Cessna U206 accident near Maunaloa, Hawaii, December 10, 2017

The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record

The instrument-rated private pilot was conducting a personal flight under visual flight rules (VFR) from one island to the airplane's home base on another island with one passenger onboard. The airport's automated weather observation system reported marginal VFR (MVFR) conditions throughout the morning of the accident, and an AIRMET Sierra was valid for the area of the accident site for mountain obscuration, widespread MVFR ceilings, and scattered rain showers. However, there was no evidence to suggest that the pilot had obtained a weather briefing from an official, access-controlled source before departing on the flight. While en route and receiving VFR flight following services from air traffic control, the pilot requested an instrument (VOR-A) approach to the destination airport. The pilot also reported having the most recent ATIS weather information Juliet, issued at 1055. The ATIS reported 4 miles of visibility with light rain and mist, along with a ceiling of 1,400 ft broken with a broken cloud layer at 3,300 ft. The controller provided the pilot with vectors to initiate the approach and advised him to maintain VFR, which the pilot acknowledged. Two minutes later, the controller issued a frequency change to the destination airport control tower. About 4 minutes after that, the tower controller advised the pilot that the airplane was south of the final approach course. The pilot indicated that he was correcting and was "right at the edge of VFR," but that he had "pretty good visibility." There were no further communications from the accident airplane and radar contact was lost shortly thereafter. The airplane impacted remote mountainous terrain about 1,285 ft msl and about 3.35 miles southwest of the runway threshold at the destination airport; the airplane was destroyed by a postimpact fire. Postaccident examination of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of preimpact mechanical anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. A photo taken by first responders about 1.5 hours after the accident showed a low cloud layer at the accident site. Damage to 20-ft-tall trees indicated that the airplane impacted them and then struck a second set of trees that were about 15 ft tall. Multiple tree branches with propeller cut marks were found along the wreckage path. The wreckage was located on the western side of a ridge with dirt and low growth vegetation that crested about 100 ft above the surrounding area, with about a 50° incline. It is likely that, during the approach, the pilot continued visual fight into an area of instrument meteorological conditions consisting of clouds and showers, which resulted in a loss of visual reference and subsequent controlled flight into terrain. The pilot's logbook was not available for review, and neither his recency of experience nor instrument experience could be determined. The flight instructor who conducted his most recent flight review, about 8 months before the accident, did not endorse the pilot for instrument flight. Autopsy of the pilot identified severe heart disease, which placed the pilot at risk of sudden acute symptoms such as chest pain, palpitations, shortness of breath, or fainting. Flight track information and the pilot's communication with air traffic control indicate that he was actively maneuvering the airplane, likely to avoid clouds and attempt to remain in visual conditions, until it impacted terrain. Thus, it is unlikely that symptoms from the heart disease contributed to the accident.

The complete narrative as the NTSB published it. The NTSB's docket holds the report as a PDF and any photographs, statements and other documents from the investigation.