Cirrus Design CORP SR20 accident near Crystal Lake, Illinois, November 26, 2011
On November 26, 2011 at about 4:26 pm local time, a Cirrus Design CORP SR20, registered N223CD, was substantially damaged in an accident during enroute near Crystal Lake, Illinois (Dupage Airport). It was a personal flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). 4 people were killed. The weather was instrument conditions (cloud, fog or low visibility).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The noninstrument-rated pilot's decision to continue flight in instrument meteorological conditions, which resulted in the pilot’s spatial disorientation and loss of control of the airplane.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- November 26, 2011 · about 4:26 pm local time
- Place
- Crystal Lake, Illinois · Dupage Airport · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- 4 people were killed.
- Weather
- instrument conditions (cloud, fog or low visibility)
- Aircraft
- Cirrus Design CORP SR20
- Registration
- N223CD · registry record · serial 1110
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The noninstrument-rated pilot was conducting the accident flight under visual flight rules (VFR) without a flight plan. The pilot contacted the tower air traffic controller at the intended destination airport and inquired about landing. The controller informed him that the airport was currently under instrument flight rules (IFR). About 30 seconds later, the pilot informed the controller that he had inadvertently flown over the airport. The controller ultimately cleared the flight to land; however, the pilot decided not to land, informing the controller that he did not want to get delayed at the airport due to the weather. The pilot subsequently told the controller that the flight was “in and out of the clouds.” After asking the pilot if he was IFR qualified (and learning that the pilot was not), the controller transferred the flight to the local radar-equipped approach control facility for further assistance. That controller advised the pilot of several airports in the vicinity that were under VFR. After initially indicating that he would divert to one of those airports, the pilot told the controller that he did not want to “mess with the weather” and did not want to “get stuck in here,” and he declined to proceed to that airport. Radar data depicted that, shortly after the pilot’s radio transmission, the airplane entered a gentle right turn. About 90 seconds later, the right turn tightened abruptly, consistent with the airplane entering a steep spiral. The last 19 seconds of radar data depicted the airplane entering a climb of about 2,500 feet per minute (fpm) followed by an approximate 3,600-fpm descent. Witnesses reported hearing an airplane overhead, but they were not able to see it due to the cloud cover. They described the sound as similar to an airplane performing aerobatics. The witnesses subsequently observed the airplane below the clouds in a steep, nose-down attitude before it struck the ground. Based on reported weather conditions in the vicinity of the accident site, the flight encountered instrument meteorological conditions. A postaccident examination of the airplane did not reveal any anomalies consistent with a preimpact failure or malfunction.
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
- VFR encounter with IMC during enroute
- Loss of control in flight during enroute defining event
- Collision with terrain or object (not controlled flight into terrain) during uncontrolled descent
The NTSB's findings
- cause Personnel issues › Action/decision › Info processing/decision › Decision making/judgment › Pilot
- cause Personnel issues › Psychological › Perception/orientation/illusio › Spatial disorientation › Pilot
- cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Aircraft control › Pilot
- Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena › Ceiling/visibility/precip › Below VFR minima › Effect on operation
Pilot
- Certificate: private
- Ratings: single-engine land
- Flight time: 207 hours in all; 114 in this make and model; 27 in the last 90 days; 11 in the last 30 days; 153 as pilot in command; 0 on instruments
- Last flight review: April 22, 2010
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: fatal
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 1,759 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, April 5, 2011; 154 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 2,900 lb
- Seats: 4
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Continental IO-360-ES (piston); 0 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: MZZ Marion IN at 2:30 pm
- Destination: DPA West Chicago IL
- Flight plan: none
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 170° at 11 knots
- Visibility: 2 statute miles
- Sky: overcast at 900 ft
- Temperature: 50°F (10°C), dew point 46°F (8°C)
- Altimeter: 29.85 inHg
- Observation at 4:29 pm from DPA, 22 miles away
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 1 | |||
| Passengers | 3 |
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.
