33 (11)

11 to 21 (10) 1 to 10 (10)

General Aviation Accidents by U.S. State, 2002
14

in 2002. Note that the 2002 totals are consistent with the 10-

year averages, shown below. Although many of the state accident 

totals for 2002 were below the 10-year averages, the distribution of 

accidents among states remained similar during the period.

Foreign Aircraft Accidents 

In 2002, U.S.-registered aircraft were involved in 35 accidents 

outside the 50 United States. Those accidents occurred in 15 different 

countries and territories, in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and in 

the Gulf of Mexico. Of these, 15 were fatal, resulting in 34 deaths. 

The largest number occurred in Puerto Rico, with 6 accidents, 

followed by the Bahamas with 4. Although most general aviation 

accidents involving U.S.-registered aircraft outside the United States

usually occur in neighboring countries like Canada, Mexico, and 

the Caribbean island nations, in 2002 accidents occurred as far 

away as France, Spain, China, and the United Kingdom.

Top 10 General Aviation Accident States, 2002

204 California

Florida

Texas

Alaska

Arizonia

Colorado

Washington

Idaho

Georgia

Michigan

171

130

117

126

112

117

104

63

73

66

72

61

56

33

45

42

44

49

42 2002 10-yr Average

2002 in Depth

Accidents Involving U.S.-Registered General Aviation Aircraft 

Outside the 50 United States, 2002

Number of Number of Fatal Number of

Accidents Accidents Fatalities

 

Pacific Ocean 

 Off Hawaii 1 1 1

Subtotal 1 1 1

Atlantic Ocean 

 Off Bahamas 1 1 5

 Off Florida 1 0 0

Subtotal 2 1 5

Gulf of Mexico 

 Off Oil Platform 4 1 1

Subtotal 4 1 1

Other Countries / Territories 

 Bahamas 4 1 2

 Canada 3 0 0

 China 1 0 0

 Cuba 1 0 0

 Dominican Republic 2 2 2

 France 1 0 0

 Guam 1 0 0

 Italy 1 1 1

 Mexico 3 2 4

 Panama 1 0 0

 Puerto Rico 6 4 10

 Spain 1 1 3

 Suriname 1 0 0

 United Kingdom 1 1 5

 Virgin Islands 1 0 0

Subtotal 28 12 27

Total 35 15 34
15 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Aircraft Type

The following graph summarizes the total number of general aviation 

accidents and the number of fatal accidents occurring in 2002 

by type of aircraft. Most notable is the large number of accidents 

involving single-engine piston airplanes, which accounted for 72% 

of all accident aircraft and 67% of all fatal accident aircraft.

In 2002, the per-aircraft accident rate for all aircraft types was 6.72 

accidents and 1.34 fatal accidents per 100,000 hours flown.24

Among fixed-wing powered aircraft, the rate for single-engine 

piston airplanes, the category representing the largest number of 

aircraft, was 7.79 accidents and 1.43 fatal accidents per 100,000 

hours flown. Amateur-built aircraft had the highest accident rate in 

2002 with 22.49 accidents and 6.57 fatal accidents per 100,000 

flight hours.25 Rotorcraft had the second-highest rate among 

powered aircraft, with 11.61 accidents and 1.68 fatal accidents 

per 100,000 hours flown. However, glider operations had the 

second-highest accident rate overall, with 19.67 accidents and 

3.81 fatal accidents per 100,000 hours flown. 

Accident Rate per Aircraft Type, 2002

(per 100,000 Flight Hours)

All Aircraft

Airplane Single Piston

Airplane Multi-Engine Piston

AirplaneTurboprop

AirplaneTurbine

Amateur-Built

Rotorcraft

Gliders

Lighter-Than-Air

Total

Fatal

6.72

1.34

7.79

1.43

5.10

1.88

4.33

1.29

0.72

0.12

6.57

11.61

1.68

3.81

6.42

0.58

22.49

19.67

24 Note that the reported rates are per aircraft and differ from per-accident rates because each aircraft is counted separately in the event of a collision. Included in the accident 

totals, but excluded from the associated rates, are six single-engine piston aircraft accidents with a probable cause attributed to suicide, sabotage, or stolen/unauthorized use. 

25 Title 14 CFR Part 21 (21.191(g)) provides for the issuance of a Special Airworthiness Certificate in the experimental category to permit the operation of amateur-built aircraft. 

Amateur-built aircraft may be fabricated from plans or assembled from a kit, so long as the major portion (51%) of construction is completed by the amateur builder(s).

Number of Accidents by Type of Aircraft, 2002

1,724 All Aircraft

Airplane Single Piston

Airplane Multi-Engine Piston

AirplaneTurboprop

AirplaneTurbine

Amateur-Built

Rotorcraft

Gliders

Lighter-Than-Air

349

1,247

234

111

41

67

20

18

3

219

64

201

29

31

6

11

0

Total

Fatal
2002 in Depth 16

Purpose of Flight

As previously mentioned, general aviation includes a wide range 

of operation types, each with unique aircraft types, flight profiles, 

and operating procedures. The total number of accidents and the 

accident rates can vary considerably as a result of these differences. 

To allow comparisons among different operations, risk exposure is 

standardized across different operations by using flight hours as a 

common measure of activity.

The type of operation or purpose of flight can be defined as the 

reason a flight is initiated. Activity data by purpose of flight are 

derived from the GAATA Survey, which includes 14 purpose/use 

categories. Two of these categories, air taxis and air tours, are 

covered under 14 CFR Part 135 and are therefore not included 

in this review. The remaining 12 categories include the previously 

mentioned categories of “personal,” “business,” “instructional,” 

“corporate,” and “aerial application,” which together accounted 

for 90% of all general aviation operations in 2002. The remaining 

10% of general aviation operations are included in more specific 

categories, such as “external load” and “medical use.” A limitation 

of the GAATA activity data is that those categories provide only a 

coarse representation of the range of possible flight operations. 

For example, “personal flying” includes but does not distinguish 

between travel, recreation, or proficiency flying. At the same 

time, the differences between similar categories like “personal” 

and “business flying” are not easily identified. Accordingly, the 

purpose-of-flight information presented in this review is limited to 

the combined categories of personal and business flying, as well as 

corporate, instructional, and aerial application flights.

According to the GAATA Survey, most general aviation operations 

are conducted for personal and/or business purposes. Of the 

estimated 25.5 million general aviation hours flown in 2002, more 

than half—14.3 million—were conducted for personal or business 

reasons.26 A result of this level of activity is that a large percentage 

of general aviation accidents involve personal/business flying. 

However, personal/business flying is still over-represented in the 

accident record: although this segment represented only about 

56% of the general aviation hours in 2002, it accounted for 68% 

(1,170) of all general aviation accidents and 76% (263) of all fatal 

accidents in 2002. 

The accident rate for flight instruction operations was substantially 

less than aerial application and personal/business flights. This 

relatively low rate is surprising because student pilots could be 

expected to make more mistakes than experienced pilots while 

they are learning to fly. Flight instruction accidents were also less 

likely to be fatal. Only 9% of the flight instruction accidents that 

occurred in 2002 resulted in fatalities, compared to almost 22% 

of personal/business accidents. When compared with the number 

of hours flown, the fatal accident rate for instructional flights was 

0.45 fatal accidents per 100,000 hours flown. The fatal accident 

rate for personal/business flying remained the highest in general 

aviation with 1.82 fatal accidents per 100,000 hours flown.

Flight Plan

Of the 1,724 pilots involved in general aviation accidents in 

2002, 1,363 (79%) did not file a flight plan. In most cases, a 

flight plan is required only for flight under instrument flight rules 

(IFR). However, pilots operating under visual flight rules (VFR) on 

point-to-point flights have the option of filing a flight plan, which 

aids search and rescue efforts for pilots who fail to arrive at their 

intended destinations. VFR flight plans are typically not filed for 

local flights.

26 GAATA Survey, 2002.
17 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Airport Involvement

Aircraft accident locations were closely split between those 

occurring away from an airport (52%) and those occurring 

on airport property (45%). Comparing accident risk based on 

location is difficult because of the exposure differences between 

different operations and aircraft types. For example, a singleengine piston aircraft used for instructional flights will spend a 

large percentage of its operating time near an airport while a 

jet aircraft used for corporate transportation will not. However, a 

relationship can be observed between the location and severity 

of accidents. Accidents on or near an airport or airstrip typically 

involve aircraft operating at relatively low altitudes and airspeeds 

while taking off, landing, or maneuvering to land. Accidents that 

occur away from an airport typically involve aircraft in the climb, 

cruise, maneuvering, and descent phases of flight, which typically 

occur at higher altitudes and higher airspeeds. As a result, accidents 

that occur away from an airport are more likely to result in higher 

levels of injury and aircraft damage than accidents that occur on an 

airstrip or near an airport. Most aircraft involved in fatal accidents in 

2002 (81%) were located away from an airport or airstrip.

Another distinction that can be drawn between flight profiles is 

between local and point-to-point operations. A local flight departs 

from and lands at the same airport, and a point-to-point flight 

lands at an airport other than the one from which it departed. 

Typical local flight operations include sightseeing, flight instruction, 

proficiency flights, pleasure flights, and most aerial observation and 

aerial application flights. Conversely, point-to-point flights include 

any operation conducted to move people, cargo, or equipment 

from one place to another. Typical point-to-point operations 

include corporate/executive transportation, personal and business 

travel, and aircraft repositioning flights. 

Location of Accident Aircraft, 2002

774

49

904

283

46

17

Total

Fatal

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Number of Aircraft

Unknown

Off Airport

On Airport

Flight Plan Filed by Accident Pilot, 2002

Unknown

2%

IFR

9%

VFR

11%

None

79%
2002 in Depth 18

A comparison of the numbers of accident aircraft on local flights 

with those on point-to-point flights illustrates that the percentages 

of aircraft on each type of flight were similar although point-topoint flights accounted for slightly more accident aircraft.

The activity data necessary to compare accident rates for local and 

point-to-point flights are not available. However, a comparison 

of the percentage of local and point-to-point accident flights 

conducted for different purposes of flight provides an indirect 

measure of the types of flying represented in both flight profiles. 

The following graph shows that most personal/business flights were 

point to point, while most instructional flights were local. 

Environmental Conditions

Many hazards to safety are unique to the type of flight operation, 

type of aircraft, and flight profile, but environmental conditions 

may be hazardous to all flight operations and all types of aircraft 

to some degree. Aircraft control, for example, is highly dependant 

on visual cues related to speed, distance, orientation, and altitude. 

When visual information is degraded or obliterated because of 

clouds, fog, haze, or precipitation, pilots must rely on aircraft 

instruments. Because of the difficulties associated with flying an 

aircraft solely by reference to instruments, the FAA has established 

specific pilot, aircraft, and procedural requirements for flight in 

instrument meteorological conditions (IMC).27 According to the FAA 

Pilot/Controller Glossary,28 “instrument meteorological conditions” 

are defined as “meteorological conditions expressed in terms of 

Local and Point-to-Point Comparision

by Type of Operation, 2002

Personal/Business 71%

Corporate/Executive

Flight Instruction

Aerial Application

Public Use

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Local Point-to-Point 

100%

0%

29%

35%

65%

13%

87%

43% 57%

27 Title 14 CFR 61.579(c), 91.167-193, 91.205(d).

28 FAA, Pilot/Controller Glossary, Washington, D.C., available at <http://faa.gov/atpubs/PCG/INDEX.HTM>.

Local and Point-to-Point Flights, 2002

Local

39%

Point-to-Point

61%

1,045

679
19 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

visibility, distance from cloud, and ceiling less than the minima29

specified for visual meteorological conditions (VMC).” Weather 

minima differ based on altitude, airspace, and lighting conditions, 

but 3 statute miles visibility and a cloud clearance of 1,000 feet 

above, 500 feet below, and 2,000 feet horizontal distance is 

typical. The following chart illustrates the percentage of accidents 

and fatal accidents that occurred in VMC and IMC. A comparison 

of the percentages of accidents in each weather condition that 

resulted in a fatality illustrates the hazards associated with flight in 

IMC. In 2002, only 17% of the accidents that occurred in visual 

conditions resulted in a fatality, but 69% of accidents in instrument 

conditions were fatal.

Although instrument conditions were present for only 5% of 

all accidents, 18% of fatal general aviation accidents in 2002 

occurred in IMC. One reason for the disproportionate number of 

fatal accidents in IMC is that such accidents are more likely to 

involve pilot disorientation, loss of control, and collision with terrain 

or objects—accident profiles that typically result in high levels of 

damage and injury. Instrument conditions may also contribute to 

accident severity by complicating situations more easily handled in 

visual conditions. For example, a forced landing due to an engine 

malfunction or failure, which might result in minor damage if it 

were to occur in visual conditions, might pose an even greater 

threat to a pilot flying in instrument conditions because reduced 

visibility would hinder the selection of a suitable landing site.

Lighting Conditions

Lighting conditions can present a similar hazard to pilots because 

of physiological factors related to night vision, difficulties in 

seeing potential hazards like mountains, terrain, and unlighted 

obstructions, and perceptual illusions associated with having fewer 

visual cues. The following graphs illustrate that most accidents in 

2002 occurred in daylight conditions but a larger percentage of 

the accidents that occurred at night resulted in fatalities.

In fact, accidents that occurred at night were twice as likely as 

daylight accidents to be fatal. Like weather-related accidents, 

accidents at night are more likely to involve disorientation, loss of 

control, and/or collision with objects or terrain, resulting in higher 

levels of injury. The reduction in visual cues also hinders pilots from 

identifying deteriorating weather conditions and further complicates 

any aircraft equipment malfunctions.

Total Accidents and Fatal Accidents by

Weather Condition, 2002

93 64

1,623

280

IMC

(69% Fatal)

VMC

(17% Fatal)

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

Total Fatal 

29 Minima for visual meteorological conditions are specified in 14 CFR 91.155.
2002 in Depth 20

Injuries and Damage for 2002

Aircraft Damage

Safety Board investigators record aircraft damage as either “destroyed,” 

“substantial,” or “minor.” Title 49 CFR 830.2 defines “substantial 

damage” as “damage or failure which adversely affects the structural 

strength, performance, or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and which 

would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected 

component.” Although not specifically defined in 49 CFR 830.2, 

“destroyed” can be operationally defined as any damage in which 

repair costs exceed the value of the aircraft,30 and “minor” damage as 

any damage that is not classified as either “destroyed” or “substantial.” 

Nearly 8 of every 10 aircraft involved in accidents during 2002 

sustained substantial damage, and about 1 in 5 accident aircraft 

were destroyed. “Minor” and “no damage” classifications together 

comprised about 1% of accident aircraft.

30 Missing or unrecoverable aircraft are also considered “destroyed.” 

Damage to Accident Aircraft, 2002

Minor

0.3%

Destroyed

18.6%

Substantial

80.6% None

0.8%

Accidents and Fatal Accidents by Lighting

Condition, 2002

140

55

53

8

1,462

263

Total

Fatal

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

12

2

Number of Accidents

Night

Dusk

Day

Dawn

Percentage of Accidents Resulting in a 

Fatality by Lighting Condition, 2002

17% 18%

15%

39%

Dawn Day Dusk Night
21 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Accident Injuries

In accordance with 49 CFR 830.2, Safety Board investigators 

categorize injuries resulting from general aviation accidents as 

“fatal,” “serious,” or “minor.” A fatal injury is defined as “any 

injury which results in death within 30 days of the accident.” Title 

49 CFR 830.2 also outlines several qualifications31 of serious injury 

that include, but are not limited to, hospitalization for more than 

48 hours, bone fracture, internal organ damage, or second- or 

third-degree burns. The following graph depicts the percentage of 

general aviation accidents resulting in each level of injury during 

2002. Most notable is the fact that more than half the accidents 

did not result in injury. 

The following graphs illustrate both the number of accident aircraft 

in each injury category and the corresponding number of persons 

aboard those aircraft who sustained injuries in each category. 

Categorization of injury level in an accident is based on the highest 

level of injury sustained by an occupant of an accident aircraft. 

Again, most persons who were aboard general aviation aircraft 

that were involved in accidents sustained no injuries.

Injuries by Role for 2002

The following table presents detailed information about the types of 

injuries incurred by all persons involved in general aviation accidents 

during 2002. The distribution of general aviation accident injuries 

varies with the type of operation and the size of aircraft, and the 

number of injuries experienced by any group of persons varies with 

their level of activity (that is, their exposure risk). For example, all 

aircraft have pilots, but not all aircraft have passengers.

Highest Level of Injury

Aboard Accident Aircraft, 2002

1,500

1,000

500

0

349

186 255

934

Fatal Serious Minor None

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

575

282 439

1,800

Fatal Serious Minor None

Total Injuries Sustained

by Persons Aboard 

Accident Aircraft, 2002

31 See appendix B for the complete definition of injury categories.

Highest Level of Accident Injury, 2002

Minor

15%

None

54%

Serious

11%

Fatal

20%
2002 in Depth 22

In 2002, 463 passengers suffered some level of injury in general 

aviation accidents, compared to the 730 pilots who were injured. 

Despite the apparent difference, the injury rate for passengers 

was similar to that of pilots, considering that only 1,123 of 

1,724 accident aircraft had passengers on board. Although the 

total number of injured passengers was equal to only 63% of the 

number of injured pilots, only 65% of accident flights were carrying 

passengers. As noted previously, most general aviation accidents 

involve personal/business flights in single-engine piston aircraft, 

which are likely to have only one pilot. Because of this exposure 

difference, pilots sustained the highest percentage of injuries in 

general aviation accidents in 2002, suffering 56% of all fatalities, 

53% of all serious injuries, and 55% of all minor injuries. 

In addition to injuries sustained by persons on board the accident 

aircraft, 29 persons who were not aboard aircraft also sustained 

injuries. For example, a photographer died after being struck by 

the main rotor blade of a helicopter, a cyclist was seriously injured 

after being struck by the wing of a glider, and two people sustained 

minor injuries when a single-engine aircraft collided with their 

automobile during a forced landing. 

Accident Pilots

Rating

Of the 1,724 pilots involved in general aviation accidents in 2002, 

the largest percentage held a private pilot certificate.32 The secondlargest percentage held a commercial pilot certificate, which is 

required for any person to act as pilot-in-command of an aircraft 

for compensation or hire.33

When compared to the number of active pilots in 2002 holding 

each type of pilot certificate, commercial pilot certificate holders 

were over-represented among general aviation accidents. Although 

commercial pilot certificate holders accounted for only 21% of all 

active general aviation pilots, they were involved in 35% of all 

general aviation accidents in 2002. 

Highest Certificate Held by Accident Pilot, 2002

Students

7%

Commercial

35%

Private

45%

None

1%

Airline Transport

12%

32 U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics.

33 See 14 CFR 61.133 for the privileges granted by a commercial pilot certificate.

General Aviation Accident Injuries, 2002

Personal Injuries Fatal Serious Minor None Total 

Pilot 327 157 246 994 1,724

Copilot 22 7 8 41 78

Flight instructor 8 8 4 21 41

Dual student 7 3 13 63 86

Check pilot 1 1 2 3 7

Other crew 11 5 3 18 37

Passenger 199 101 163 660 1,123

Total aboard 575 282 439 1,800 3,096

On ground 5 15 9 0 29

Other aircraft 1 0 0 17 18

Total 581 297 448 1,817 3,143
23 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Similarly, the per-pilot accident rate was highest for commercial 

pilot certificate holders during 2002, with 4.36 accidents per 1,000 

active pilots. One possible explanation for the higher numbers of 

accidents is that commercial certificate holders may be employed 

as pilots and would therefore be likely to fly more hours annually 

than student or private pilots.

However, the largest percentage of commercial pilots involved in 

accidents during 2002 (57%) were conducting personal flights and were 

not involved in commercial operations at the time of the accidents.

(1,695 of accident pilot records with data available, 2002)

Accident Rate per 1,000 Active Pilots by Certificate, 2002

1.29

2.93

4.36

1.38

5.00

4.00

3.00

2.00

1.00

0

Student Private Commercial Airline

Transport

Type of Operation Conducted by Accident

Pilot Certificate, 2002

Private Commercial Airline

 Transport

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

730

0 14 5

285

83 93

39

112

4 33 23

Personal/Business Aerial Application

Instruction Ferry/Positioning

Number of Active Pilots by Highest Certificate, 2002

Students

85,991

Commercial

137,504

Private

260,845

Recreational

318

Airline Transport

147,104
2002 in Depth 24

Because annual flight-hour data are not compiled separately for 

pilots holding each type of certificate, it is not possible to compare 

activity-based accident rates. The U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics34

also do not include information about the type of operation 

that certificate holders engage in. However, the high number 

of commercial pilot accidents attributed to aerial application 

operations might suggest that this sector of commercial flying 

may have contributed disproportionately to the increased rate 

observed for commercial pilots as a whole. Examples of other 

commercial operations not presented in the chart include 

corporate/executive transportation, sightseeing flights, banner 

towing, and aerial observation. 

Total Time

Of the 1,648 accidents in 2002 for which pilot total flight experience 

data are available, 48% involved pilots with a total flight time of 

1,000 hours or less. The following chart depicts the distribution of 

experience among accident pilots. The inset focuses on those pilots 

with less than 1,000 hours. The largest percentage of accident 

pilots in this group had 200 hours or less of total flight time. When 

compared to all accident pilots with available data, about 16% of 

accident pilots had 200 hours of flight experience or less.

Because of the flight hour requirements35 for obtaining commercial 

and ATP certificates, it is not surprising that nearly all accident pilots 

with 200 total hours or less of flight time held either private pilot 

certificates (53%) or student pilot certificates (39%).36 Most pilots 

with more than 1,000 total hours of flight time held commercial 

pilot certificates (52%).

(1,648 accident pilot records with total flight time information)

Accident Pilot Total Time, 2002

>10,000 165

9,001-10,000

8,001-9,000

7,001-8,000

6,001-7,000

5,001-6,000

4,001-5,000

3,001-4,000

2,001-3,000

1,001-2,000

0-1,000

27

21

23

39

45

57

77

142

259

793

Flight Hours

Accident Pilot Total Time, 2002

(fewer than 1,000 hours)

801-1,000 87

601-800

401-600

201-400

0-200

102

148

185

271

Flight Hours

Pilot Certificate Held by Accident

Pilots with 200 Hours or Fewer

Total Time, 2002

Commercial

4%

Student

39%

Airline

Transport

1%

None

3%

Private

53%

Pilot Certificate Held by Accident

Pilots with More Than 1,000 Hours

Total Time, 2002

Commercial

Private 52%

25%

Airline

Transport

23%

34 U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics, 2002. 

35 Refer to 14 CFR Part 61 for the requirements of each type of pilot certificate and to 

14 CFR 141 for differences in those requirements for training conducted at approved flight schools.

36 Two accident pilots held commercial certificates but had fewer than 200 hours total time; one was a balloon pilot and the other was a foreign citizen operating a U.S.-

registered aircraft.
25 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

It is also not surprising that most accident pilots with 200 hours 

total flight time or less were flying single-engine piston airplanes 

when the accidents occurred. Accident pilots with more than 1,000 

hours were flying a more diverse selection of aircraft, including 

significantly higher percentages who were flying multi-engine 

piston, turboprop, and turbine-powered airplanes, and about twice 

as many who were flying helicopters.

Time in Type of Aircraft

Of the 1,401 accidents in 2002 for which pertinent data are 

available, 87% involved pilots with 1,000 hours or less of time 

in the accident aircraft make and model. Most accident pilots in 

this group (64%) had less than 200 hours of total flight time in the 

accident aircraft type, and a total of 109 pilots (8% of all accident 

pilots for whom data are available) had less than 10 hours in type. 

Most accident pilots with less than 10 hours of flight time in make 

and model were flying single-engine piston aircraft.

(1,401 accident pilot records with time-in-aircraft-type information)

Pilots may have low time in type because they are new pilots 

with low total time or they are experienced pilots who are 

transitioning to a new aircraft. Two groups of pilots who might 

be expected to have accumulated significant time in make and 

model are those who own their own airplanes and fly them often 

and professional pilots who fly the same aircraft often. A large 

number of general aviation pilots who own aircraft have singleengine piston airplanes. Helicopters and multi-engine piston, 

Type Aircraft Flown by Accident Pilots with

200 or Fewer Hours Total Flight Time, 2002

Airplane Single-Engine Piston

Airplane Multi-Engine Piston

AirplaneTurboprop

AirplaneTurbine

Rotorcraft

Lighter-Than-Air

Gliders

90%

1%

5%

4%

0%

0%

0%

Type Aircraft Flown by Accident Pilots with

More Than 1,000 Hours Total Flight Time, 2002

Airplane Single-Engine Piston

Airplane Multi-Engine Piston

AirplaneTurboprop

AirplaneTurbine

Rotorcraft

Lighter-Than-Air

Gliders

63%

10%

16%

1%

7%

2%

0%

Accident Pilot Total Time in Aircraft

Type, 2002

>5,000 24

4,001-5,000

3,001-4,000

2,001-3,000

1,001-2,000

0-1,000

16

19

37

87

1,218

Flight Hours

Accident Pilot Total Time

in Aircraft Type, 2002

(fewer than 1,000 hours)

Flight Hours

801-1,000 59

601-800

401-600

201-400

0-200

0-10

67

119

192

781

109
2002 in Depth 26

jet, and turboprop airplanes are more likely to be operated 

by professional pilots. Although not specifically detailed in the 

chart, it is particularly worth noting that 42 of the 109 accident 

pilots in 2002 who had less than 10 hours in the accident aircraft 

type were operating amateur-built aircraft. 

Comparison of these two graphs shows that accident pilots with 

more than 200 hours in make and model were more likely than 

pilots with fewer hours in type to be flying rotorcraft or multi-engine 

piston, jet, or turboprop airplanes.

Age

Most accident pilots in 2002 were between the ages of 40 and 59. 

The average age of all active pilots in the U.S. increased steadily 

from 1993 through 2002 and by 2002 was 44 years.37 In contrast, 

the average age of general aviation accident pilots was 49 years. 

Despite the difference in average age, no meaningful conclusions 

can be made regarding specific age-related accident risk because 

FAA flight-hour activity numbers are not available for each age 

group. Age differences could be the result of activity if opportunities 

for recreational flying were to increase with age.

. 

Type Aircraft Flown by Accident Pilots with

10 or Fewer Hours in Accident Aircraft Type, 2002

Airplane Single-Engine Piston

Airplane Multi-Engine Piston

AirplaneTurboprop

AirplaneTurbine

Rotorcraft

Lighter-Than-Air

Gliders

85%

4%

6%

4%

2%

0%

0%

Type Aircraft Flown by Accident Pilots with

More Than 200 Hours in Accident Aircraft Type, 2002

Airplane Single-Engine Piston

Airplane Multi-Engine Piston

AirplaneTurboprop

AirplaneTurbine

Rotorcraft

Lighter-Than-Air

Gliders

64%

8%

19%

0%

7%

2%

1%

37 U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics, 2002
27 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

The two charts that follow show the relationship of the accident 

pilot’s age by type of operation and by highest pilot certificate.

Accident Occurrences for 2002

Safety Board accident reports document the circumstances of an 

accident as “accident occurrences” and the “sequence of events.” 

Occurrence data can be defined as what happened during the 

accident. A total of 54 occurrence codes are available to describe 

the events for any given accident.38 Because aviation accidents 

are rarely limited to a single occurrence, each occurrence is 

coded as part of a sequence (that is, occurrence 1, occurrence 

2, etc.), with as many as five different occurrence codes in one 

accident. For accidents that involve more than one aircraft, the list 

of occurrences may be different for each aircraft. Of the 1,692 

accident aircraft in 2002 for which data are available, 1,244 had 

2 or more occurrences, 680 had 3 or more, 115 had 4 or more, 

and 9 had a total of 5 occurrences (each). 

Average Age of Accident Pilot by Type of

Operation, 2002

All Accident Pilots

Personal/Business

Corporate Executive

Aerial Application

Other Work

Instruction

49

51

47

47

45

40

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Age in Years

Average Age of Accident Pilot by Highest

Pilot Certificate, 2002

All Accident Pilots

ATP

Private

Commercial

Student

49

52

40

52

47

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Age in Years

38 Two of the codes, “missing aircraft” and “undetermined,” do not represent operational events.

Average Age of Active Pilots

1993-2002

44

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

44 44 44 44 42 43 43

41 41

Age in 

Years
2002 in Depth 28

The excerpt from a brief report shown here, which is for a 2002 accident with three 

occurrences, illustrates how an accident with multiple occurrences is coded. In this accident, 

the airplane pilot was unable to maintain control while landing in a crosswind. During 

the landing roll, the airplane veered to the right side of the runway, and when the pilot 

attempted a go-around, the airplane became momentarily airborne before colliding with an 

embankment next to the runway. The airplane nosed over and came to rest inverted. Each 

of these occurrences was coded in order, as shown.

Occurrence data do not include specific 

information about why an accident may 

have happened; the first occurrence can 

instead be considered the first observable 

link in the accident chain of events. The 

following table displays first occurrences 

for all year-2002 general aviation 

accident aircraft with sequence of events 

data available. To simplify the presentation 

of accident occurrence data, similar 

occurrences are grouped into eight major 

categories.

Among the eight major categories of first 

occurrences, the largest percentage of 

accidents (26%) included occurrences 

related to aircraft power. Among the 

individual occurrences, the most common 

involved a loss of control either in flight 

(13%) or on the ground (12%). Although 

occurrences involving loss of aircraft 

control on the ground resulted in only 3 

fatal accidents in 2002, loss-of-control 

occurrences in flight resulted in a total of 

108 fatal accidents—nearly one-third of 

all fatal accidents and more than twice 

that of any other single occurrence.

Occurrence #1: LOSS OF CONTROL - ON GROUND/WATER 

Phase of Operation: LANDING - FLARE/TOUCHDOWN

Findings

1. (F) WEATHER CONDITION - CROSSWIND 

2. (C) COMPENSATION FOR WIND CONDITIONS - INADEQUATE - PILOT IN

COMMAND

3. (C) DIRECTIONAL CONTROL - NOT MAINTAINED - PILOT IN COMMAND 

----------

Occurrence #2: ON GROUND/WATER ENCOUNTER WITH TERRAIN/WATER 

Phase of Operation: LANDING - ROLL

Findings

4. TERRAIN CONDITION - DIRT BANK/RISING EMBANKMENT

----------

Occurrence #3: NOSE OVER

Phase of Operation: LANDING - ROLL

Findings Legend: (C) = Cause, (F) = Factor

Example of Occurrence Findings Cited in an NTSB Accident Brief, 2002
29 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Accident First Occurrences, 2002 

Total Fatal

Collision - In-flight 252 85

In-flight Collision with Object 130 37

In-flight Collision with Terrain/Water 98 42

Undershoot 12 0

Midair Collision 10 6

Near Collision Between Aircraft 2 0

Noncollision - In-flight 412 167

Loss Of Control - In-flight 226 108

Airframe/Component/System Failure/Malfunction 108 22

In-flight Encounter with Weather 68 35

Abrupt Maneuver 6 2

Vortex Turbulence Encountered 4 0

Altitude Deviation, Uncontrolled 0 0

Forced Landing 0 0

Decompression 0 0

Collision - On-ground or Water 105 2

On Ground/Water Collision with Object 52 2

On Ground/Water Encounter with Terrain/Water 41 0

Dragged Wing, Rotor, Pod, Float or Tail/Skid 6 0

Collision Between Aircraft (Other Than Midair) 6 0

Noncollision - On-ground or Water 400 7

Loss of Control - On Ground/Water 195 3

Hard Landing 122 1

Overrun 40 2

Nose Over 22 0

On Ground/Water Encounter with Weather 9 0

Roll Over 7 0

Propeller Blast or Jet Exhaust/Suction 2 0

Propeller/Rotor Contact to Person 2 1

Nose Down 1 0

Ditching 0 0

Total Fatal

Power Related 448 63

Loss of Engine Power 212 31

Loss of Engine Power(Total) - Nonmechanical 119 7

Loss of Engine Power(Total) - Mech Failure/Malf 51 11

Loss of Engine Power(Partial) - Mech Failure/Malf 32 6

Loss of Engine Power(Partial) - Nonmechanical 28 7

Rotor Failure/Malfunction 4 1

Propeller Failure/Malfunction 2 0

Engine Tear-away 0 0

Landing Gear 44 1

Wheels-up Landing 14 0

Gear Collapsed 12 0

Main Gear Collapsed 7 0

Gear Retraction on Ground 4 0

Nose Gear Collapsed 4 0

Wheels-down Landing in Water 2 1

Complete Gear Collapsed 1 0

Tail Gear Collapsed 0 0

Other Gear Collapsed 0 0

Gear Not Extended 0 0

Gear Not Retracted 0 0

Miscellaneous 27 5

Miscellaneous/Other 15 1

Fire 11 4

Hazardous Materials Leak/Spill 1 0

Fire/Explosion 0 0

Explosion 0 0

Cargo Shift 0 0

Undetermined 4 4

Missing Aircraft 3 3

Undetermined 1 1

85

37

42

0

6

0

167

108

22

35

2

0

0

0

0

2

2

0

0

0

7

3

1

2

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

63

31

7

11

6

7

1

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

5

1

4

0

0

0

0

4

3

1

130

0
2002 in Depth 30

Phase of Flight

The following illustration displays the percentage of accident 

aircraft in each phase of flight at the time of the first occurrence. 

The phase of flight can be defined as when, during the operation 

of the aircraft, the first occurrence took place. Fifty distinct 

phases of flight are used to describe the operational chronology 

of occurrences. To simplify the presentation of this information, 

the detailed phases are grouped into the nine broad categories 

shown in this illustration. For example, the category “approach” 

includes any segment of an instrument approach or position in 

the airport traffic pattern and continues until the aircraft is landing 

on the runway. The upper set of numbers shows the distribution of 

accidents by each phase associated with each first occurrence, and 

the numbers in parentheses show the distribution of fatal accidents 

by each phase associated with each first occurrence. 

As shown in the illustration, most initiating events for accidents 

(62%) occurred during takeoff, climb, approach, and landing, 

despite the relatively short duration of these phases compared to 

the entire profile of a normal flight. The high number of accidents 

that occurred during takeoff and landing reflects the increased 

workload placed on both the flight crew and the aircraft during 

these phases. During both takeoff and landing, the flight crew 

must control the aircraft, change altitude and speed, communicate 

with air traffic control (ATC) and/or other aircraft, and maintain 

separation from obstacles and other aircraft. Aircraft systems are 

also stressed during takeoff and landing with changes to engine 

power settings, the possible operation of retractable landing gear, 

flaps, slats, and spoilers, and changes in cabin pressurization. 

While the aircraft is at low altitude during takeoff and landing, it 

is also most susceptible to hazards caused by wind and weather 

conditions. 

Notably, landing accounted for the largest percentage of total 

accident first occurrences (29%) but only 3% of fatal accident 

first occurrences. The largest percentage of fatal accident first 

occurrences (29%) occurred during maneuvering, but only 14% 

of all accident first occurrences occurred during this phase. These 

differences reflect the relative severity of accidents that are likely to 

occur during each phase. Accidents during cruise and maneuvering 

are more likely to result in higher levels of injury and aircraft damage 

due to higher speeds and altitudes. 

The likelihood of an aircraft accident first occurrence during each 

phase of flight varies by aircraft type and type of operation due 

to the unique hazards associated with each. For example, aircraft 

conducting aerial application flights fly at very low altitudes while 

spraying and therefore have an increased risk of colliding with 

terrain or obstructions. As a 

result, about 62% of all first 

occurrences for 2002 accidents 

involving aerial application 

flights occurred during the 

maneuvering phase compared 

to less than 9% of personal/

business flights and 12% for 

instructional flights. 

Accident Aircraft Phase of Flight During First Occurrence, 2002

 Standing Taxi/Other Takeoff Climb Cruise Descent Maneuver/Hover Approach Go-Around Landing

 4.6% 19.1% 3.3% 15.0% 2.4% 13.7% 10.5% 2.1% 29.4%

 (2.7%) (17.1%) (7.2%) (20.1%) (4.5%) (29.3%) (15.0%) (1.2%) (3.0%)

1,692 accident aircraft with phase-of-flight data
31 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Accident phase-of-flight differences among aircraft types are the 

result of the amount of time spent in each phase, aircraft-specific 

hazards associated with that phase, and the type of operations 

typically conducted with that aircraft. For example, the largest 

percentage of first occurrences for accidents involving helicopter 

flights, about 31%, occurred while maneuvering. The percentage 

of accidents during this phase reflects the hazards unique to 

helicopters while hovering and during operations that are unique 

to helicopters, such as carrying external loads. In contrast, the 

largest percentage of accidents involving single- and multi-engine 

piston aircraft occurred during landing.

Chain of Occurrences

An accident’s first occurrence and phase of flight during first 

occurrence indicate how and when an accident begins. However, 

the entire accident can also be viewed as a chain of all the 

accident occurrences cited in the order in which they happen. As 

previously discussed, accident events often include a combination 

of multiple occurrences, with many possible combinations. For 

example, of the 1,692 accidents that occurred during 2002 for 

which occurrence data are available, 417 unique combinations 

of accident occurrences were cited. The following tables, which 

list the top ten combinations of occurrences for all accidents 

and fatal accidents, illustrate the most common events.

Accident Aircraft Phase of Flight During Accident

First Occurrence by Type of Operation, 2002

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Standing/Taxi/Other

Takeoff

Climb

Cruise

Maneuvering

Descent

Approach

Go-Around

Landing

Aerial Application Personal and Business Flight Instruction

Accident Aircraft Phase of Flight During Accident First

Occurrence by Aircraft Type, 2002

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Standing/Taxi/Other

Takeoff

Climb

Cruise

Manuevering

Descent

Approach

Go-Around

Landing

Single-Engine Piston Airplane Multi-Engine Piston Airplane

Turbine Airplane Helicopter
2002 in Depth 32

The top ten occurrence chains cited in fatal accidents are similar 

to those cited for all accidents. Loss of control followed by in-flight 

collision with terrain tops both lists, with more than half the accidents 

of this type being fatal. It is important to note that, although this 

was the most frequent chain of occurrences in 2002, it accounted 

for less than 9% of all accidents for the year.

A diverse range of events can, in combination, result in an accident. 

Fatal accidents, however, are often the result of a more predictable set 

of events. A comparison of the two lists provides insight as to why some 

accidents are fatal and others are not. Five of the top ten chains of 

accident occurrences for all accidents in 2002 involved ground events 

associated with taxi, takeoff, or landing. In contrast, all of the top ten 

chains of fatal accident occurrences included an in-flight collision with 

terrain or object, accident profiles that are more likely to result in the 

high impact forces likely to cause serious injury. As these differences 

show, most accidents in 2002 did not involve catastrophic events, and 

a large number of accidents involved aircraft on the ground.

Most Prevalent Causes/Factors for 2002

Probable Causes, Factors, Findings, and the Broad 

Cause/Factor Classification

In addition to coding accident occurrences, the Safety Board makes 

a determination of probable cause. The objective of the probable 

cause statement is to define the cause and effect relationships 

in the accident sequence. The probable cause could be described 

as why the accident happened. In determining probable cause, the 

Board considers the facts, conditions, and circumstances of the event. 

Within each accident occurrence, any information that helps explain 

why that event happened is identified as a “finding” and may be further 

designated as either a “cause” or “factor.” The term “factor” is used 

to describe situations or circumstances that contributed to the accident 

cause. The details of probable cause are coded as the combination of 

all causes, factors, and findings associated with the accident. Just as 

accidents often include a series of events, the reason why those events 

led to an accident reflects a combination of multiple causes and 

factors. For this reason, a single accident report can include multiple 

cause and factor codes, as shown in the following brief.

Chain of Occurrences - All GA Accidents, 2002

 

 1 Loss of Control - In-flight → In-flight Collision with Terrain/Water 151

 2 In-flight Collision with Terrain/Water 90

 3 In-flight Collision with Object 78

 4 Hard Landing 71

 5 On ground/water Collision with Object 48

 6 Loss of Engine Power → Forced Landing → 47

 In-flight Collision with Terrain/Water 

 7 In-flight Collision with Object → In-flight Collision with Terrain/Water 46

 8 Loss of Control - On ground/water → On ground/water Encounter 42

 with Terrain/Water 

 9 Loss of Control - On ground/water → On ground/water 41

 Collision with Object 

 10 Loss of Control - On ground/water 34

Rank

Number of

Accidents

Chain of Occurrences - Fatal GA Accidents, 2002

 Number of

Rank Accidents

 1 Loss of Control - In-flight → In-flight Collision with Terrain/Water 88

 2 In-flight Collision with Terrain/Water 43

 3 In-flight Collision with Object 22

 4 In-flight Collision with Object → In-flight Collision with Terrain/Water 16

 5 Airframe/Component/System Failure/Malfunction → 13

 Loss of Control - In-flight → In-flight Collision with Terrain/Water 

 6 Loss of Control - In-flight → In-flight Collision with Object 11

 7 In-flight Encounter with Weather → Loss of Control - In-flight → 10

 In-flight Collision with Terrain/Water 

 8 Loss of Engine Power → Forced Landing → In-flight Collision 9

 with Terrain/Water 

 9 In-flight Encounter with Weather → In-flight Collision 8

 with Terrain/Water 

 10 Loss of Engine Power → Loss of Control - In-flight → 8

 In-flight Collision with Terrain/Water
33 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Example of NTSB Accident Brief, 2002

Occurrence #1: UNDERSHOOT

Phase of Operation: LANDING - FLARE/TOUCHDOWN

Findings

1. (C) DISTANCE - MISJUDGED - PILOT IN COMMAND

----------

Occurrence #2: IN FLIGHT COLLISION WITH TERRAIN/WATER

Phase of Operation: LANDING - FLARE/TOUCHDOWN

Findings

2. (F) TERRAIN CONDITION - HIDDEN OBSTRUCTION(S)

----------

Occurrence #3: MAIN GEAR COLLAPSED

Phase of Operation: LANDING - FLARE/TOUCHDOWN

Findings

3. LANDING GEAR,MAIN GEAR - SHEARED

Findings Legend: (C) = Cause, (F) = Factor

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this 

accident as follows. The pilot’s failure to attain the proper touchdown point resulting in 

an undershoot, and an in-flight collision with a log during the landing flare. A contributing 

factor in the accident was a hidden obstruction.

This accident sequence began with the approach to landing 

at a remote airstrip. During the landing, the airplane touched 

down about 2 feet short of the runway threshold. The right main 

landing gear struck a log stump concealed by bushes, tearing the 

landing gear from the airplane. The right wing struck the ground 

and the airplane came to a halt. In this accident, the misjudged 

landing distance by the pilot and the resulting undershoot were 

cited as causes, with the hidden obstruction in the terrain cited 

as a contributing factor. The sheared landing gear was cited as a 

finding but was not assigned as a cause or factor.

To simplify the presentation of probable cause information in this 

review, the hundreds of unique codes used by investigators to code 

probable cause are grouped into broad cause/factor categories. 

This broad cause/factor classification provides an overview of 

fundamental accident origins by dividing all accident causes and 

factors into three groups: aircraft, environment, and personnel. 

The following graph shows the percentage of general aviation 

accidents that fall into each broad cause/factor classification. 

Personnel-related causes or factors were cited in 89% of the 1,684 

general aviation accident reports for 2002 for which cause/factor 

data were available. Environmental causes/factors were cited in 

43% of these accident reports, and aircraft-related causes/factors 

were cited in 27%.39

(1,684 accidents with findings)

39 Because the Safety Board frequently cites multiple causes and factors for an aircraft accident, the number of causes and factors will result in a sum greater than the total 

number of accidents.

Accident Broad Cause/Factor and Cause, 2002

Aircraft Environment Personnel 

27%

22%

43%

3%

89%

86%

Cause/Factor Cause Only
2002 in Depth 34

Environmental conditions are rarely cited as an accident cause 

but are more likely to be cited as a contributing factor. In 2002, 

only 58 of 728 environmental citations (8% of all environmental 

causes/factors) were listed as a cause, with the remainder listed as 

contributing factors. For example, rough terrain might be cited as a 

contributing factor, but not a cause, to explain why an aircraft was 

damaged during a forced landing due to engine failure. In that 

case, the origin(s) of the engine failure would be cited as cause, 

but the terrain would be cited as a factor because it contributed to 

the accident outcome.

As mentioned previously, several hundred unique codes are 

available to document causes/factors. A more detailed summary of 

the cause/factor codes is illustrated in the following graph, grouped 

into the categories of personnel, environment, and aircraft.

As this figure shows, most causes and factors attributed to general 

aviation accidents in 2002 were related to personnel. Much like 

the pilot and passenger injury differences discussed previously, part 

of the reason why personnel are cited so often may have to do with 

exposure to risk. Personnel, and pilots in particular, are associated 

with every flight. However, potential aircraft and environmental 

accident causes and factors depend on a range of variables, 

including the type of flight, type of aircraft, time of day, time of 

year, and location. 

(1,684 accidents with findings in 2002)

Summary of Findings Cited as Cause or Factor

in GA Accidents, 2002

Personnel Total

Pilot

Others (not aboard)

Others (aboard)

Organizations

1,497

1,421

113

12

Personnel

Environment Total

Weather condition

Terrain condition

Object

Light condition

Airport/airways

facilities, aids

728

348

293

145

Environment

83

35

Aircraft Total

Powerplant/propulsion

Fluid

Landing gear

Aircraft structure

Systems & equipment

Flight control systems

Instruments

Aircraft performance

Engine power loss

447

209

115

66

Aircraft

45

34

24

8

6

5

1
35 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Although the pilot was the most frequently cited individual in the 

personnel category in 2002, other persons not aboard the aircraft 

were also cited as a cause or factor in 113 accidents. Such 

personnel included flight instructors, maintenance technicians, and 

airport personnel. In the broad category of environmental factors, 

weather conditions were cited in 348 or 21% of the accidents. 

Powerplant-related40 causes/factors, cited in 209 or 12% of all 

general aviation accidents, were the most commonly cited aircraft 

factors.

The following graph shows how specific accident causes and factors 

varied by type of flight operation. For example, personnel were 

cited in 91% of instructional flight accidents, compared to 82% 

for aerial application accidents. The high percentage of personnel 

causes/factors for flight instruction accidents is likely the result of 

aircraft control and decision-making errors due to students’ lower 

level of skill and ability. In contrast, aerial application accidents 

cited a higher percentage of aircraft causes/factors, most likely 

because the low altitude flown during spray operations allows few 

options for recovery in the event of a mechanical failure.

.

A comparison of the causes/factors cited in accidents involving 

different types of aircraft reveals surprisingly similar results. The 

slightly higher percentage of helicopter and multi-engine piston 

accidents that cited aircraft causes/factors in 2002 is likely a result 

of the mechanical complexity and reliability of the aircraft and 

powerplants. The higher percentage of environmental causes/

factors cited in single-engine aircraft accidents may be due to 

the range, performance, and equipment limitations of smaller 

aircraft. 

Broad Causes/Factors

by Type of Operation, 2002

41%

27%

15%

49% 46%

31%

82% 89%

91%

Aircraft Environment Personnel

Aerial Application Personal and Business Flight Instruction

40 “Powerplant/propulsion” causes and factors include any partial loss or disruption of engine power, as well as the malfunction or failure of any part(s), equipment, or system 

associated with engine propulsion. “Engine power loss” refers only to the total loss of engine power.
2002 in Depth 36

Human Performance

The information recorded in the personnel category refers primarily 

to whose actions were a cause or factor in an accident. To increase 

the level of detail about the actions or behavior that may have 

led to an accident, causal data related to human performance 

issues and any underlying explanatory factors are also recorded. 

The information in these categories can be thought of as how and 

why human performance contributed to the accident. For example, 

if a pilot becomes disoriented and loses control of an aircraft 

after continuing visual flight into instrument flight conditions, the 

pilot would be cited as a “cause” in the personnel category, and 

planning/decision-making would likely also be cited in the human 

performance issues category.

Of the 1,397 accidents for which the cause or factor was attributed 

to human performance in 2002, the most frequently cited cause/

factor was aircraft handling and control (70%), followed by planning 

and decision-making (37%) and use of aircraft equipment (11%). 

Issues related to personnel qualification were cited in about 40% 

of the 161 accidents with underlying explanatory factors related 

to human performance. Examples of qualification issues that were 

cited in the 2002 accident record included lack of total experience, 

lack of recent experience, and inadequate training.

Broad Causes/Factors by Accident Aircraft

Type, 2002

25%

40% 35%

30%

45%

24%

49%

39%

89% 86%

77%

90%

Aircraft Environment Personnel

Single-Engine Piston Airplane Multi-Engine Piston Airplane

Turbine Airplane Helicopter

Human Performance and 

Explanatory Causes/Factors, 2002

All Accidents Fatal Accidents 

 Human Performance Issues 1,397 284 

 Aircraft Handling/Control 963 223 

 Planning/Decision 523 103 

 Use of Aircraft Equipment 155 12 

 Maintenance 96 19 

 Communications/Information/ATC 61 10 

 Meteorological Service 7 6 

 Airport 1 0 

 Dispatch 0 0 

 Underlying Explanatory Factors 161 74 

 Qualification 65 22 

 Physiological Condition 58 45 

 Psychological Condition 34 13 

 Aircraft/Equipment Inadequate 6 1 

 Procedure Inadequate 4 1 

 Material Inadequate 3 0 

 Facility Inadequate 2 1 

 Information 1 1 

 Institutional Factors 1 0 
37 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Weather as a Cause/Factor

Because general aviation aircraft are usually smaller, slower, and 

more limited in maximum altitude and range than transport-category 

aircraft, they can be more vulnerable to hazards posed by weather. 

Smaller aircraft are affected to a greater degree by adverse wind 

conditions; and precipitation, icing, and convective weather have a 

greater effect on aircraft that lack the speed, altitude, and/or range 

capabilities to avoid those conditions. Weather conditions cited 

most often as a cause or factor in general aviation accidents are 

related to winds, including “gusts,” “crosswind,” and “tailwind.” 

Of the top five environmental causes/factors cited in general 

aviation accidents in 2002, three were related to wind. Because 

aircraft are most susceptible to the effects of wind during takeoffs 

and landings, the effect of adverse wind was reflected in a high 

percentage of general aviation accidents that occurred during 

those phases of flight. 

As previously discussed, most landing accidents do not result in 

fatal injuries. Because of the strong association of wind with landing 

accidents, it is not surprising that most wind-related accidents in 

2002 were not fatal. The wind-related weather factors “gusts,” 

“crosswind,” and “tailwind” were cited as a cause/factor in a total 

of 194 accidents, but only 14 of those accidents were fatal. Among 

fatal general aviation accidents, three of the five most frequently cited 

weather factors were related to conditions that resulted in reduced 

visibility, including “low ceiling,” “fog,” and “clouds.” Accidents 

under conditions of low visibility typically involve either loss of aircraft 

control and/or collision with obstacles or terrain, both of which are 

likely to result in severe injuries and aircraft damage.

Note: due to the possibility of multiple findings, the sum of causes/

factors is greater than the total number of accidents.

Accidents by Weather Cause/Factor

All Accidents Fatal Accidents 

 Weather Condition 348 80 

 Gusts 78 7 

 Crosswinds 71 2 

 Tailwind 45 5 

 High density altitude 34 11 

 Low ceiling 29 24 

 Downdraft 19 1 

 Carburetor icing conditions 18 1 

 Clouds 17 14 

 Fog 17 13 

 Icing conditions 15 9 

 High wind 12 3 

 Variable wind 9 0 

 Windshear 8 1 

 Turbulence 7 1 

 Snow 6 2 

 Unfavorable wind 6 0 

 Sudden windshift 5 0 

 Haze/smoke 5 0 

 Other 4 0 

 Rain 4 3 

 Dust devil/whirlwind 3 0 

 No thermal lift 3 0 

 Obscuration 3 3 

 Thunderstorm, outflow 3 2 

 Turbulence, terrain induced 3 1 

 Drizzle/mist 2 2 

 Mountain wave 2 1 

 Thunderstorm 2 2 

 Turbulence (thunderstorms) 2 2 

 Below approach/landing minimums 1 1 

 Freezing rain 1 1 

 Temperature, low 1 0 

 Turbulence, clear air 1 1 

 Updraft 1 0 

 Whiteout 1 1 

 
38

Focus on General Aviation Safety: 

Stall/Spin Accidents

In 1972, the Safety Board published a special study, General 

Aviation Stall/Spin Accidents,41 analyzing general aviation stall/

spin accidents that occurred between 1967 and 1969. Based on 

the 991 stall/spin accidents and 427 fatal stall/spin accidents 

examined, the report stated the Board’s position that reduction of 

stall/spin accidents should be “a social, political, and economic” 

goal. A review of more recent data reveals that although the 

number of general aviation accidents and fatalities has decreased 

significantly42 in the 30 years since the Board’s special study, the 

percentage of accidents attributed to stall/spin events has changed 

little. 

This section includes statistical data and discusses general aviation 

accidents involving stall/spin accidents. This section is not meant to 

be an exhaustive discussion of all the related safety concerns, but 

rather a discussion of the details of an issue important to general 

aviation.

What Is a Stall?

Airplanes fly because of the way air flows around a wing as it 

moves through the air. The wings of most general aviation aircraft 

are designed with an airfoil shape that is curved more on the top 

than the bottom. Because of this curvature, air flowing over the 

top of an aircraft wing speeds up, which results in a low pressure 

above the wing. At the same time, the air striking the underside of 

the airfoil and the air flowing off the back of the airfoil create high 

pressure under the wing. A lifting force is created by this pressure 

differential, and an airplane can fly if the lifting force is equal to 

or greater than the weight of the airplane. If the angle between 

General Aviation Stall Accident Statistics, 2002

Fixed-Wing Stall Accidents 

 Total Accidents 190 

 Accident Aircraft 190 

 

Fixed-Wing Stall Accident Highest Injury 

 Fatal 89 

 Serious 21 

 Minor 33 

 None 47 

 

Fixed-Wing Stall Accident Injuries 

 Fatal 147 

 Serious 44 

 Minor 54 

 Persons aboard with no injuries 124 

 

Fixed-Wing Stall Accident Aircraft Damage 

 Destroyed 75 

 Substantial 115 

 Minor 0 

 None 0 

41 National Transportation Safety Board, Special Study—General Aviation Stall/Spin Accidents, NTSB-AAS-72-8 (Washington, DC: 1972).

42 For example, a total of 4,256 general aviation accidents and 1,426 general aviation accident fatalities were reported in 1972 compared to 1,715 general aviation 

accidents and 581 fatalities reported in 2002.
39 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

the airfoil and the oncoming airflow or relative wind increases, 

the pressure differential will increase and create more lift. A side 

effect of lift is drag, which results from the resistance of air flowing 

around the aircraft.

Any given airfoil has an angle of attack beyond which smooth 

airflow is impossible. Beyond the critical angle of attack, the 

airflow over the top of the wing becomes turbulent, and the lifting 

force is disrupted. This situation is known as a stall, which for most 

aircraft occurs at an angle of attack between 15 and 20 degrees, 

depending on the design of the airfoil.

Angle of attack between oncoming relative wind and aircraft wing centerline.

Turbulent airflow around an airfoil as the critical angle of attack is exceeded.

Stalls are often associated with low airspeeds because typically, 

stalls occur when a pilot increases angle of attack in an attempt 

to maintain an altitude or approach path while operating at 

reduced power—for example, while preparing to land. However, 

a stall can occur at any airspeed, any aircraft attitude, and any 

power setting. Such factors as the aircraft’s weight and balance, 

configuration, and wing loading all affect the speed at which an 

aircraft stalls. The critical angle of attack for a wing depends on 

the design of the airfoil and will always be the same for that design 

unless contamination from frost, ice, or snow disrupts the airflow 

over a wing. To avoid a stall, pilots must be aware of the aircraft’s 

design limitations and how stall speed will be affected by changes 

in airplane configuration and operate the aircraft accordingly.

To recover from a stall and regain aircraft control, a pilot must reduce 

the angle of attack below the critical angle of attack. The recovery 

procedure for most aircraft requires the pilot to reduce backpressure 

on the elevator control or apply slight forward pressure. Engine 

power should also be increased to the maximum allowable to speed 

recovery and minimize altitude loss. Once the stall condition is 

corrected, the aircraft should be returned to straight and level flight 

with the coordinated use of the flight controls. In practice, the entire 

recovery process should proceed smoothly, with nearly simultaneous 

application of flight control inputs and engine power. If the pilot 

attempts to increase angle of attack too quickly, a secondary stall 

can result, and if coordinated control inputs are not maintained 

during the stall or initial stall recovery, a spin can result.

What is a Spin?

The FAA Airplane Flying Handbook43 refers to a spin as an 

“aggravated stall” that results in a rapidly rotating, corkscrew 

descent. A spin develops when an airplane encounters a rotational 

force at or near the point of stall, such as from flight control inputs 

or turbulent air, causing unequal lift and drag forces on the wings. 

Relative Wind

Angle of Attack

43 FAA, Airplane Flying Handbook, FAA-H-8083-3A (Washington, DC: 2004).
Focus on General Aviation Safety 40

Rotation around the longitudinal axis (bank) or vertical axis (yaw) 

creates unequal forces by changing the relative airflow over the 

wings, which also changes the angle of attack. When an aircraft is 

in a stalled condition, a differential in angle of attack between the 

wings results in the wing on the inside direction of rotation being 

more stalled than the outside wing, creating less lift and more drag 

on the inside wing. If not quickly corrected, the unequal lift and drag 

forces acting on the wings will sustain or accelerate the yawing and 

banking motions in a condition known as auto-rotation. Since the 

wing will no longer be generating sufficient lift to maintain flight, 

the spin entry will also cause the nose of the aircraft to drop. 

Aerodynamic profile of a spin.

The simultaneous pitching, banking, and yawing motions of a spin 

result in a loss of aircraft control and a rapidly increasing descent 

rate. There may be a natural tendency for a pilot to counter the 

nose-low attitude with elevator backpressure, and/or counter 

the rotation with opposite aileron input. However, either of these 

responses will aggravate the spin by further increasing the angle 

of attack, as in the case of 

elevator input, and/or the 

differential in angle of attack 

between the wings, as in 

the case of opposite aileron 

input.

As in a stall, recovery from 

a spin requires that the pilot 

reduce the angle of attack 

to regain control. However, 

the recommended recovery 

technique is slightly different, 

particularly in regard to engine 

power. Pilots should always 

be familiar with the stall/spin 

recovery technique outlined 

in the approved flight manual 

for the specific aircraft they 

fly. Absent specific guidance, 

FAA advisory circular 

AC-61-67C44 outlines a 

recommended spin recovery 

technique developed through 

NASA flight tests. 

LIF

DR

T

AG

DRAG

LIFT

More drag

More stalled

Relative wind

Chord line

Greater angle of attack

Less stalled

Chord line

Less angle of attack

Relative wind

Flight profile of a spin.

44 FAA Advisory Circular, Stall and Spin Awareness Training, AC-61-67C (Washington, DC: 2000).
41 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Because spins typically result in the nose of the aircraft pointing 

nearly straight down, the first step in recovery is to reduce power 

to idle to minimize altitude loss and reduce speed buildup. The 

next step is to neutralize any aileron input and apply full rudder 

opposite the direction of rotation. Once rotation stops, the pilot 

should reduce backpressure on the elevator control to decrease 

the angle of attack, and then gradually and smoothly reapply 

backpressure to return the aircraft to level flight. Unlike a typical 

stall recovery, airspeed can build very rapidly during a spin recovery 

due to the extreme nose-low attitude. A pilot must be careful not to 

exceed the aircraft’s maximum airspeed limits by increasing pitch 

too slowly, and at the same time, not to overstress the aircraft or 

induce a secondary stall by increasing pitch too abruptly.

Stall/Spin Accidents

Although the profiles and recovery techniques for stalls and spins 

differ in some ways, the key to avoiding either condition is to avoid 

exceeding the critical angle of attack. Given the near-vertical 

nose-low attitude of stalls and spins, these accidents can result in 

high impact angles and forces. In some cases, it may not be clear 

whether an accident involved a stall/spin, or stall only. For that 

reason, stall and spin accidents are treated similarly in this review.

Stall/spin accidents accounted for about 13% of all fixed-wing 

general aviation accidents in 2002, and 28% of those fatal 

accidents. A chart showing the total number of stall/spin accidents 

and those that resulted in fatalities from 1993 through 2002 reveals 

a slight overall decrease.

When total and fatal stall/spin accidents over the previous 10-year 

period are presented as a percentage of accidents involving a 

single category, that of fixed-wing aircraft, the annual percentages 

appear to have remained relatively steady.

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

Total Fatal

Fixed-Wing General Aviation Accidents

Involving Stall, 1993-2002

100 105

89 79 95

72 70 76 72 89

229 227 243

195 175 192 174 160 161

190

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Percentage of Fixed-Wing General Aviation Accidents

Involving Stall, 1993-2002

27%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Total Fatal

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

26% 27% 27% 27% 23% 21% 25% 24% 28%

12% 13% 13% 11% 11% 11% 10% 10% 11% 13%
Focus on General Aviation Safety 42

A comparison of these values with those reported in the Safety 

Board’s 1972 study also suggest that the relative contribution of 

stall/spin accidents to recent annual totals is slightly higher than it 

was 30 years ago.

Accident Severity

The high proportion of fatal accidents citing a stall/spin indicates 

the severity of these kinds of accidents. Almost half the stall/spin 

accidents in 2002 resulted in fatal injuries compared to the overall 

fatality rate of 20% for general aviation accidents. A total of 147 

persons were killed, and 44 persons received serious injuries, in 

stall/spin accidents during 2002.

Percentage of GA Accidents Involving Stall

8%

22%

28%

% of GA Accidents % of Fatal GA Accidents

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

1972 NTSB Study 2002

13%

Highest Level of Injury Sustained in Stall

Accidents, 2002

47%

11%

17%

25%

Fatal Serious Minor None

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Fatal Serious Minor None

200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

Number of Injuries Resulting From Stall

Accidents, 2002

44

147

54

124
43 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

The distribution of accident injuries, when compared with those 

reported in the 1972 special study, indicates that the distribution of 

injuries in 2002 is similar to the previous study.

The large percentage of fatal stall/spin accidents can be explained 

by the severity of these accidents, and the high impact forces typically 

involved. Another indication of the severity of stall/spin accidents 

is that all accident aircraft were either substantially damaged or 

destroyed.

Accident Occurrences

Pilots are taught from the first to balance aircraft speed, power 

settings, attitude, and control inputs to maintain controlled 

flight; however, with the rare exception of a flight control system 

malfunction or failure, most stall/spin accidents involve the pilot’s 

failure to manage these fundamental tasks adequately. A pilot who 

is distracted by communication or navigation tasks, other aircraft 

occupants, or equipment-related issues, may inadvertently enter 

a stall/spin and fail to recognize the onset of a stall. Stall/spin 

accidents can also involve decision-making and planning issues 

like trying to recover after overshooting a turn from base to final 

rather than executing a go-around.

As discussed in a previous chapter, accident investigation results 

are recorded using occurrence codes that describe what happened, 

and sequence of events codes that explain why those occurrences 

Comparison of Highest Level of Injury Sustained in

 Stall Accidents, 1972 Special Study and 2002

Fatal Serious Minor None

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

43% 47%

18%

11%

18% 17%

21% 25%

1972 NTSB Study 2002

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Level of Aircraft Damage Sustained in

Stall Accidents, 2002

61%

Destroyed Substantial Minor None

39%

0% 0%
Focus on General Aviation Safety 44

happened. Using this convention, investigators typically code 

stall/spin accidents as a loss of control in flight occurrence with a 

sequence-of-event code indicating a stall and/or spin encounter.

The following chart ranks the first occurrences of all general 

aviation stall/spin accidents in 2002 in order of frequency. Because 

stall/spin coding is reflected in the probable cause coding, not the 

occurrences, the most frequently cited first occurrence was “loss of 

control–in flight.” For 116 accidents, or about 61% of all stall/spin 

accidents, the first cited accident occurrence was loss of control 

associated with the stall/spin. The next most common type of 

occurrence—18% of the total—included the several categories 

of occurrences associated with a malfunction or failure of the 

aircraft engine, suggesting situations in which pilots may have 

been distracted while trying to respond to an emergency or may 

have failed to adhere to appropriate engine-out procedures and 

performance parameters.45 Occurrences of “hard landing” and 

“loss of control on ground” describe less severe situations in which 

an aircraft is stalled during landing due to problems with approach 

planning, aircraft configuration, or aircraft control.

A comparison of the numbers of total and fatal accidents citing 

each first occurrence indicates that more than half of the stall/spin 

accidents citing a loss of control in flight or an engine malfunction/

failure as a first occurrence resulted in fatal injuries. In contrast, 

none of the stall/spin accidents that resulted in hard landings or 

loss of control on the ground was fatal. The primary difference 

between the severities of these accidents was the altitude at which 

they occurred and the resulting forces at impact.

Differences between the profiles of these accidents can also be seen 

when the entire accident timeline is represented as a series or chain 

of sequential events. The following table lists the ten most common 

occurrence chains cited in stall/spin accidents during 2002. When 

presented this way, the frequency of stalls/spins followed by impact 

and engine malfunctions or failures preceding a stall/spin are even 

more apparent.

45 In comparison, the Safety Board’s 1972 study found that the loss-of-control (stall) event was cited as the first accident occurrence in 75% of stall/spin accidents, and engine 

malfunction or failure was cited as a first occurrence in 19% of accidents.

First Occurrences for Aircraft Involved in

Stall Accidents, 2002

 Total Fatal

Loss of control - in flight 116 57

Loss of engine power 16 12

Hard landing 14 0

Loss of engine power (total) - nonmechanical 8 2

In flight encounter with weather 7 5

In flight collision with terrain/water 6 2

Loss of engine power (partial) - nonmechanical 5 4

Loss of control - on ground/water 4 0

Loss of engine power (partial) - 3 2

 mechanical failure/malfunction 

Airframe/component/system failure/malfunction 2 1

Loss of engine power (total) - 2 2

 mechanical failure/malfunction 

Near collision between aircraft 2 0

Abrupt maneuver 1 0

Fire 1 1

In flight collision with object 1 1

Miscellaneous/other 1 0

Undershoot 1 0

Grand Total 190 89
45 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Phase of Flight

The following graphic illustrates the percentage of stall/spin 

accidents that occurred in each of nine distinct phases of flight 

during the first accident occurrence. The values in parentheses 

indicate the percentages of fatal stall/spin accidents that 

occurred in each phase of flight.

Unlike the phase of flight occurrences for general aviation 

accidents discussed earlier in this review, the largest percentage 

of stall/spin accidents did not occur during the landing phase. 

Although many stalls/spins may have occurred during approach 

and landing, a considerably larger percentage of stall/spin 

accidents occurred during the maneuvering phase. Activities 

like aerial application and flight training are included in the 

maneuvering phase, as are intentional low-level flight and 

aerobatics. 

Type of Operation

A further analysis of the percentage of accidents involving different 

flight operations shows that approximately 74% of stall/spin accidents 

during 2002 involved personal/business flights. Instructional flights 

were the next most common type of flight operation involved in a 

stall/spin accident—at about 12%—and the remaining types of 

flying each accounted for only small percentages of all stall/spin 

accidents. 

10 Most Frequent Occurrence Chains Reported

For GA Stall Accidents, 2002

 Total Fatal

1. 1) Loss of control - in flight 2) In flight collision with terrain/water 84 45

2. 1) Loss of control - in flight 2) In flight collision with object 17 8

3. 1) Hard landing 8 0

4. 1) Loss of engine power 2) Forced landing 8 6

 3) Loss of control - in flight 4) In flight collision with terrain/water 

5. 1) In flight collision with terrain/water 5 2

6. 1) In flight encounter with weather 2) Loss of control - in flight 5 4

 3) In flight collision with terrain/water

7. 1) Loss of control - in flight 2) In flight collision with object 4 2

 3) In flight collision with terrain/water 

8. 1) Loss of engine power (partial) - nonmechanical 4 3

 2) Loss of control - in flight 3) In flight collision with terrain/water 

9. 1) Loss of control - on ground/water 2) Loss of control - in flight 3 0

 3) In flight collision with terrain/water

10. 1) Loss of engine power (partial) - mechanical 3 2

 failure/malfunction 2) Loss of control - in flight 

3) In flight collision with terrain/water

Stall Accident Phase of Flight, 2002

Takeoff

23.7%

(18.4%)

Climb

1.6%

(4.3%)

Cruise

1.6%

(12.9%)

Descent

7.9%

(9.8%)

Maneuver

28.9%

(35.0%)

Approach

11.6%

(12.3%)

Go-Around

9.5%

(3.1%)

Landing

14.7%

(2.5%)
Focus on General Aviation Safety 46

Accident Pilot Experience

Because stalls and spins involve a breakdown in the basic tasks 

of aircraft control, one might assume that less-experienced pilots 

are more likely to be involved in stall/spin accidents than more 

experienced pilots. However, only 12% of the 175 stall/spin 

accident pilots in 2002 for whom flight time data were available 

had 200 hours or fewer total flight time, while 45% had more than 

1,000 hours of flight time. 

(175 stall accident pilots with data available)

A similar relationship between experience and stall/spin accidents 

can be observed in total flight time in accident aircraft type. Of 

the pilots involved in stall/spin with data available, 46% had more 

than 200 hours in the aircraft type compared to 36% who had 100 

hours or fewer.

Stall Accident Pilot Total Time, 2002

>1000

901-

801-900

701-800

601-700

501-600

401-500

301-400

201-300

101-200

0-100

79

5

6

8

9

9

13

13

12

14

7

Flight Hours

Purpose of Flight for Stall 

Accident Aircraft, 2002

Corporate/Executive

Public Use

Aerial Application

Flight Instruction

Personal/Business

Other 8.9%

0.5%

2.1%

2.6%

11.6%

74.2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
47 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

(128 stall accident pilots with data available)

The distribution of accident pilots by the highest level of pilot 

certificate held indicates that pilots holding private and commercial 

certificates accounted for the largest percentages. Both groups 

were over-represented in stall/spin accidents when compared to 

the active pilot population in which approximately 39% of pilots 

held a private certificate and 20% held a commercial certificate. 

It is also worth noting that in 31 of the 190 stall/spin accidents in 

2002—about 16%—an FAA-certificated flight instructor was on 

board. The flight instructor certificate is currently the only FAA pilot 

certificate that requires flight training in spin recovery.

Stall/Spin Accident Causes/Factors

A comparison of the broad categories of accident probable cause 

and contributing factors for stall/spin accidents during 2002 shows 

that the aircraft and environment categories of causes/factors were 

less likely to be cited than in general aviation accidents overall, as 

presented earlier in this review. For stall/spin accidents, it is important 

to note that the Board’s probable cause coding conventions 

associate stall/spin encounters with a pilot action. Accordingly, this 

graph shows that 100% of accidents cited personnel. Because of 

this convention, no comparisons can be made between stalls/spins 

and other accidents regarding the relative number of probable 

cause findings attributed to personnel. Aircraft equipment and 

environmental conditions were rarely cited as causes of stall/spin 

accidents and were less likely to be cited as factors in stall/spin 

accidents than in general aviation accidents overall.

Highest Certificate Held by Stall/Spin

Accident Pilots, 2002

Other/None

1%

Student

6%

ATP

12%

Private

55%

Commercial

26%

Stall Accident Pilot Total Time in

Aircraft Type, 2002

>200

101-200

51-100

0-50

0-10

59

22

15

32

15

Flight Hours
Focus on General Aviation Safety 48

Within the group of stall/spin accidents, the pilot-in-command 

was the most frequently cited individual and accounted for more 

than 97% of the individuals cited. Other personnel cited include a 

flight instructor who failed to supervise a student adequately and a 

maintenance technician who used incorrect materials in a repair, 

contributing to a gear collapse during a hard landing following a 

stall. The following chart includes a more detailed cause/factor 

summary that illustrates the distribution of cited personnel, as well 

as environmental and aircraft-related causes/factors.

General Aviation Stall Accident Causes/Factors, 2002

Personnel

Pilot

Others (not Aboard)

Others (aboard)

Organizations

Environment

Weather condition

Terrain condition

Object

Light condition

Airport/airways

facilities, aids

Aircraft

Powerplant/

propulsion

Fluid

Aircraft structure

Aircraft performance

Engine power loss

Systems and

equipment

Flight control

systems

Instruments

Landing gear

79

 0 50 100 150 200

190

189

7

3

0

49

38

9

6

3

2

23

11

6

3

2

1

1

0

0

0

Broad Causes/Factors Cited in Stall

Accidents, 2002

Aircraft Environment Personnel

12%

4%

100% 99%

Cause or Factor Cause

26%

2%
49 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

The proportion of stall/spin accidents in 2002 citing environmental 

and/or aircraft-related causes and factors was noticeably less than for 

all accidents. Powerplants were the most commonly cited equipment 

in the aircraft cause/factor category. The number of accidents citing 

powerplants is consistent with the accident occurrence details showing 

that about 12% of stall/spin accidents follow an engine malfunction 

or failure. As for the environmental category, weather was the most 

frequently cited cause/factor. Details of the basic weather at the time 

of the accident indicate that 96% of stall/spin accidents occurred in 

visual meteorological conditions. One reason for this disparity may 

be the way the accidents in IMC are reported. A particular accident 

profile may be attributed to stall/spin if it occurs in visual conditions, 

but the same accident profile might be attributed to disorientation if 

it were to occur in instrument conditions.

Human Performance

A further breakdown of the findings related to human performance 

indicates that aircraft handling was the most commonly cited human 

performance issue in stall/spin accidents, and failure to maintain 

airspeed was the most commonly cited performance parameter. 

The most commonly cited causes and factors underlying human 

performance were pilot qualification and physiological condition.

Stall/Spin Awareness and Avoidance 

Training

Stalls and spins result in a momentary loss of aircraft control and 

can result in a drop in altitude of several hundred feet depending 

on recovery speed and technique. Pilots who inadvertently enter a 

spin while turning from base leg to final at a normal traffic-pattern 

altitude are unlikely to be able to recover quickly enough to avoid 

an accident. Therefore, the primary intent of stall/spin training is 

not to teach pilots to recover from stalls/spins, but to identify and 

recover from an impending stall before it occurs.

Before 1949, the Civil Aeronautics Administration—predecessor to 

today’s FAA—required pilot applicants to demonstrate spin entry 

and recovery. The CAA dropped the spin requirement in 1949 in 

favor of spin recognition and avoidance training. As a result, the 

Human Performance and Explanatory

Causes/Factors Cited in GA Stall Accidents, 2002

Human Performance Issues 189 

 Aircraft handling/contro 180 

 Planning/decision 47 

 Use of aircraft equipment 10 

 Communications/information/ATC 10 

 Maintenance 8 

 Meteorological service 3 

 Airport 0 

 Dispatch 0 

Underlying Explanatory Factors 21

 Qualification 15 

 Physiological condition 5 

 Psychological condition 1 

 Information 0 

 Facility inadequate 0 

 Aircraft/equipment inadequate 0 

 Material inadequate 0 

 Procedure inadequate 0 

 Institutional factors 0 
Focus on General Aviation Safety 50

only pilots currently required to demonstrate proficiency in spins 

and spin recovery are flight instructor applicants46 in the airplane 

and glider categories. The most recent significant changes to stall 

training came in 1991 and 1997, with changes to the 14 CFR Part 

61 requirements for stall training and certification. Coincidental 

with those changes, the FAA released updates to AC-61-67B in 

1991 and AC-61-67C in 1997, providing guidance on stall and 

spin awareness training. In general, the emphasis in pilot training 

has continued to move from stall/spin recovery toward recognizing 

and avoiding stall/spin conditions and situations that could lead 

to inadvertent stalls and spins. The Safety Board’s 1972 special 

study noted that the increased emphasis on stall/spin recognition 

and avoidance after 1949 reduced the number of stall/spin 

accidents noticeably. However, a comparison of those results with 

the percentage of accidents attributed to stall/spin over the last 

decade suggests that the 1991 and 1997 changes have had little 

additional effect.

The 1972 special study pointed out that, in addition to the revised 

training procedures, the 1949 regulatory change was intended to 

spur the development of new spin-resistant aircraft designs, but 

those changes had not been realized. With the average age of 

aircraft operating in general aviation at more than 30 years, that 

situation continues to be true today for the bulk of the general 

aviation fleet. Analysis of more recent accidents indicates that the 

relative contribution of stalls/spins to general aviation accidents 

has changed little since the 1967-1969 timeframe covered in the 

Safety Board’s earlier report, suggesting that equipment and/or 

design changes may be necessary to further reduce stall/spin 

accidents. 

Summary

A review of the historical data, and those from 2002, indicate that 

stalls/spins are among the most commonly cited causes of fatal general 

aviation accidents. Comparisons between stall/spin accidents and 

general aviation accidents overall indicate that stall/spin accidents 

result in higher-than-average levels of injury and aircraft damage, 

with more than 40% of all stall/spin accidents resulting in a fatality. 

A comparison of stall/spin accidents in 2002 with those cited in 

the Safety Board’s 1972 special study, General Aviation Stall/Spin 

Accidents, indicates that the total number of accidents each year 

has decreased noticeably. Despite the Safety Board’s call for action 

in that study, however, the relative contribution of stalls/spins to 

general aviation accidents has changed little in the intervening 30 

years.

46 Title 14 CFR 61.183(i).
51 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Appendix A

The National Transportation Safety Board 

Aviation Accident/Incident Database

The National Transportation Safety Board is responsible for 

maintaining the government’s database on civil aviation accidents. 

The Safety Board’s Accident/Incident Database is the official 

repository of aviation accident data and causal factors. The 

database was established in 1962 and about 2,000 new event 

records are added each year. 

The Accident/Incident Database is primarily composed of aircraft 

accidents. An “accident” is defined in 49 CFR 830.2 as “an occurrence 

associated with the operation of an aircraft which takes place between 

the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight and 

all such persons have disembarked, and in which any person suffers 

death or serious injury, or in which the aircraft receives substantial 

damage.” The database also contains a select number of aviation 

“incidents,” defined in 49 CFR 830.2 as “occurrences other than 

accidents that are associated with the operation of an aircraft and that 

affect or could affect the safety of operations.”

Accident investigators use the Safety Board’s Accident Data 

Management System (ADMS) software to enter data into the 

Accident/Incident Database. Shortly after the event, a preliminary 

report containing a few data elements such as date, location, 

aircraft operator, and type of aircraft, becomes available. A factual 

report with additional information concerning the occurrence is 

available within a few months. A final report, which includes a 

statement of the probable cause and other contributing factors, 

may not be completed for months until the investigation is closed. 

An accident-based relational database is currently available to 

the public at http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp#query_start. It 

contains records of about 40,000 accidents and incidents that 

occurred between 1982 and the present. Each record may contain 

more than 650 fields of data concerning the aircraft, event, 

engines, injuries, sequence of accident events, and other topics. 

Individual data files are also available for download at ftp://www.

ntsb.gov/avdata, including one complete data set for each year 

beginning with 1982. The data files are in Microsoft Access (.mdb) 

format and are updated monthly. This download site also provides 

weekly “change” updates and complete documentation.
52

Appendix B 

Definitions

Definitions of Safety Board Severity Classifications 

The severity of a general aviation accident or incident is classified 

as the combination of the highest level of injury sustained by the 

personnel involved (that is, fatal, serious, minor, or none) and level 

of damage to the aircraft involved (that is, destroyed, substantial, 

minor, or none). Accidents include those events in which any 

person suffers fatal or serious injury, or in which the aircraft receives 

substantial damage or is destroyed. An event that results in minor 

or no injuries and minor or no damage is not classified as an 

accident.

Definitions for Highest Level of Injury

Fatal—Any injury that results in death within 30 days of the 

accident.

Serious—Any injury that (1) requires the individual to be 

hospitalized for more than 48 hours, commencing within 7 days 

from the date the injury was received; (2) results in a fracture of 

any bone (except simple fractures of fingers, toes, or nose); (3) 

causes severe hemorrhages, nerve, muscle, or tendon damage; (4) 

involves any internal organ; or (5) involves second- or third-degree 

burns, or any burns affecting more than 5% of the body surface.

Minor—Any injury that is neither fatal nor serious.

None—No injury.

Definitions for Level of Aircraft Damage

Destroyed—Damage due to impact, fire, or in-flight failures to 

the extent that the aircraft cannot be repaired economically.1 

Substantial Damage—Damage or failure that adversely 

affects the structural strength, performance, or flight characteristics 

of the aircraft, and that would normally require major repair or 

replacement of the affected component. Engine failure or damage 

limited to an engine if only one engine fails or is damaged, bent 

fairings or cowling, dented skin, small puncture holes in the skin or 

fabric, ground damage to rotor or propeller blades, and damage 

to landing gear, wheels, tires, flaps, engine accessories, brakes, or 

wingtips are not considered “substantial damage.”2

Minor Damage—Any damage that neither destroys the aircraft 

nor causes substantial damage (see definition of substantial 

damage for details).

None—No damage.

1 Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 830.2 does not define “destroyed.” This term is difficult to define because aircraft are sometimes rebuilt even when it is not 

economical to do so.

2 See 49 CFR 830.2.
53 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Appendix C

The National Transportation Safety Board 

Investigative Process

The National Transportation Safety Board investigates every 

accident that occurs in the United States involving civil aviation 

and public aircraft flights that do not involve military or intelligence 

agencies. It also provides investigators to serve as U.S. Accredited 

Representatives as specified in international treaties for aviation 

accidents overseas involving U.S.-registered aircraft or involving 

aircraft or major components of U.S. manufacture. Investigations 

are conducted from Safety Board Headquarters in Washington, 

D.C. or from one of the 10 regional offices in the United States 

(see appendix D).1

In determining probable cause(s) of a domestic accident, 

investigators consider the facts, conditions, and circumstances 

of the event. The objective is to ascertain those cause and effect 

relationships in the accident sequence about which something 

can be done to prevent recurrence of the type of accident under 

consideration.

Note the distinction between the population of accidents investigated 

by the Safety Board and those that are included in the Annual 

Review of Aircraft Accident Data, U.S. General Aviation. Although 

the Safety Board is mandated by Congress to investigate all civil 

aviation accidents that occur on U.S. soil (including those involving 

both domestic and foreign operators), the Annual Review describes 

accidents that occurred among U.S.-registered aircraft in all parts 

of the world. 

1 For more detailed information about the Safety Board’s investigation of aviation accidents or incidents, see 49 CFR 831.2
54

Appendix D

National Transportation Safety Board Regional Offices1

Southwest Regional Office

1515 W. 190th Street, Suite 555

Gardena, California 90248

Phone: 310-380-5660

FAX: 310-380-5666

7:00 a.m. - 3:30 p.m. (Pacific)

Northwest Regional Office

19518 Pacific Highway South

Suite 201

Seattle, Washington 98188

Phone: 206-870-2200

FAX: 206-870-2219

8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. (Pacific) 

Alaska Regional Office

222 West 7th Avenue

Room 216, Box 11

Anchorage, Alaska 99513

Phone: 907-271-5001

FAX: 907-271-3007

7:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (Alaska)

Central Mountain Regional Office

4760 Oakland Street, Suite 500

Denver, Colorado 80239

Phone: 303-373-3500

FAX: 303-373-3507

7:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. (Mountain)

South Central Regional Office

624 Six Flags Drive

Suite 150

Arlington, Texas 76011

Phone: 817-652-7800

FAX: 817-652-7803

7:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. (Central)

Southeast Regional Office - Miami

8405 N.W. 53rd Street

Suite B-103

Miami, Florida 33166

Phone: 305-597-4610

FAX: 305-597-4614

7:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. (Eastern) 

Southeast Regional Office - Atlanta

Atlanta Federal Center 

60 Forsyth Street, SW

Suite 3M25

Atlanta, Georgia 30303

Phone: 404-562-1666

FAX: 404-562-1674

7:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. (Eastern)

Northeast Regional Office - Ashburn

45065 Riverside Parkway

Ashburn, Virginia 20147 

Phone: 571-223-3930

FAX: 571-223-3926

8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. (Eastern) 

Northeast Regional Office - Parsippany

2001 Route 46, Suite 310

Parsippany, New Jersey 07054 

Phone: 973-334-6420

FAX: 973-334-6759

8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. (Eastern) 

North Central Regional Office

31 West 775 North Avenue

West Chicago, Illinois 60185

Phone: 630-377-8177

FAX: 630-377-8172

7:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. (Central)

1 As of FY 2003