Glasair Aviation USA LLC SPORTSMAN GS-2 accident near Castle Rock, Colorado, October 29, 2013
On October 29, 2013 at about 1:00 am local time, a 2012 Glasair Aviation USA LLC SPORTSMAN GS-2, registered N535SP, was substantially damaged in an accident during enroute near Castle Rock, Colorado. It was a positioning flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). 1 person was seriously injured. The weather was instrument conditions (cloud, fog or low visibility).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The pilot’s improper decision to continue flight into known icing conditions, which adversely affected the airplane’s performance and resulted in a loss of airplane control.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- October 29, 2013 · about 1:00 am local time
- Place
- Castle Rock, Colorado · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- 1 person was seriously injured.
- Weather
- instrument conditions (cloud, fog or low visibility)
- Aircraft
- Glasair Aviation USA LLC SPORTSMAN GS-2, built 2012
- Registration
- N535SP · no longer on the register · serial 7369
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Positioning flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
A review of air traffic control (ATC) recordings indicated that, after the airplane crossed over the mountains, the pilot checked in with the Denver terminal radar approach controller and expressed concern about the weather at her destination airport. After receiving weather for a closer airport, which included visibility 1.5 miles in mist with a 400-foot overcast ceiling, the pilot changed her destination to that airport. About 3 minutes later, the pilot asked the controller if other pilots had reported icing during descent, and the controller responded that other pilots had reported icing in cloud tops about 9,000 feet mean sea level (msl). The pilot advised that she wanted to change back to her original destination, and, shortly later, the controller cleared the approach. About 20 minutes later, the pilot advised the controller that the airplane was "picking up rime ice," and, about 3 minutes later, she again asked for clearance to the intermediate airport; the controller cleared that approach. During the approach, the controller issued three low altitude alerts because the airplane was not maintaining the assigned altitudes, and he provided the pilot with the weather information for the destination airport, which included visibility 2 miles in mist, 400 feet overcast, and temperature and dew point below freezing at -1° C. The pilot reported being established on the approach about 3 miles from the final approach fix shortly before the controller issued the third low altitude alert. After this alert, the pilot responded that the airplane was climbing and maintaining altitude and was established on the approach. Shortly later, the controller asked the pilot to indicate the airplane's altitude, but the pilot did not respond. Radar track data indicated that the airplane was about 6,800 feet msl before radar and radio contact were lost. The airplane subsequently descended and impacted terrain. The airplane likely accumulated ice when the pilot continued flight into known icing conditions, which adversely affected its performance and resulted in a loss of airplane control. ATC services were adequate, and no deficiencies were noted.
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
- Structural icing 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 Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena › Temp/humidity/pressure › Conducive to structural icing › Response/compensation
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › (general) › Attain/maintain not possible
Pilot
- Certificate: flight instructor, commercial pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instructor: airplane multi-engine; instructor: airplane single-engine; instructor: instrument airplane; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 5,055 hours in all; 903 in this make and model; 218 in the last 90 days; 81 in the last 30 days; 4,986 as pilot in command; 3,236 on instruments
- Medical certificate: Class 2 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: serious injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 0 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, January 7, 2013; 0 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 2,500 lb
- Seats: 4
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Lycoming IO-390-X (piston); 0 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: HDN Hayden CO at 11:45 pm
- Destination: FTG Denver CO
- Flight plan: VFR then IFR
Weather at the time
- Light: dusk
- Wind: from 110° at 6 knots
- Visibility: 2 statute miles
- Sky: overcast at 400 ft; ovct at 400 ft
- Temperature: 30°F (-1°C), dew point 30°F (-1°C)
- Altimeter: 30.03 inHg
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 1 |
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.
