The U.S. aircraft register, updated daily
Accidents · NTSB BFO94LA028 · Final report

Mitsubishi MU-3 accident near Teterboro, New Jersey, January 20, 1994

On January 20, 1994 at about 2:00 pm local time, a Mitsubishi MU-3, registered N306P, was substantially damaged in an accident near Teterboro, New Jersey (Teterboro airport). It was an executive or corporate flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). No one was hurt; 5 people were on board or involved. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).

The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged

The pilot selected unsuitable terrain for landing. The runway conditions were factors.

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

What the record shows

Date
January 20, 1994 · about 2:00 pm local time
Place
Teterboro, New Jersey · Teterboro
Type
Accident
Injuries
No one was hurt; 5 people were on board or involved.
Weather
visual conditions (good weather)
Aircraft
Mitsubishi MU-3
Registration
N306P · registry record · serial A009SA
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Executive or corporate flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)

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

The airplane landed on a runway NOTAM'd to have 1/2 inch snow and ice and poor airplane braking for all types aircraft. The same report was on ATIS, and the same information was being provided by the ATC tower controller. The pilot said that when the airplane was slowing from 80 to 40 knots, braking was poor. He said that it was too late to execute a go-around. At 40 knots, the airplane did not seem to be slowing and the brakes were not effective. As the end of the runway was getting closer, the pilot elected to steer the airplane off the runway into a snow bank to avoid colliding with the runway's approach lights. The airplane's nose gear collapsed when the airplane collided with the snow bank.

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: airline transport pilot
  • Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instructor: airplane multi-engine; instructor: airplane single-engine; instructor: instrument airplane; instrument: airplane
  • Flight time: 11,978 hours in all; 676 in this make and model; 65 in the last 90 days; 32 in the last 30 days; 11,504 as pilot in command; 3,856 on instruments
  • Medical certificate: Class 2 (valid medical--w/ waivers/lim.)
  • Seat: left

The aircraft

  • Airframe total time: 3,437 hours
  • Last inspection: continuous airworthiness programme, October 1, 1993; 56 hours since
  • Maximum gross weight: 15,570 lb
  • Seats: 10
  • Landing gear: retractable
  • Engine: P&W JT15D-4D (turbofan); 0 hours total

The flight

  • Departed from: CHA Chattanooga TN at 12:00 pm
  • Flight plan: IFR
  • Runway 24, 6,000 ft by 150 ft
  • A second pilot was aboard

Weather at the time

  • Light: daylight
  • Wind: from 300° at 7 knots
  • Visibility: 10 statute miles
  • Sky: broken clouds at 25,000 ft; scat at 8,000 ft
  • Temperature: 3°F (-16°C), dew point 0°F (-18°C)
  • Altimeter: 30.00 inHg
  • Observation at 2:10 pm from TET

Injuries

FatalSeriousMinorNone
Crew2
Passengers3

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.