Aerospatiale AS350 accident near Lake Charles, Louisiana, June 26, 2010
On June 26, 2010 at about 3:15 pm local time, a Aerospatiale AS350 (helicopter), registered N191EH, was substantially damaged in an accident during landing (flare/touchdown) near Lake Charles, Louisiana (Chennault International Airpor airport). It was an instructional flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). No one was hurt; 2 people were on board or involved. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The flight instructor’s inadvertent entry into ground resonance when demonstrating a hydraulic failure running landing, which resulted in substantial damage to the helicopter. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's and instructor pilot's failure to control the drift and rate of descent during the practice maneuvers.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- June 26, 2010 · about 3:15 pm local time
- Place
- Lake Charles, Louisiana · Chennault International Airpor · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 2 people were on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Aerospatiale AS350 B2 · all AS350s on the register
- Registration
- N191EH · no longer on the register · serial 2505
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Instructional flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The flight instructor was preparing the commercial-rated pilot for a check ride in the helicopter equipped with skid-type landing gear. During one of three running landings to a touchdown, the flight instructor was demonstrating a practice hydraulic failure running landing and the helicopter started to get into ground resonance as he initially touched down. The flight instructor increased power to become briefly airborne and continued the maneuver to a normal practice hydraulic failure running landing. After the ground resonance experience, the flight instructor continued the flight training session for an additional 45 minutes and conducted another hydraulic failure running landing, several slope landings, and five hovering autorotations. Two of the hovering autorotations were described as rough, with an undesired drift to the front left. The flight instructor then left the airport where they had been practicing and returned to their home base airport where they conducted two straight-in autorotations and three 180-degree autorotations, all to a power recovery. After shut-down procedures were completed the two pilots were surprised when they discovered substantial damage, with buckling around the full circumference of the forward part of the tail boom and a crack in the skin at the 6 o’clock position. The flight instructor stated that he thought the damage occurred when they were conducting hovering autorotations. The two pilots reported that they were not injured.
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
What happened, in order
- Abnormal runway contact during landing (flare/touchdown)
- Ground resonance during landing (flare/touchdown)
- Aircraft inspection event
- Autorotation Hard landing defining event
- Abnormal runway contact during landing (landing roll)
The NTSB's findings
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Descent rate › Not attained/maintained
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Directional control › Not attained/maintained
- cause Personnel issues › Action/decision › Action › Incorrect action performance › Instructor/check pilot
- factor Personnel issues › Action/decision › Action › Lack of action › Pilot
- factor Personnel issues › Action/decision › Action › Lack of action › Instructor/check pilot
Flight instructor
- Certificate: commercial pilot
- Ratings: instructor: helicopter; instructor: instrument helicopter; instrument: helicopter; rotorcraft: helicopter
- Flight time: 2,383 hours in all; 655 in this make and model; 45 in the last 90 days; 23 in the last 30 days; 2,258 as pilot in command; 1,373 on instruments
- Last flight review: October 4, 2009
- Medical certificate: Class 1 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
Pilot
- Certificate: commercial pilot
- Ratings: single-engine land; instrument: airplane; instrument: helicopter; rotorcraft: helicopter
- Flight time: 4,185 hours in all; 6 in this make and model
- Medical certificate: Class 1 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 8,980 hours
- Last inspection: approved inspection programme, June 8, 2010; 90 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 4,961 lb
- Seats: 6
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Turbomeca Arriel 1 (turboshaft); 0 hours total
- Operator: Era Helicopters LLC
The flight
- Departed from: LCH Lake Charles LA at 2:36 pm
- Destination: LCH Lake Charles LA
- Runway 15, 10,701 ft by 200 ft
- A second pilot was aboard
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: scat at 2,000 ft
- Temperature: 90°F (32°C), dew point 70°F (21°C)
- Altimeter: 30.02 inHg
- Observation at 2:50 pm from CWF
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 2 |
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.
Other NTSB records under N191EH the same tail number, which may have belonged to a different aircraft at the time
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.