The U.S. aircraft register, updated daily
Accidents · NTSB BFO92LA110 · Final report

Cessna 152 accident near Belmont, New Hampshire, July 22, 1992

On July 22, 1992 at about 7:20 pm local time, a Cessna 152, registered N93361, was substantially damaged in an accident near Belmont, New Hampshire. It was an instructional flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). 1 person had minor injuries. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).

The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged

INADEQUATE IN-FLIGHT PLANNING/DECISION BY THE PILOT.

Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.

What the record shows

Date
July 22, 1992 · about 7:20 pm local time
Place
Belmont, New Hampshire
Type
Accident
Injuries
1 person had minor injuries.
Weather
visual conditions (good weather)
Aircraft
Cessna 152 · all 152s on the register
Registration
N93361 · no longer on the register · serial 15285473
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Instructional flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)

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

DURING A SUPERVISED SOLO CROSS COUNTRY, THE FLIGHT WAS DIVERTED FROM THE PLANNED FLIGHT ROUTE. THE PILOT STATED THAT FUEL CONSUMPTION WAS GREATER THAN WHAT SHE HAD PLANNED FOR. THE PILOT SAID SHE REALIZED THE AIRPLANE DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH FUEL TO MAKE HER NEXT DESTINATION, SO SHE STARTED TO DIVERT TO AN ALTERNATE LANDING SITE. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, AT APPROXIMATELY 2,000 FEET MEAN SEA LEVEL, THE ENGINE QUIT. THE PILOT MADE A FORCED LANDING IN A FIELD. THE ON SCENE INVESTIGATION REVEALED THERE WAS NO FUEL IN THE FUEL TANKS. THE PILOT REPORTED THERE WERE NO AIRPLANE MECHANICAL MALFUNCTIONS. THE PILOT STATED IN THE RECOMMENDATION SECTION OF THE ACCIDENT REPORT, ' (1) THINGS DIDN'T GO AS PLANNED: PLAN FUEL STOPS FOR WORST POSSIBLE SCENARIO, AND (2) MONITORED MORE CLOSELY THE TIME SPENT IN THE AIR INSTEAD OF WHAT THE FUEL GAUGES READ.' THE PILOT'S FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR STATED THAT HE ASSUMED SHE WOULD REFUEL AFTER THE FIRST LEG OF THE FLIGHT. THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR STATED, IN HINDSIGHT, HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT WHEN AND WHERE THE PILOT SHOULD REFUEL.

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.

The factual record from the NTSB's investigation tables, in plain English

Pilot

  • Certificate: student
  • Flight time: 38 hours in all; 38 in this make and model; 38 in the last 90 days; 20 in the last 30 days
  • Medical certificate: Class 1 (valid medical--no waivers/lim.)
  • Seat: left

The aircraft

  • Airframe total time: 5,170 hours
  • Last inspection: annual inspection, June 19, 1992; 40 hours since
  • Maximum gross weight: 1,670 lb
  • Seats: 2
  • Landing gear: fixed
  • Engine: Lycoming O-235-L2C (piston); 0 hours total
  • Operator: Sanford Air Incorporated

The flight

  • Departed from: BGR Bangor ME at 4:30 pm
  • Destination: CON Concord NH
  • Flight plan: none
  • Runway 0

Weather at the time

  • Light: daylight
  • Wind: from 300° at 12 knots
  • Visibility: 15 statute miles
  • Sky: broken clouds at 25,000 ft; scat at 8,000 ft
  • Temperature: 73°F (23°C), dew point 43°F (6°C)
  • Altimeter: 30.00 inHg
  • Observation at 6:50 pm from BGR, 1 miles away

Injuries

FatalSeriousMinorNone
Crew1

Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report

The docket, the folder of records gathered during an investigation (maintenance records, photographs, witness statements, examinations), has not been read from the NTSB for this case yet; the list appears here once it has. Open the docket at the NTSB.

Everything on this page comes from the NTSB's public records. The narrative, probable cause and findings are the NTSB's own words; the coded tables behind the report are written out in plain English, with pilots' ages, home towns and medical details left out. The documents and photographs are the NTSB's docket, shown as the NTSB released them. This site's own text never names anyone involved. A preliminary report can change; the final report usually follows one to two years later, and the page is refreshed when it does.