aviation

Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

U.S. General Aviation, Calendar Year 2003

ACCIDENT REPORT

NTSB/ARG-07/01

PB2007-105388

Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

U.S. General Aviation, Calendar Year 2003

NTSB/ARG-07/01

PB2007-105388

Notation 7534E

Adopted November 29, 2006

National Transportation Safety Board

490 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20594
National Transportation Safety Board. 2007. U.S. General Aviation, Calendar Year 2003. Annual Review of 

Aircraft Accident Data NTSB/ARG-07/01. Washington, D.C.

Abstract: The National Transportation Safety Board’s 2003 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data for U.S. General Aviation

is a statistical compilation and review of general aviation accidents that occurred in 2003 involving U.S.-registered aircraft. 

As a summary of all U.S. general aviation accidents for 2003, 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 PB2007-105388 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

2003 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 2003............................... 4

General Aviation Industry Indicators ................................................4

Fleet Makeup.................................................................................4

General Aviation Activity .................................................................5

Historical Trends in Accident Data .............................................. 7

Accident Rates ...............................................................................7

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

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

2003 in Depth............................................................................... 13

Location of General Aviation Accidents in 2003..............................13

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

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

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

Purpose of Flight ..........................................................................16

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

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

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

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

Injuries and Damage for 2003 ......................................................20

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

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

Injuries by Role for 2003...............................................................22

Accident Pilots..............................................................................23

Rating ...................................................................................23

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

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

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

Accident Occurrences for 2003....................................................27

Phase of Flight......................................................................28

Chain of Occurrences .................................................................30

Most Prevalent Causes/Factors for 2003 .......................................31

Probable Causes, Factors, Findings, and the Broad 

Cause/Factor Classification ...............................................31

Human Performance....................................................................34

Weather as a Cause/Factor..........................................................35

Focus on General Aviation Safety: 

Night Flying ................................................................................ 37

Historical Record of Night Accidents .............................................37

What is Night?............................................................................38

Light Condition’s Influence on Vision.............................................38

Purpose of Flight .........................................................................41

Weather ....................................................................................42

Phase of Flight ............................................................................42

Accident First Occurence .............................................................43

Regulatory Requirements..............................................................44

Pilot Experience...........................................................................44

Conclusion.................................................................................45

Appendix A .................................................................................. 47

The National Transportation Safety Board Aviation 

Accident/Incident Database ...............................................47

Appendix B ................................................................................. 48

Definitions..................................................................................48

Appendix C................................................................................... 49

The National Transportation Safety Board 

Investigative Process..........................................................49

Appendix D .................................................................................. 50

National Transportation Safety Board Regional Offices...................50

1 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

2003 General Aviation Accident

Summary

A total of 1,739 general aviation accidents occurred during calendar 

year 2003, involving 1,758 aircraft.1 The number of general aviation 

accidents in 2003 was slightly higher than in 2002, with a 1% increase 

of 24 accidents. Of the total number of accidents, 352 were fatal, 

resulting in 632 fatalities. The number of fatal general aviation 

accidents in 2003 increased 2% from calendar year 2002, and the 

number of fatalities increased by 9%. The circumstances of these 

accidents and details related to the aircraft, pilots, and locations are 

presented throughout this review. 

2003 General Aviation Accident Statistics

1,739

352

1,758

632

324

523

1,697

 25,998,000

6.67/100,000 hours

1.34/100,000 hours

2.78/1,000 active pilots

0.56/1,000 active pilots

 

a Federal Aviation Administration, General Aviation and Air Taxi Survey, 2003.

 

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

General Aviation Hours Flowna

Fatal Accidentsb

All Accidentsb

Accidents per Active Pilots

Minor

Persons involved in accidents with no injuries

General Aviation Accident Rate

Fatal Accidents per Active Pilots

General Aviation Accidents

General Aviation Accident Injuries

Fatal

Total Accidents

Fatal Accidents

Accident Aircraft

Serious

1 In this review, a collision between two aircraft is counted as a single accident. The 11 midair collision accidents that occurred in 2003 involved 22 general aviation aircraft. In 

addition, 9 ground collision accidents involved 17 general aviation aircraft.
2

Introduction

Purpose of the Review 

The National Transportation Safety Board’s 2003 Annual Review 

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

compilation and review of general aviation accidents that occurred 

in 2003 involving U.S.-registered aircraft. As a summary of all U.S. 

general aviation accidents for 2003, 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 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, 

and registered experimental or amateur-built aircraft. The diverse set 

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, 2003, 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 2003 (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

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 singleengine 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 2003 Annual Review is organized into four parts.

The first part summarizes general aviation accident statistics for 

2003, industry markers related to general aviation activity in 

2003, 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. 

The third part focuses on specific circumstances of accidents 

that occurred during 2003. This section describes accident 

occurrences and summarizes the Safety Board’s findings of 

probable cause and contributing factors.

1.

2.

3.

4. The fourth section presents in-depth coverage of a special topic 

important to general aviation safety. The 2003 Annual Review 

focuses on night flying, which has historically accounted for a 

disproportionate number of fatal accidents.

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>. 

8 In 2003, three crashes were attributed to pilot suicide and one accident to sabotage.
4

The General Aviation Environment in

2003

General Aviation Industry Indicators 

A theme repeated throughout this review is 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. In 2003, the general aviation climate was influenced by 

generally favorable economic conditions and an increase in general 

aviation aircraft production.

Fleet Makeup

Although sales of new general aviation aircraft increased noticeably after 

the mid-1990s, most general aviation aircraft in use in 2003 were more 

than 25 years old.9 U.S. manufacturers delivered 2,137 new general 

aviation aircraft in 2003, compared to an estimated total of 206,917 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, are also difficult to 

track because most new equipment is also available for installation in 

older aircraft.

9 In 2002, the FAA estimated the average age of all single-engine and multi-engine aircraft to be 31 years. No revised estimate is associated with 2003.

Annual Shipments of U.S.-Manufactured 

General Aviation Aircraft, 1984-2003

0

1,000

2,000

19841985198619871988198919901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003

Single-engine Multi-engine Turboprop Jet
5 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

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 the graph shows, annual general 

aviation flight hour estimates from 1994 through 2003 peaked in 1999, 

but were lower after that. In 2003, the estimated number of general 

aviation flight hours was 25.9 million, up slightly from 2002.

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,10 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,

11 which 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 sample of aircraft is selected from the registry of aircraft 

owners for use in the GAATA Survey, and reporting is not required.

Number of General Aviation Hours

Flown Annually, 1994-2003

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

100,000 Hours

10 Part 121 operators report activity monthly, and scheduled Part 135 operators report quarterly.

11 The GAATA Survey is available at <http://www.faa.gov/data_statistics/aviation_data_statistics/general_aviation/CY2003/>.

Number of Active Aircraft in

General Aviation, 2003 

Multi-engine

Piston

16,898

 Singleengine

Piston

142,943 

 Turboprop 

7,043 

 Jet 

 7,497 

 Rotorcraft

6,044 

 Glider

2,003 

 Amateurbuilt

17,028 

 Lighter

than Air 

3,950 
The General Aviation Environment in 2003 6

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 general 

aviation operations. Available measures of the pilot population include 

both the number of certificates issued to new pilots, which represents 

positive growth in the pilot population, and the number of medical 

certificates issued, which represents an informal census of all active 

pilots. 

The number of new student pilot certificates annually fluctuated between 

1994 and 2003.12 The total number of new student certificates issued 

in 2003 came to 58,842, a decrease from the total of 65,421 issued 

in 2002. 

As shown by the number of medical certificates issued, the 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 2003, the number of active pilots fluctuated, with 

an estimated total of 625,011 active U.S. pilots in 2003.

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 2003, 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. This increase in activity had a noticeable effect on the accident 

rate and should be considered when attempting to interpret the general 

aviation accident record for 2003 in the context of previous years. 

Number of New Student Pilot 

Certificates Issued, 1994-2003

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Thousands of Certificates

Estimated Number of Active Pilot 

Certificates, 1994-2003

500

550

600

650

700

750

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Thousands of Certificates

12 FAA, U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics, 2003, is available at <http://www.faa.gov/data_statistics/aviation_data_statistics/civil_airmen_statistics/>.
7 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Historical Trends in Accident 

Data

Accident Rates

In the last decade, the calculated general aviation accident rate 

declined overall as annual estimates of general aviation activity 

increased noticeably13 without a corresponding increase in the number 

of accidents. The rate of 6.67 accidents per 100,000 hours flown in 

2003 was substantially lower than the 9.08 accidents per 100,000 

hours recorded in 1994. In fact, the 2003 rate was only slightly higher 

than that of 1999, which had the lowest rate since the Safety Board 

began reporting general aviation-only annual accident rates in 1975.14

The relative percentage of fatal accidents remained fairly constant from 

1994 through 2003, at 18 to 21% of the total rate. The 2003 rate of 

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

than the 2002 fatal accident rate of 1.33. In 2003, accident-related deaths per flight hour were 2.43 fatalities 

per 100,000 hours flown. The highest annual fatality-per-hour rate 

occurred in 1994 with 3.28 deaths per 100,000 hours flown.

General Aviation Accident Rate

 1994-2003

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Accidents per 100,000 Hours

Accidents Fatal Accidents

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

aircraft population by about 10 %. See appendix A of the GAATA Survey, Calendar Year 2003, for an explanation of the changes in survey methodology.

14 Prior to 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.
8

Another measure of accident distribution is the number of accidents per 

active pilot. Although this measure was considerably more stable from 

1994 through 2003 than the per-hour accident rate, it did decrease 

slightly overall. The per-pilot rate in 2003 was only slightly higher than 

the low for the period, which occurred in 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 General Aviation Fatalities 

per 100,000 Hours Flown, 1994-2003

3.0

2.6 2.5 2.4

2.1 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4

0

1

2

3

4

5

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Fatalities per 100,000 Hours

3.3

Historical Trends in Accident Data

General Aviation Accident Distribution 

per Active Pilot, 1994-2003

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Accidents per 1,000 Pilots

Accidents Fatal Accidents
9 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Number of Accidents and Fatalities

Although the number of general aviation accidents fluctuated slightly 

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

between 1994 and 2003 declined overall from 2,021 in 1994 to 

1,739 in 2003, and the number of fatal accidents decreased overall, 

from 404 to 352.

The number of fatalities from general aviation accidents also exhibited 

a generally downward trend from the high of 730 in 1994 to 632 in 

2003. It should be noted that 2003 continued a generally downward 

trend in total fatalities for the overall 10-year period. It should also be 

noted that the trend reflects a decrease in general aviation flight hours 

flown annually following the events of September 11, 2001.

Number of General Aviation Accidents 

1994-2003

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Accidents Fatal Accidents

Number of Fatal General Aviation 

Accidents and Fatalities, 1994-2003

0

250

500

750

1,000

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Fatal Accidents Fatalities 
Historical Trends in Accident Data 10

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,15 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 typical of general aviation activity 

include personal/business flying,16 corporate flying, aerial application, 

and instructional flights.

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.17 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.

In 8 out of the 10 years, personal and business flying had the highest 

average accident rate, followed by aerial application. The lowest 

accident rate was for corporate/executive transportation, which for the 

10-year period ranked lowest overall each year. 

•

Accident Rate by Type of Operation, 1994-2003 

(per 100,000 Flight Hours)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Personal and Business Aerial Application

Flight Instruction Corporate/Executive

15 The 2003 Annual Review data include 20 public aircraft accidents, 3 of which resulted in 1 or more fatalities.

16 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).

17 See 14 CFR Part 61, Subpart H, for flight instructor certificate and rating requirements.
11 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

In 2003, the highest proportion of flying time was associated with 

personal and business operations, which accounted for the largest 

proportion of accidents, 69% (n = 1197), a percentage consistent 

with the 10-year average. Less than 1% of the accidents (n = 5) 

were corporate/executive operations, 5% were aerial application (n = 

86), and 14.7%, instructional flying (n = 255). Totals for corporate/

executive accidents are barely visible when graphed in comparison 

to accidents involving other types of operations. For both corporate/

executive operations and instructional flights, the proportion of flight 

hours was higher than the proportion of accidents, reflecting the relative 

safety of these missions. 

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. 

Number of Accidents by 

Type of Operation, 1994-2003

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Personal and Business Aerial Application

Flight Instruction Corporate/Executive

Fatal Accident Rate by Type of Operation, 1994-2003 

(per 100,000 Flight Hours)

0

1

2

3

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Personal and Business Aerial Application

Flight Instruction Corporate/Executive
Historical Trends in Accident Data 12

Between 1994 and 2003, an average 265 fatal accidents per year were 

personal/business flights, compared to an average 24 fatal accidents 

per year related to instructional flying, 12 for aerial application, and 

3 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 number 

of fatal accidents per year among each type of flight operation exhibits 

a distribution similar to the number of accidents; personal and business 

flying accounted for an average 74% of all fatal general aviation 

accidents and 74% of all fatal injuries for 1994 through 2003.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Personal and Business Aerial Application

Flight Instruction Corporate/Executive

Number of Fatal Accidents by 

Type of Operation, 1994-2003
13 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

2003 in Depth

Location of General Aviation Accidents in 2003

United States Aircraft Accidents 

Geographic location can contribute to general aviation accident totals 

because of increased activity associated with population density, or 

increased risk due to hazardous terrain, a propensity for hazardous 

weather, or a concentration of particularly hazardous flight operations. 

The following map shows state by state the number of all general aviation 

accidents that occurred within the United States in 2003. 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 

had the greatest number of accidents in 2003. U.S. Census Bureau 

data18 indicate that California had the highest state population in 

2003, followed by Texas (second) and Florida (fourth). In addition, all 

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

three are popular travel destinations that attract general aviation traffic 

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

pilots19 and active aircraft.20 These data suggest that the high number 

of accidents in California, Florida, and Texas are 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 challenges21 to aviation that are reflected in the 

general aviation accident record. After California, Florida, and Texas, 

Alaska had the most general aviation accidents in 2003.

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

19 FAA, U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics, 2003, available at <http://www.faa.gov/data_statistics/aviation_data_statistics/civil_airmen_statistics/>.

20 FAA, GAATA Survey 2003, available at <http://www.faa.gov/data_statistics/aviation_data_statistics/general_aviation/CY2003/.>.

21 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>.

96

176

28

44

66

50

23

16

34

85 36

49

120

22

17

12

15

9

38

18

26

36

14

18

31

26 44

123

21

33

25 11

18

46 18

30

45

40

27

32

2

9

4

9

17

7

6

3

18

12

Accidents

40 + (13)

27 to 39 (10)

21 to 26 (6)

14 to 20 (10)

0 to 13 (11)

General Aviation Accidents by U.S. State, 2003
14

The top 10 states by number of general aviation accidents in 2003 are 

presented here along with the 10-year average. Note that many of the state 

accident totals for 2003 were below historical averages, but the distribution 

of accidents among states remained similar during the period.

Foreign Aircraft Accidents 

In 2003, U.S.-registered aircraft were involved in 34 accidents outside 

the 50 United States. Those accidents occurred in 17 different countries 

and territories, in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and in the Gulf of 

Mexico. Of those accidents, 15 were fatal, resulting in 31 deaths. 

Most of these accidents occurred in Mexico, with 5 accidents, followed 

by Canada with 4. As expected, 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, but in 2003, accidents occurred as far away as Germany, 

Bolivia, Malaysia, and Antarctica.

2003 in Depth

Top 10 General Aviation Accident States 2003

45

46

49

50

66

85

96

120

123

176

35

42

48

61

64

65

112

125

130

196

Michigan

Illinois

Colorado

Idaho

Washington

Arizona

Alaska

Texas

Florida

California

2003 10-yr Average

En route Hawaii 1 0 1

Off Florida 1 1 1

Off Oil Platform 1 0 0

Antarctica 1 0 0

Bahamas 3 2 2

Bolivia 1 1 2

Canada 4 2 3

Colombia 1 1 1

Costa Rica 3 1 3

Dominican Republic 1 0 0

France 1 0 0

Germany 1 0 0

Martinique 1 0 0

Mexico 5 4 7

Malaysia 1 0 0

Netherlands 1 0 0

Netherlands Antilles 1 0 0

Puerto Rico 3 0 0

Spain 1 1 3

United Kingdom 2 2 4

34 15 31

Accidents Involving U.S.-Registered General Aviation Aircraft Outside the 50

United States, 2003

Number of

Accidents

Number of Fatal 

Accidents

Number of

Fatalities

Total

Other Locations

Pacific Ocean

Gulf of Mexico

Atlantic Ocean

Subtotal 1 0 0

1 0 1

1 1 1

Subtotal

Subtotal

Subtotal 31 14 29
15 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Aircraft Type

The following graphs summarize the total number of general aviation 

accidents and fatal accidents occurring in 2003 by aircraft type. Most 

notable is the large number of accidents involving single-engine piston 

airplanes, which accounted for 74% of all accident aircraft and 66% of 

all fatal accident aircraft.

In 2003, the per-aircraft accident rate for all aircraft types was 6.75 

accidents and 1.35 fatal accidents per 100,000 hours flown.22

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

airplanes was 7.91 accidents and 1.41 fatal accidents per 100,000 hours 

flown. Amateur-built aircraft23 had the highest accident rate with 21.60 

accidents and 5.50 fatal accidents per 100,000 flight hours. Rotorcraft 

had the second-highest rate among powered aircraft, with 10.60 

accidents and 1.62 fatal accidents per 100,000 hours flown. However, 

glider operations had the second-highest accident rate overall, with 19.45 

accidents and 5.07 fatal accidents per 100,000 hours flown. 

22 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 four single-engine piston aircraft crashes with a probable cause attributed to suicide, sabotage, or stolen/unauthorized use.

23 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 of construction is completed by the amateur builder(s).

21

23

197

208

24

73

113

1,307

1,758

355

235

46

24

14

53

30

6

0 Lighter-than-air

Gliders

Rotorcraft

Amateur-built

Jet Airplane

Turboprop Airplane 

Multi-engine Piston Airplane

Single-engine Piston Airplane

All Aircraft

Total

Fatal

Number of Accidents by Type of Aircraft, 2003

Accident Rate per Aircraft Type, 2003

(per 100,000 Flight Hours)

0.00

5.07

1.62

5.50

0.56

1.48

2.27

1.41

1.35

6.75

7.91

5.58

4.50

0.97

21.60

10.66

19.45

14.73 Lighter-than-air

Gliders

Rotorcraft

Amateur-built

Jet Airplane

Turboprop Airplane 

Multi-engine Piston Airplane

Single-engine Piston Airplane

All Aircraft

Total

Fatal
2003 in Depth 16

Purpose of Flight

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 

include the previously mentioned categories of “personal,” “business,” 

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

accounted for 90% of all general aviation operations during 2003. 

The remaining 10% 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 

26 million general aviation hours flown in 2003, more than half—

14.6 million—were conducted for personal or business reasons.24

Accordingly, a large percentage of general aviation accidents involve 

personal/business flying. However, personal/business flying is still overrepresented in the accident record: although this segment represented 

about 56% of the general aviation hours in 2003, it accounted for 

68% of all general aviation accidents (n=1,197) and 76% of all fatal 

accidents in 2003 (n=264).

The accident rate for instructional flights is about half that of 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 13% of the flight instruction accidents 

that occurred in 2003 resulted in fatalities, compared to 22% of 

personal/business accidents. When compared with the number of 

hours flown, the fatal accident rate for instructional flights was 0.77 

fatal accidents per 100,000 hours flown. The fatal accident rate for 

personal/business flying remained the highest in general aviation with 

1.78 fatal accidents per 100,000 hours flown. 

Flight Plan

There were 1,758 pilots involved in general aviation accidents in 2003, 

and for 1,434 (82%) of those pilots, there was no record of filing 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.

24 FAA, GAATA Survey 2003, available at http://www.faa.gov/data_statistics/aviation_data_statistics/general_aviation/CY2003/.
17 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Airport Involvement

Aircraft accident locations were closely split between those occurring 

on airport property (45%) and those occurring away from an airport 

(51%). Comparing accident risk based on location is difficult 

because of the exposure differences among different operations and 

aircraft types. For example, a single-engine 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. In 

contrast, accidents that occur away from an airport typically involve 

the climb, cruise, maneuvering, and descent phases of flight, which 

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

these accidents 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 fatal accidents in 2003 (78%) 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 is one that departs 

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

that 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 with the goal of moving 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. A comparison of the numbers 

Flight Plan Filed by Accident Pilot 2003 

VFR

9%

IFR

9%

No Record/ 

Unknown

82%

 Accident Location, 2003

23

273

56

81

884

774

0 200 400 600 800 1,000

Unknown

Off-airport

On Airport

Number of Accidents

Total

Fatal
2003 in Depth 18

of accident aircraft on local flights with those on point-to-point flights 

illustrates that the percentages of aircraft on point-to-point flights 

accounted for more accident aircraft.

The activity data necessary to compare accident rates for local and pointto-point flights are not available. However, a comparison of the percentage 

of local and point-to-point accident flights conducted for different purposes 

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. 

Corporate/executive transportation and aerial application operations 

were also inversely proportionate, with 100% of corporate flights being 

point-to-point and 79% of aerial application flights being local. 

Environmental Conditions

Many hazards 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 dependent 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 requirements25 for flight in instrument meteorological 

conditions (IMC). According to the FAA Pilot/Controller Glossary,

26

“instrument meteorological conditions” are defined as “meteorological 

Local and Point-to-Point Flights, 2003

Local

39%

Point-toPoint

678 1,080 61%

Percentage of Local Flights by Type of 

Accident Operation, 2003

57%

79%

63%

30%

0%

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

Public Use

Aerial Application

Flight Instruction

Coorporate/ Executive

Personal/ Business

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

26 FAA, Pilot/Controller Glossary, Washington, D.C., available at <http://faa.gov/atpubs/PCG/INDEX.HTM>.
19 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

conditions expressed in terms of visibility, distance from cloud, and 

ceiling less than the minima27 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 2003, only 17% of the accidents 

that occurred in visual conditions resulted in a fatality, but 66% of 

accidents in instrument conditions were fatal.

Although instrument conditions were present for only 6% of all 

accidents, 19% of fatal general aviation accidents in 2003 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 further complicating situations that might be 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 make 

the selection of a suitable landing site more difficult.

Lighting Conditions

Lighting conditions can present a similar hazard to pilots because of 

physiological factors related to night vision, difficulties in seeing potential 

hazards such as mountains, terrain, and unlighted obstructions, and 

perceptual illusions associated with having fewer visual cues. The 

following graphs illustrate that, similar to IMC, most accidents occurred 

in daylight conditions but a larger percentage of the accidents that 

occurred at night resulted in fatalities.

Total Accidents and Fatal Accidents 

by Weather Condition, 2003

100 66

1,628

280

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

IMC VMC

Total Fatal

(66% Fatal) (17% Fatal)

27 Minima for visual meteorological conditions are specified in 14 CFR 91.155.
2003 in Depth 20

In fact, accidents that occurred at night were more than 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 that result in higher levels of injury. 

The reduction in visual cues at night also hinders pilots from identifying 

deteriorating weather conditions and further complicates their ability 

to deal with any aircraft equipment malfunctions. For additional 

information about the safety issues associated with night flying, refer to 

the special topic section of this report for a more detailed discussion 

of night accidents.

Injuries and Damage for 2003

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,28 and “minor” 

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

“substantial.” 

Percentage of Accidents Resulting in a 

Fatality by Lighting Condition, 2003

33%

18% 16%

38%

Dawn Day Dusk Night

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

Accidents and Fatal Accidents by 

Lighting Condition, 2003

22

4

271

9

46

52

12

1,497

56

122

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Unknown

Dawn

Day

Dusk

Night

Number of Accidents

Total

Fatal
21 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Nearly 8 of every 10 aircraft involved in accidents during 2003 sustained 

substantial damage, and about 1 in 5 accident aircraft was destroyed. 

“Minor” and “no damage” classifications together comprised about 

1% of accident aircraft.

Accident Injuries

In accordance with 49 CFR 830.2, Safety Board investigators categorize 

general aviation injuries 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 qualifications29 of 

serious injury that include, but are not limited to, hospitalization for 

more than 48 hours, bone fracture, internal organ damage, or secondor third-degree burns. The following graph depicts the percentage 

of general aviation accidents resulting in each level of injury during 

2003. Most notable is the fact that more than half the accidents did 

not result in injury. 

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

 Highest Level of Accident Injury, 2003

Fatal

20%

Serious

11%

Minor

16%

None

53%

Damage to Accident Aircraft, 2003

Substantial

78%

None

1%

Destroyed

20%

Minor

1%
22

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 2003

The following table presents detailed information about the types of 

injuries incurred by all persons involved in general aviation accidents 

during 2003. The distribution of 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 to risk). For example, all aircraft have a pilot, but not all have 

passengers on board.

General Aviation Accident Injuries, 2003

In 2003, 543 passengers suffered some level of injury in general 

aviation accidents, compared to the 830 pilots and copilots who were 

injured. Pilots sustained the highest percentage of injuries in general 

aviation accidents in 2003, suffering 53% of all fatalities, 51% of all 

serious injuries, and 54% of all minor injuries. 

In addition to injuries sustained by persons on board the accident 

aircraft, 26 persons on the ground sustained injuries as a result of 

general aviation accidents. For example, one person was killed and 

eight were seriously injured when an aircraft hit an apartment building 

after losing control in IMC, a person operating a jet ski was seriously 

629

314

509

1,689

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

Fatal Serious Minor None

 Highest Level of Injury 

Aboard Accident Aircraft, 2003 

352 279 196

912

0

500

1,000

1,500

Fatal Serious Minor None

Total Injuries Sustained 

by Persons Aboard 

Accident Aircraft, 2003

Personal Injuries Fatal Serious Minor None Total

 Pilot 338 166 284 970 1,758

 Copilot 19 14 9 37 79

 Flight instructor 14 4 6 24 48

 Dual student 11 8 15 62 96

 Check pilot 1 2 1 6 10

 Other crew 6 4 7 15 32

 Passenger 240 116 187 575 1,118

 Total aboard 629 314 509 1,689 3,141

 On ground 3 10 13 0 26

 Other Aircraft 0 0 1 8 9

 Total 632 324 523 1,697 3,176

2003 in Depth
23 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

injured after being struck by the float of a landing seaplane, and six 

people sustained minor injuries when the wreckage of two single-engine 

aircraft fell on a residential neighborhood after a midair collision. 

Accident Pilots

Rating

Of the 1,758 pilots involved in general aviation accidents in 2003, the 

largest percentage held a private pilot certificate.30 The second-largest 

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.31

When compared to the number of active pilots in 2003 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 20% of all active general aviation pilots, they 

were involved in 35% of all general aviation accidents in 2003. 

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

certificate holders during 2003, with 4.85 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, more than one-third of commercial pilots involved in 

accidents during 2003 (35%) were conducting personal flights and were 

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

30 FAA, U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics, 2003.

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

Highest Certificate Held by Accident Pilot, 2003 

Student

7%

Other/None

1%

Airline 

Transport

14%

Commercial

35%

Private

43%

Number of Active Pilots by Highest 

Certificate, 2003

Recreational

310

Student 

87,296

Private

241,045

Commercial

123,990 

Airline 

Transport

143,504 
24

Because annual flight-hour data are not compiled separately for pilots 

holding each type of certificate, it is not possible to compare activitybased accident rates. The U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics32 also do not 

include information about the type of operation that certificate holders 

engage in. Examples of other commercial operations not presented 

in the chart include corporate/executive transportation, sightseeing 

flights, banner towing, and aerial observation. 

Total Time

For the 1,635 accident pilots for which total flight experience data are 

available, 46% 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 

total 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.

(1,635 accident pilot records with total flight time information)

Accident Rate per 1,000 Active Pilots by Certificate, 2003

1.34

2.95

4.85

1.67

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

Student Private Commercial Airline

Transport

Type of Operation Conducted by 

Accident Pilot Certificate, 2003

690

119 119

0

82

6 4

106

49

2 31 26

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Private Commercial Airline Transport

Personal / Business Aerial Application

Instruction Ferry / Positioning

(1,693 of accident pilot records with data available, 2003)

2003 in Depth

32 FAA, U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics, 2003.

Accident Pilot Total Time, 2003

744

261

141

80

64

40

40

31

19

25

190

0-1,000

1,001-2,000

2,001-3,000

3,001-4,000

4,001-5,000

5,001-6000

6,001-7,000

7,001-8,000

8,001-9,000

9,001-10,000

>10,000

Flight Hours

Accident Pilot Total Time 2003 

(1,000 hours or less)

261

183

119

105

76

0-200

201-400

401-600

601-800

801-1,000

Flight Hours
25 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

It is not surprising that 9 of 10 accident pilots with 200 hours total flight 

time or less were flying single-engine piston airplanes. Most accident 

pilots with more than 1,000 hours were also flying single-engine piston 

airplanes, but the list includes a more diverse selection of aircraft, multiengine piston, turboprop, and turbine-powered airplanes, and more 

than twice as many who were flying rotorcraft.

Time in Type of Aircraft

Of the 1,407 accidents in 2003 for which pertinent data are available, 

41% involved pilots with 100 hours or less of time in the accident 

aircraft make and model. Of those, 100 pilots (7% 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.

(1,407 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 

Type Aircraft Flown by Accident Pilots With 200 or Less

Hours Total Flight Time, 2003 

2%

1%

6%

0%

0%

0%

91%

Glider

Lighter than air

Rotorcraft

Airplane Turbine

Airplane Turboprop

Airplane Multi-engine Piston

Airplane Single-engine Piston

Type Aircraft Flown by Accident Pilots with More than 1,000 

Hours Total Flight Time, 2003

1%

1%

14%

2%

7%

9%

66%

Glider

Lighter than air

Rotorcraft

Airplane Turbine

Airplane Turboprop

Airplane Multi-engine Piston

Airplane Single-engine

Piston

Accident Pilot Total Time in Aircraft Type, 2003 

100

583

206

119

80

65

55

26

29

21

30

193

0-10

0-100

101-200

201-300

301-400

401-500

501-600

601-700

701-800

801-900

901-1,000

>1,000

Flight Hours
26

who own aircraft have single-engine piston airplanes. Helicopters and 

multi-engine piston, 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 38 of the 100 accident 

pilots in 2003 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

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

1994 through 2003 and by 2003 was 45 years.33 In contrast, the average 

age of general aviation accident pilots was 51. 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.

2003 in Depth

Type Aircraft Flown by Accident Pilots With 10 or 

Less Hours in Accident Aircraft Type, 2003

3%

1%

4%

1%

0%

2%

89%

Glider

Lighter-than-Air

Rotorcraft

Airplane Turbine

Airplane Turboprop

Airplane Multi-Engine Piston

Airplane Single-Engine Piston

Type Aircraft Flown by Accident Pilots With More

than 200 Hours in Accident Aircraft Type, 2003 

1%

1%

16%

2%

6%

8%

66%

Glider

Lighter-than-Air

Rotorcraft

Airplane Turbine

Airplane Turboprop

Airplane Multi-Engine Piston

Airplane Single-Engine Piston

Average Age of Active Pilots

 1994-2003

41 42

43 43 44 44 44 44 44 45

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Age in Years

33 FAA, U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics, 2003. 
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 2003

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.34 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 six 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 1,695 accident aircraft in 2003 for which data are available, 

1,345 cited 2 or more occurrences, 707 cited 3 or more, 117 cited 4 

or more, 11 cited 5 or more, and 1 cited a total of 6. 

The excerpt from a brief report shown here, which is for a 2003 accident 

with three occurrences, illustrates how an accident with multiple 

occurrences is coded. In this accident, the pilot was flying to a remote 

mountain airstrip when a witness saw the aircraft make a wrong turn 

into a dead-end canyon. The aircraft impacted trees while the pilot 

was attempting to reverse course. The pilot subsequently lost control of 

the airplane, and it impacted terrain. Each of these occurrences was 

coded in order, as shown.

Example of Occurrence Findings Cited in an NTSB Accident Brief, 2003

Occurrence #1: IN FLIGHT COLLISION WITH OBJECT

Phase of Operation: MANEUVERING

----------

Occurrence #2: LOSS OF CONTROL - IN FLIGHT

Phase of Operation: DESCENT - UNCONTROLLED

----------

Occurrence #3: IN FLIGHT COLLISION WITH TERRAIN/WATER

Phase of Operation: DESCENT - UNCONTROLLED

Average Age of Accident Pilot By Type of Operation, 2003 

Average Age of Accident Pilot By Highest Pilot Certificate, 2003 

43

47

46

40

51

51

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Instruction

Other Work

Aerial Application

Corporate/Executive

Personal/Business

All Accident Pilots

Age in Years

45

52

50

51

51

40 45 50 55

Student

Commercial

Private

ATP

All Accident Pilots

Age in Years

34 Two of the codes, “missing aircraft” and “undetermined,” do not represent operational events.
28

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-2003 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 in flight (15%), followed closely by loss of 

control on the ground (14%). Although occurrences involving loss 

of aircraft control on the ground resulted in only 2 fatal accidents in 

2003, loss-of-control occurrences in flight resulted in a total of 95 

fatal accidents—more than one-quarter of all fatal 

accidents and more than twice that of any other 

single occurrence.

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. 

2003 in Depth

First Occurrences Total Fatal First Occurrences (Cont.) Total Fatal 

Collision – In-flight 254 82 Power Related 446 52

In-flight Collision with Object 141 40 Loss of Engine Power 182 22

In-flight Collision with Terrain/Water 76 30 Loss of Engine Power(Total) - Nonmechanical 131 18

Midair Collision 20 12 Loss of Engine Power(Total) - Mech Failure/Malf 64 5 

Undershoot 17 0 Loss of Engine Power(Partial) - Nonmechanical 37 6 

Near Collision Between Aircraft 0 0 Loss of Engine Power(Partial) - Mech Failure/Malf 19 1 

Noncollision – In-flight 443 166 Propeller Failure/Malfunction 8 0 

Loss Of Control - In-flight 247 95 Rotor Failure/Malfunction 5 0 

Airframe/Component/System Failure/Malfunction 94 16 Engine Tear-away 0 0 

In-flight Encounter with Weather 87 51 Landing Gear 29 0 

Abrupt Maneuver 11 3 Gear Collapsed 11 0 

Vortex Turbulence Encountered 3 1 Wheels-up Landing 8 0 

Altitude Deviation, Uncontrolled 1 0 Main Gear Collapsed 4 0 

Forced Landing 0 0 Gear Retraction on Ground 3 0 

Decompression 0 0 Nose Gear Collapsed 2 0 

Collision – On-ground or Water 89 5 Complete Gear Collapsed 1 0 

On Ground/Water Collision with Object 35 1 Wheels-down Landing in Water 0 0 

On Ground/Water Encounter with Terrain/Water 31 1 Tail Gear Collapsed 0 0 

Collision Between Aircraft (Other Than Midair) 16 2 Other Gear Collapsed 0 0 

Dragged Wing, Rotor, Pod, Float or Tail/Skid 7 1 Gear Not Extended 0 0 

Noncollision – On-ground or Water 405 7 Gear Not Retracted 0 0 

Loss of Control - On Ground/Water 229 2 Miscellaneous 25 5 

Hard Landing 98 1 Miscellaneous/Other 19 5 

Overrun 50 2 Fire 3 0 

Nose Over 11 0 Cargo Shift 2 0 

Roll Over 5 0 Fire/Explosion 1 0 

Propeller/Rotor Contact to Person 5 2 Hazardous Materials Leak/Spill 0 0 

Propeller Blast or Jet Exhaust/Suction 4 0 Explosion 0 0 

Nose Down 2 0 Undetermined 4 4 

Ditching 1 0 Missing Aircraft 4 4 

On Ground/Water Encounter with Weather 0 0 Undetermined 0 0 

General Aviation Accident First Occurrences, 2003
29 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

As shown in the illustration, almost half of all general aviation 

accidents (49%) occurred during either takeoff or 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%) of any single phase but only 4% of 

fatal accident first occurrences. The combination of the cruise and 

maneuvering phases accounted for about half (51%) of fatal accident 

first occurrences, but less than one-third (29%) of all accidents. 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, flight instruction typically 

involves a lot of time spent practicing takeoffs and landings. As a 

result, about 39% of all first occurrences for 2003 accidents involving 

instructional flights occurred during landing compared to 29% of 

personal/business flights and 7% of aerial application flights. 

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

3.8% 20.6% 2.2% 15.3% 3.1% 14.2% 10.0% 2.3% 28.6%

(3.4%) (16.2%) (4.7%) (22.1%) (4.4%) (29.3%) (14.0%) (2.2%) (3.7%)

Accident Aircraft Phase of Flight During First Occurrence, 2003

1,695 accident aircraft with phase of flight data
30

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 37%, 

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-engine piston aircraft occurred during landing. Takeoff 

accounted for 20-25% of accidents involving airplanes, but only 13% 

of accidents involving helicopters.

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 1,695 accidents 

that occurred during 2003 for which occurrence data are available, 

405 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, 2003

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Standing/

Taxi/Other

Takeoff 

Climb

Cruise

Maneuvering

Descent

Approach

Go-around

Landing

Personal/Business Aerial Application Flight Instruction

Accident Aircraft Phase of Flight During Accident First 

Occurrence by Aircraft Type, 2003

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Standing/

Taxi/Other

Takeoff

Climb

Cruise

Manuevering

Descent

Approach

Go-around

Landing

Single-engine Piston Airplane Multi-engine Piston Airplane

Turbine Airplane Helicopter

2003 in Depth
31 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

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 or water tops both 

lists, with almost half those accidents being fatal. It is important to note that, although 

this was the most frequent chain of occurrences in 2003, it accounted for only 9% of all 

accidents for the year.

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

are more likely to result from an in-flight collision, often preceded by loss of control and/or 

weather encounters or equipment malfunctions. For example, all of the top ten chains of 

fatal accident occurrences included an in-flight collision 

with terrain or object, events that are more likely to result 

in the high impact forces likely to cause serious injury. In 

contrast to the severity of these cases, most accidents in 

2003 did not involve catastrophic events, and a large 

number of accidents involved aircraft on the ground that 

resulted in minor or no injuries.

Most Prevalent Causes/Factors for 

2003

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.

1 1) Loss Of Control - In Flight 2) In Flight Collision With Terrain/water 157

2 1) In Flight Collision With Object 74

3 1) In Flight Collision With Terrain/water 67

4

1) Loss Of Control - On Ground/water 2) On Ground/water Encounter With

Terrain/water 65

5 1) In Flight Collision With Object 2) In Flight Collision With Terrain/water 43

6 1) Hard Landing 42

7 1) Loss Of Control - In Flight 2) In Flight Collision With Object 39

8 1) Loss Of Engine Power 2) Forced Landing 3) In Flight Collision With Object 37

9 1) Loss Of Control - On Ground/water 2) On Ground/water Collision With Object 34

10 1) Loss Of Engine Power 2) Forced Landing 3) In Flight Collision With Terrain/water 32

Rank

Chain Of Occurrences - All General Aviation Accidents, 2003

Number of

Accidents

1 1) Loss Of Control - In Flight 2) In Flight Collision With Terrain/water 71

2 1) In Flight Collision With Terrain/water 30

3 1) In Flight Collision With Object 17

4 1) In Flight Collision With Object 2) In Flight Collision With Terrain/water 17

5 1) In Flight Encounter With Weather 2) In Flight Collision With Terrain/water 17

6

1) In Flight Encounter With Weather 2) Loss Of Control - In Flight 3) In Flight

Collision With Terrain/water 14

7 1) Loss Of Control - In Flight 2) In Flight Collision With Object 14

8

1) Loss Of Engine Power 2) Forced Landing 3) Loss Of Control - In Flight 4) In Flight

Collision With Terrain/water 9

9

1) Airframe/component/system Failure/malfunction 2) Loss Of Control - In Flight 3) In

Flight Collision With Terrain/water 8

10

1) Loss Of Control - In Flight 2) In Flight Collision With Object 3) In Flight Collision 

With Terrain/water 7

Number of

Accidents Rank

Chain Of Occurrences - Fatal General Aviation Accidents, 2003
32

Example of NTSB Accident Brief, 2003

Occurrence #1: MISCELLANEOUS/OTHER

Phase of Operation: MANEUVERING

Findings

1. (C) DOOR - NOT SECURED

2. (C) ALTITUDE/CLEARANCE - NOT MAINTAINED - PILOT IN COMMAND

3. DOOR - OPEN

4. (C) PREFLIGHT PLANNING/PREPARATION - INADEQUATE - PILOT IN 

COMMAND

----------

Occurrence #2: LOSS OF CONTROL - IN FLIGHT

Phase of Operation: EMERGENCY LANDING AFTER TAKEOFF

Findings

5. AIRCRAFT CONTROL - NOT MAINTAINED - PILOT IN COMMAND

6. DIVERTED ATTENTION - PILOT IN COMMAND

----------

Occurrence #3: IN FLIGHT COLLISION WITH TERRAIN/WATER

Phase of Operation: MANEUVERING

Findings

7. TERRAIN CONDITION - GROUND

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

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

follows. The pilot’s inadequate preflight preparation in which he failed to secure the cabin door 

which diverted his attention and resulted in the failure to maintain directional control.

This accident happened just after takeoff, when the aircraft door opened in 

flight. The pilot attempted to return to the runway and make an emergency 

landing. While maneuvering to land, the pilot lost control of the airplane 

and began descending. The aircraft struck trees, power lines, and then 

impacted the ground. The investigation revealed that the airplane door had 

not been properly latched and locked prior to departure. In this accident, 

the unsecured door, the pilot’s failure to maintain altitude in flight, and 

inadequate preflight preparation were cited as causes. The open door, the 

pilot’s diverted attention, and the subsequent loss of aircraft control were 

all cited as findings but 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 91% of the 1,677 general aviation 

accident reports for 2003 for which cause/factor data were available. 

Environmental causes/factors were cited in 45% of these accident 

reports, and aircraft-related causes/factors were cited in 28%.35

(1,677 accidents with findings)

Environmental conditions are rarely cited as an accident cause but are 

more likely to be cited as a contributing factor. In 2003, only 39 of 754 

environmental citations (2% of all causes/factors cited) were listed as 

35 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, 2003 

28%

45%

91%

23%

2%

89%

Aircraft Environment Personnel

Cause/Factor Cause Only

2003 in Depth
33 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

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.

(1,677 accidents with findings in 2003)

As mentioned previously, several hundred unique codes 

are available to document causes/factors, as summarized 

in the graph on this page.

As this graph shows, most causes and factors attributed 

to general aviation accidents in 2003 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. 

Although the pilot was the most frequently cited individual 

in the personnel category in 2003, other persons 

not aboard the aircraft were also cited as a cause 

or factor in 131 accidents. Such personnel included 

flight instructors, maintenance technicians, and airport 

personnel. In the broad category of environmental 

factors, weather conditions were cited in 357 (21%) of 

the accidents. Powerplant-related36 causes/factors, cited 

in 202 (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 96% of instructional 

flight accidents and 91% of personal/business 

accidents, compared to 86% for aerial application 

accidents. The high percentage of personnel causes/

factors for flight instruction accidents is likely the 

4

5

7

25

41

68

146

202

468

 Engine Power Loss

 Aircraft Performance

 Instruments

 Flight Control Systems

 Aircraft Structure

 Systems and Equipment

 Landing Gear

 Fluid

 Powerplant/Propulsion

Aircraft Total

Environment

Aircraft

27

70

198

312

357

754

 Airport/Airways Facilities, Aids

 Light Condition

 Object

 Terrain Condition

 Weather Condition

Environment Total

Personnel

5

10

131

1,459

1,548

 Organizations

 Others (aboard)

 Others (not aboard)

 Pilot

Personnel Total

Summary of Findings Cited as Cause or Factor in General 

Aviation Accidents, 2003

36 “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.
34

result of aircraft control and decision-making errors due to students’ 

lower level of skill and ability, as well as the large amount of time 

practicing maneuvers like takeoffs and landings, which are more likely 

to result in accidents. 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 similar results. The higher percentage of multiengine piston accidents that cited aircraft causes/factors in 2003 is 

likely a result of more complex systems as compared to single-engine 

piston airplanes. Conversely, the high reliability of turbine engines 

likely contributes to the low percentage of aircraft-related findings for 

those aircraft. There is also a noticeable drop in the percentage of 

environmental causes/factor citations progressing from single- to multiengine piston, and turbine airplane accidents, mirroring increases in 

the typical range, performance, and equipment capabilities of those 

aircraft. 

Human Performance

The information recorded in the personnel category refers primarily 

to whose actions were a cause or factor in an accident. However, 

details 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 

Broad Causes/Factors by Type of 

Operation, 2003

37%

53%

86%

28%

47%

91%

16%

35%

96%

Aircraft Environment Personnel

Aerial Application Personal and Business Flight Instruction

Broad Causes/Factors by Accident 

Aircraft Type, 2003

27%

46%

91%

40% 42%

95%

35%

85%

36%

90%

20%

30%

Aircraft Environment Personnel

Single-engine Piston Airplane Multi-engine Piston Airplane

Turbine Airplane Helicopter

2003 in Depth
35 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

and loses control of an aircraft after continuing visual flight into 

instrument flight conditions, the pilot’s inability to maintain control 

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 1,431 accidents for which the cause or factor was attributed to 

human performance in 2003, the most frequently cited cause/factor 

was aircraft handling and control (71%), followed by planning and 

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

related to personnel qualification were cited in about 32% of the 

157 accidents with underlying explanatory factors related to human 

performance. Examples of qualification issues that were cited in the 

2003 accident record included lack of total experience, lack of recent 

experience, and lack of certification.

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.” 

The top three environmental causes/factors cited in general aviation 

accidents in 2003 were all 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. 

Human Performance Issues 1,431 285

 Aircraft Handling/Control 1,012 227

 Planning/Decision 530 125

 Use of Aircraft Equipment 162 22

 Maintenance 90 10

 Communications/Information/ATC 62 12

 Meteorological Service 8 8

 Airport 2 1

 Dispatch 0 0

Underlying Explanatory Factors 157 75

 Qualification 51 19

 Physiological Condition 46 42

 Psychological Condition 40 15

 Aircraft/Equipment Inadequate 11 2

 Procedure Inadequate 8 1

 Institutional Factors 5 2

 Facility Inadequate 4 1

 Information 2 2

 Material Inadequate 2 1

Human Performance and Explanatory Causes/Factors 2003

All Accidents Fatal Accidents
36

Note: due to the possibility of multiple findings, the sum of causes/factors is greater than the 

total number of accidents.

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 windrelated accidents in 2003 were not fatal. The wind-related 

weather factors “crosswind,” “gusts,” and “tailwind” were 

cited as a cause/factor in 222 accidents, but only 12 of those 

accidents were fatal. Among fatal general aviation accidents, 

the three 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. The high 

number of fatal general aviation accidents occurring in low 

visibility weather led the Safety Board to conduct a safety study 

of these accidents.37 Several of the weather-related accidents 

that occurred during 2003 were included in that study.

 Weather Condition 357 91

 Crosswind 94 4

 Gusts 85 7

 Tailwind 43 1

 Low ceiling 38 33

 High density altitude 30 4

 Fog 22 17

 High wind 22 10

 Carburetor icing conditions 19 1

 Clouds 19 17

 Downdraft 14 3

 Icing conditions 13 8

 Unfavorable wind 9 0

 Sudden windshift 8 0

 Rain 8 7

 Turbulence 7 3

 Snow 4 1

 Thunderstorm 4 1

 Windshear 4 1

 Variable wind 4 0

 Turbulence (thunderstorms) 4 2

 Temperature, low 3 0

 Turbulence in clouds 3 1

 Hail 3 1

 No thermal lift 3 0

 Mountain wave 2 2

 Dust devil/whirlwind 2 0

 Haze/smoke 2 1

 Other 2 0

 Turbulence, terrain induced 1 0

 Whiteout 1 0

 Updraft 1 0

 Obscuration 1 1

 Below approach/landing minimums 1 1

 Drizzle/mist 1 1

 Lightning 1 0

All Accidents Fatal Accidents

Accidents by Weather Cause/Factor

37 National Transportation Safety Board, Risk Factors Associated with Weather-Related General Aviation Accidents, NTSB/SS-05/01 (Washington, DC: 2005)

2003 in Depth
37 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Focus on General Aviation Safety: 

Night Flying

Recent general aviation accident data demonstrate that accidents that 

occur at night are more likely to be fatal than those that occur during 

the day. This section attempts to explain the risks associated with flying 

at night. To that end, this section includes statistical data and discusses 

safety issues related to general aviation operations at night. 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 

the safety of general aviation pilots.

Historical Record of Night Accidents

Each year between 1994 and 2003, an average 11% of general 

aviation accidents occurred at night. Estimates of the distribution of 

general aviation flight hours based on the FAA general aviation activity 

survey38 suggest that accidents are proportionate to activity, with an 

estimated 12% of general aviation hours flown at night. However, 

each year, an average 33% of night accidents were fatal, making them 

almost twice as likely to be fatal as accidents that occurred during the 

day. Reasons for the increased risk include the effects of darkness on 

the pilot’s ability to see and avoid obstacles and the increased difficulty 

of safely responding to emergency situations.

1,739

352

1,758

178

179

55

24

29

70

104

45

66

168

Night Accident Aircraft Damage

52

121

2

None 4

Minor

Minor

Persons aboard with no injuries

Destroyed

Substantial

None

Number of Accident Injuries

Fatal

Serious

Night Accidents by Injury Level

Fatal

Serious

Minor

General Aviation Night Accident Statistics, 2003

Night Accidents

Total Accidents

Accident Aircraft

All General Aviation Accidents

Total Accidents

Accident Aircraft

Fatal Accidents

38 Data were provided by the FAA, Office of Accident Investigation, using results from the newly revised, 2004 General Aviation and Air Taxi Activity and Avionics Survey. Estimates of 

the day/night distribution of activity were calculated from survey responses, excluding those from aircraft owners who reported having flown any time in 14 CFR Part 135 operations.

Percentage of General Aviation Accidents 

Occurring Day and Night, 1994-2003

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1994199519961997199819992000200120022003

Day Night
38

What Is Night?

In 14 CFR Part 1, the FAA defines night as “the time between the end 

of evening civil twilight and the beginning of morning civil twilight, as 

published in the American Air Almanac, converted to local time.” Civil 

twilight is defined as the time at which the sun is 6 degrees below the 

horizon, roughly 30 minutes before sunrise and 30 minutes after sunset. 

This definition applies to most night-related regulatory requirements, 

such as required minimum aircraft equipment, VFR weather minimums, 

logging of flight time, and required fuel reserves.

Rather than using a simple day/night distinction, Safety Board investigations 

record lighting conditions at the time of an accident as one of the following: 

dawn, day, dusk, and night, with the additional classifications of dark night 

and bright night. For purposes of clarity, the data presented in this section 

will be limited to the day/night classification.39

Light Condition’s Influence on Vision

Many of the human performance difficulties associated with night flying 

begin with the structure and function of the human visual system, and 

the corresponding effects of low-light conditions on a pilot’s visual 

perception. To better explain those human performance issues, this 

section includes a brief overview of the visual system.

Light enters the eye through the pupil, passing through the cornea and 

lens, which together focus light on the inside surface of the back of 

the eye, called the retina. The retina contains about 125 million lightsensitive photoreceptor cells that convert light from a visual scene into 

neural impulses. 

Percentage of General Aviation Accidents 

Resulting in a Fatality by Day and Night, 1994-2003

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1994199519961997199819992000200120022003

Day Night

39 For the purposes of this section, “day” includes the Safety Board reporting categories of “dawn” and “day,” and “night” includes Board reporting categories “dusk,” “night,” “bright 

night,” and “dark night,” unless otherwise specified.

Cornea

Lens

Retina

Fovea

Optic

Nerve

2003 in Depth
39 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

The human visual system is able to function over an extreme range of 

light conditions from sunlit day to starlit night. This range is possible 

because the retina includes two distinct types of photoreceptors—

cones and rods—that interact dynamically based on ambient light 

levels. Because cones and rods differ in size, shape, and response, and 

in the way they interact, cones mediate visual function in bright light 

conditions, and rods mediate visual function in low light conditions. 

At intermediate light levels, both systems operate together and the 

resulting visual function shares qualities of both systems.

Pilots should be aware that their ability to read text, 

identify objects and terrain features, and perceive color 

are all impaired in low light conditions.

Cones are mostly concentrated in the part of the retina associated 

with the central field of vision, called the fovea. Cone cells include 

three additional subtypes that are sensitive to different wavelengths 

of light—what we perceive as red, green, and blue—which allow for 

color vision. Rods are more abundant than cones and are distributed 

throughout the remaining area of the retina. Unlike cones, rods provide 

no color information. 

Cones are smaller in both diameter and length than rods, allowing 

room for more cone cells in a smaller area, which results in higher 

visual acuity. Rods tend to be larger and accumulate light over a 

longer period of time than cones, making them more sensitive in lowlight conditions because they are more likely to absorb enough light to 

stimulate a response.

Pilots should modify their scanning technique in dark 

conditions to compensate for changes in visual acuity, and 

try to look to the side of small targets rather than trying to 

fixate on them.

In addition to the size and shape of individual photoreceptors, rods and 

cones differ in how they interact with each other. Although the retina 

is made of about 125 million photoreceptor cells, the optic nerve that 

carries the signals from the retina to the brain is made up of only about 

1 million cells; as a result, many photoreceptors feed a single optic 

nerve cell. However, the ratio of receptors to nerve cells is not uniform 

across the retina. Cone cells in the fovea can have a receptor-to-nerve 

cell ratio as low as one to one while rod cells in the periphery can have 

a ratio of several hundred to one. Combining the inputs of multiple 

cells over a larger area further increases the sensitivity of rod cells at 

the expense of visual acuity; as a result, large objects remain visible 

under low light levels but fine detail features are harder to detect and 

Accident Coding

Ambient Lighting

Visual

Function

Poor acuity and

no color vision

Good acuity and

good color vision

Dark Night Bright Night Dusk/Dawn Daylight

Starlight Moonlight Indoor light Sunlight

Rod function

Cone function

Absolute

threshold

Cone

threshold

Rod

saturation

Rod Dominated

Periphery

Cone

Dominated

Central Vision
40

text is harder to read. Further, the cones provide little information in 

low light conditions to help us perceive the color of unlighted objects 

at night and a functional blind spot is created in the fovea. 

Pilots should allow sufficient time for their eyes to adapt 

before departing on a night flight, and should thereafter 

avoid exposure to bright light for more than a second or 

two to avoid a loss of dark adaptation.

When a rod or cone is stimulated by light, pigments in the cell convert 

the light into a neural impulse. The cell must regenerate these pigments 

after each impulse before it is ready to fire again. Pigment regeneration 

takes about 5 minutes in the cone cells and up to 30 minutes in rod 

cells. These differences in cell recovery time result in a two-stage 

increase in sensitivity when transitioning from bright to low light. When 

a person moves from bright to low light, sensitivity improves for the first 

3-4 minutes and levels off briefly as the cones adjust. Sensitivity then 

continues to increase as the rods adapt, reaching maximum sensitivity 

after about 30 minutes. 

Dim red light is used for cockpit illumination because rods are least 

sensitive to long wavelength (red) light, and it has little negative effect 

on dark adaptation. However, the Aeronautical Information Manual 

recommends the brief use of dim white light as necessary in the cockpit 

at night because red light illumination can make it difficult to read 

aeronautical charts or focus on objects in the cockpit. If pilots must 

use white light in the cockpit, they should close one eye to retain some 

dark adaptation.

Pilots can take steps to improve their night vision.

Smoking, vitamin A deficiency, high cabin altitude, exposure to carbon 

monoxide from engine exhaust, and fatigue can all negatively affect a 

pilot’s night vision. In addition to not smoking and maintaining a healthy 

diet, pilots can improve their night vision by maintaining a lower cabin 

altitude and/or using oxygen at night.

Pilots should use all available flight instruments, navigation 

aids, and approach guidance to counter potential illusory 

perceptions resulting from changes in visual function in 

the dark.

Even healthy pilots with good night vision are susceptible to perceptual 

problems in low light conditions. In addition to acuity changes and 

dark adaptation, visual performance is negatively affected by reduced 

contrast at night. As ambient lighting decreases, contrast—the 

difference between the brightest and darkest visual features—also 

decreases. In daylight conditions, we are able to detect obstacles, 

rising terrain, and ground features because of the high-contrast edges 

outlining an obstacle, or the line where terrain or water meets sky. As 

ambient lighting decreases, the contrast of objects and terrain features 

decreases and it becomes harder to distinguish those features from the 

surrounding environment. 

Perceptions of speed and direction of movement are based on visual 

details like the apparent flow of the surroundings when moving through 

the environment, the relative size and height of familiar objects, texture 

gradients, and linear perspective. When flying, these details also 

provide information about altitude and climb/descent rate. Reduced 

lighting limits the amount of visual detail available and increases the 

likelihood of experiencing illusory perceptions of speed, distance, 

altitude, or climb/descent rate. As a result, pilots may simply be unable 

to see rising terrain, trees, or unlit obstacles. In other cases, they may 

become disoriented and have difficulty maintaining level flight in cruise 

or flying a proper descent angle while on approach to landing.

Some examples of nighttime perceptual illusions include the 

following:

False Horizon Illusion – At night, pilots may become disoriented 

because they are unable to distinguish ground lights from stars. 

Cloud formations or patterns of ground lights can also create 

the illusion of sloping terrain or the perception that the plane 

•

2003 in Depth
41 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

is banking. Such illusions can disorient pilots and cause them 

to lose control of their aircraft if they rely on their perceptions, 

which can be false, rather than aircraft flight instruments. 

Distance Illusions – Bright approach or runway lights can be 

seen from long distances at night. This can create the illusion 

that the aircraft is much closer to the runway than it is, leading 

to a lower than appropriate approach path. 

Featureless Terrain or “Black Hole” Illusion – In dark conditions, 

with few ground lights, pilots may be unable to perceive enough 

orientation clues to judge altitude or descent rate, causing them 

to perceive the aircraft to be higher than it actually is. If this 

occurs while on approach, pilots may have the sensation that 

the aircraft is stationary while the runway is sloping away. This 

illusion can cause pilots to unknowingly descend into terrain or 

water, or cause them to fly a low approach or undershoot the 

runway while landing.

In general, pilots are susceptible to illusions at night that are similar to 

those encountered during flight in instrument conditions. The best way to 

overcome these and similar illusions is to use aircraft flight instruments 

and other resources. For example, pilots should use glideslope, visual 

approach path indicator lighting, and/or global positioning system 

(GPS) vertical navigation information, if available, during approach 

and landing at night to counter possible false perceptions of altitude 

or decent rate. Long straight-in approaches should also be avoided in 

favor of an appropriate traffic pattern whenever possible.

Purpose of Flight

Accident likelihood is based on the level of risk associated with an 

activity and the frequency of that activity. The Safety Board has found 

that the distribution of accidents that occur during the day and at night 

is proportionate to the number of hours flown; however, the unique 

risks that night conditions pose to specific operations is reflected in the 

•

•

distribution of accidents by purpose of flight. For example, only 2% of 

aerial application accidents occur at night, most likely because aerial 

application is almost exclusively a daytime activity.

For other types of flight operations, the differences may be more complex. 

Positioning flights are a unique type of general aviation operation 

because they usually involve aircraft and pilots that do much of their 

flying under either 14 CFR Part 121, or more likely, Part 135. If an ondemand Part 135 operator flies an empty airplane to pick up passengers 

for a subsequent flight, the empty leg is a positioning flight subject to Part 

91, and therefore a general aviation operation. As the previous graph 

illustrates, one-third of general aviation accidents in 2003 that involved 

positioning flights occurred at night. These flights may pose an additional 

risk if the pilot is experiencing the effects of fatigue due to the time of day 

and/or from having already completed a long day of flying.

Day and Night Distribution of Accidents 

by Purpose of Flight, 2003

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

Corporate/Executive

Positioning Flights

Personal/Business

Flight Instruction

Aerial Application

Day

Night
42

Weather

Another source of increased risk for fatal accidents at night is the 

hazard posed by weather. Conditions like fog and low clouds that 

reduce visibility can either form or worsen as the temperature decreases 

at night and water vapor in the air condenses. Clouds, fog, and 

precipitation are an even greater threat to VFR flights at night than 

during the day because the conditions are harder to see and avoid, 

particularly because the illumination that is available from ground lights 

or moonlight is limited. The minimum visibility and cloud clearance 

requirements for visual flight outlined in 14 CFR 91.155 address this 

increased risk by requiring greater clearance for night VFR in class 

G (uncontrolled) airspace. However, 2003 data on accident weather 

conditions indicate that night accidents occurred more than five times 

more often in IMC than in VMC. These data demonstrate that preflight 

planning and obtaining weather information are critical at night—even 

for local flights—because clouds and precipitation are harder to see. 

Phase of Flight

As previously noted, the percentage of general aviation accidents 

that occur at night is roughly equivalent to the percentage of general 

aviation flying estimated to occur at night. However, accidents that 

occur at night are about twice as likely to result in a fatal injury, which 

can be explained partly by differences in typical day and night accident 

profiles.

As noted earlier, most general aviation accidents occur during takeoff 

and landing. In 2003, the combined phases of takeoff and landing 

accounted for 51% of daytime accidents; night accidents do not, 

however, exhibit a similar distribution. As the following chart shows, the 

largest percentage of night-accident initiating events occurred during 

cruise, followed by approach. Night accidents also involved slightly 

higher percentages during descent and go-around.

Percentage of Accidents in VMC/IMC 

by Day and Night, 2003

4%

22%

96%

78%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Day Night

IMC VMC

First Occurence Phase of Flight for 

Day/Night Accident Aircraft, 2003

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

TAXI

TAKEOFF

CLIMB

CRUISE

DESCENT

MANEUVERING

APPROACH

GO-AROUND

LANDING

Day Night

2003 in Depth
43 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

The distribution of fatal accidents by phase of flight shows that injury 

severity is closely related to the impact forces generated by the speed 

and altitude typical of each phase. In 2003, cruise and approach 

phases together accounted for 54% of all fatal night accidents. In 

contrast, none of the accidents that occurred during landing, which 

involve relatively slow speeds and low impact forces, were fatal.

Accident First Occurrence

General aviation accidents at night differ from those that occur during 

the day with regard to how the accident events typically unfold. As the 

following tables show, loss of control in flight, loss of engine power, 

and aircraft system and equipment malfunctions are frequently cited 

as first occurrences in both day and night accidents. However, the 

percentage of accidents citing collision with objects, collisions with 

terrain, and in-flight encounters with weather were noticeably higher 

for accidents that occurred at night.

The earlier discussion of the human visual system and how it functions in 

low light helps explain why higher percentages of night flying accidents 

occur during cruise, approach, and descent, and why accidents at 

night are more likely to involve collision with objects or terrain. 

First Occurence Phase of Flight for 

Fatal Day/Night Accident Aircraft, 2003

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

TAXI

TAKEOFF

CLIMB

CRUISE

DESCENT

MANEUVERING

APPROACH

GO-AROUND

LANDING

Day Night

Accident 

Aircraft

% of Day 

Accident Aircraft 

Loss of control - on ground/water 220 15%

Loss of control - in flight 219 14%

Loss of engine power 163 11%

In flight collision with object 116 8%

Loss of engine power (total) - nonmechanical 112 7%

Hard landing 91 6%

Airframe/component/system failure/malfunction 83 5%

In flight encounter with weather 66 4%

In flight collision with terrain/water 64 4%

Loss of engine power (total) - mechanical failure/malfunction 59 4%

Ten Most Frequently Cited Occurrences in Day Accidents, 2003

Accident

Aircraft

Loss of control - in flight 29 16%

In flight collision with object 25 14%

In flight encounter with weather 22 12%

Loss of engine power 18 10%

Loss of engine power (total) - nonmechanical 18 10%

In flight collision with terrain/water 13 7%

Airframe/component/system failure/malfunction 10 6%

Loss of control - on ground/water 8 4%

Hard landing 6 3%

On ground/water collision with object 5 3%

Ten Most Frequently Cited Occurrences in Night Accidents, 2003

% of night

Accident Aircraft
44

Regulatory Requirements

The FAA has established specific requirements for pilot training and 

currency to address the unique risks associated with night flight. For 

example, 14 CFR 61.109 requires applicants for a private pilot license 

to have logged at least 3 hours of night-flight training, including at 

least one night-cross-country flight greater than 100 nautical miles, 

and at least 10 takeoffs and landings to a full stop at night. Private 

pilot applicants must also have logged at least 3 hours of instruction 

flying solely by reference to aircraft instruments, which is relevant to 

night flying because of the similarities between operating at night 

and in IMC conditions. Once certificated, pilots must also maintain 

a minimum level of activity to be eligible to carry passengers at night. 

The currency requirements of 14 CFR 61.57(b) state that pilots may 

not carry passengers at night unless they have, within the last 90 days, 

performed at least three takeoffs and landings to a full stop during the 

period from 1 hour after sunset until 1 hour before sunrise.

Unlike the United States, many countries require a separate rating to 

fly at night. For example, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, 

and the European Joint Aviation Authority all require pilots to receive 

additional training to fly at night. To fly VFR at night, Australian Civil 

Aviation Orders require40 pilots to have at least 10 hours of flight time 

at night including, among other things, 3 hours of dual instruction 

on a cross-country flight greater than 100 nautical miles in length 

and landing at a remote airfield without sufficient lighting to create 

a discernible horizon. Once they have completed this training, pilots 

must demonstrate their knowledge and proficiency by passing a flight 

test to receive a night visual flight rules (NVFR) rating. Canadian 

requirements41 for a night rating state that applicants must have logged 

a minimum of 20 hours in the same category of aircraft, including at 

least 10 hours of night flying and 10 hours of instrument instruction. 

The 10 hours at night must consist of 5 hours of dual instruction, 

including a cross-country, and 5 hours of solo flight, including at least 

10 takeoffs and landings.

Pilot Experience

Much like flight by reference to instruments, flying at night requires 

practice and can be more difficult for pilots with little experience. 

However, the data that are available for 200342 suggest that many of 

the pilots involved in night accidents were not inexperienced, and the 

median total flight experience of pilots involved in night flying accidents 

was only slightly less than that of all general aviation accident pilots. 

A comparison of night flying experience indicates, however, that the 

median number of flight hours logged at night was higher for pilots 

involved in nighttime accidents. This difference may be another example 

of increased exposure to risk: pilots who spend more time flying at night 

are naturally more likely to be involved in an accident at night than 

pilots who do most of their flying during the day.

40 Australian Civil Aviation Orders, 40.2.2.

41 Canadian Aviation Regulations, 421.42.

42 Total flight hour data were available for 1,639 accident pilots and night flight hour data were available for 1,049 pilots.

Total Night

All Accident Pilots 1,194 hrs 65 hrs

Night Accident Pilots 1,078 hrs 100 hrs

Median Flight Experience

2003 in Depth
45 Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data

Similarly, differences in the distribution of accident pilots with regard to 

their highest level of certification do not appear to be large. 

Conclusion

The 2003 accident record and recent general aviation accident data 

indicate that accidents at night are more likely to be fatal than those 

that occur during daylight. Over the past decade, one-third of all 

general aviation accidents at night resulted in a fatality. The severity 

of night accidents is the result of an increased likelihood of accidents 

involving collision with objects or terrain and in-flight encounters with 

weather, which are in turn the byproduct of low light conditions and 

their effect on human performance. 

Although the human visual system is capable of functioning over a 

wide range of light conditions, it is limited in low light, making pilots 

susceptible to illusory perceptions of speed, altitude, and distance that 

can lead to severe accidents. Much like flight in IMC, safe night flying 

requires training and practice. Pilots can minimize their risks at night 

by maintaining proficiency with aircraft instruments, using all available 

approach guidance while landing, and taking the necessary steps to 

maintain or improve their night vision.

Percentage of Accident Pilots by 

Highest Certificate Day and Night, 2003 

48%

33%

14%

1%

2%

7%

3%

41%

36%

14%

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

Other/None

Student

Private

Commercial

ATP

Day

Night

47 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, etc. 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 updates 

and complete documentation.
48

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 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.
49 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.1 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). 

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
50

Appendix D

1 As of FY 2003

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)

National Transportation Safety Board Regional Offices1