Airbus A319 112 incident near New Orleans, Louisiana, May 5, 2015
On May 5, 2015 at about 2:05 am local time, a 2005 Airbus A319 112, registered N941FR, suffered minor damage in an incident during enroute (cruise) near New Orleans, Louisiana. It was flown under scheduled airline rules (Part 121). No one was hurt; 136 people were on board or involved. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The ingression of moisture into the windshield’s laminate layer, which induced electrical arcing in the windshield heating system that subsequently cracked the outer glass pane of the windshield.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 4, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- May 5, 2015 · about 2:05 am local time
- Place
- New Orleans, Louisiana · map
- Type
- Incident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 136 people were on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Airbus A319 112, built 2005 · all A319 112s on the register
- Registration
- N941FR · registry record · serial 2483
- Damage
- Minor damage
- Flight
- Flight · scheduled airline rules (Part 121)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
About 1 hour into the air carrier flight, the flight crew observed arcing and sparks along the bottom of the windshield. The flight crew then heard a popping sound and observed the windshield cracking. The crew subsequently declared an emergency, diverted the flight to another airport, and landed the airplane without further incident. The captain did not remember if any breakers popped or if there was an electronic centralized aircraft monitor message during the event. Postincident examination of the windshield revealed evidence of repairs to the moisture seal along the windshield's entire upper and aft edges, and the windshield exhibited typical signs of aging. The interlayer material adjacent to the edges of the windshield was cloudy and cracked. Evidence of moisture ingression into the laminate around the edges of the windshield was found. The moisture ingression at the lower, forward corner of the windshield had progressed inward to the bus bar. Brown, bubbled interlayer material was found adjacent to the windshield fracture origins, indicating that the windshield heat was powered at the time of fracture and that electrical arcing had occurred. The moisture likely disrupted the electrical path between the bus bar and the windshield's electrical heating film, which resulted in the electrical arcing and subsequent cracking of the windshield's outer glass pane. The operator's maintenance program required periodic inspections of the incident part number windshields in its fleet, which were in accordance with the windshield manufacturer's recommended inspections. A review of the airplane's maintenance records revealed that the windshield was inspected about 11 months before the incident. During this inspection, the windshield's moisture seal was noted to be eroded and was subsequently repaired. The incident windshield was last inspected 8 days before the accident and included a detailed inspection of the moisture seal for cracks and erosion, and no findings were noted. The delamination, discoloration, interlayer microflakes, bubbling, and burn spots were within the specified limits of the airplane maintenance manual. The incident windshield was installed on the airplane at manufacture, and it had accumulated 38,085 flight hours since its installation. The latest windshield design, which entered service 5 years before the incident, includes enhancements that reduce the potential for moisture ingress and electrical arcing. To date, there have been no reported electrical arcing events or age-related failures of the latest windshield design.
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
- Sys/Comp malf/fail (non-power) during enroute (cruise) defining event
- Off-field or emergency landing during emergency descent
The NTSB's findings
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft structures › Windows › windshield system › Flight compartment windows › Failure
- Aircraft › Aircraft structures › Windows › windshield system › Flight compartment windows › Design
Pilot
- Certificate: airline transport pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 8,662 in this make and model
- Last flight review: January 20, 2015
- Medical certificate: Class 1 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
Co-pilot
- Certificate: airline transport pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 587 in this make and model
- Last flight review: April 19, 2015
- Medical certificate: Class 1 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Last inspection: continuous airworthiness programme
- Maximum gross weight: 166,449 lb
- Seats: 144
- Landing gear: retractable
- Engine 1: Cfm CFM56 (turbofan); 33,662 hours total
- Engine 2: Cfm CFM56 (turbofan); 441,385 hours total
- Operator: Frontier Airlines INC
The flight
- Departed from: MCO Orlando FL at 1:02 am
- Destination: LAS Las Vegas NV
- Flight plan: IFR
- A second pilot was aboard
Weather at the time
- Light: night
- Wind: from 130° at 9 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: broken clouds at 10,000 ft
- Temperature: 73°F (23°C), dew point 63°F (17°C)
- Altimeter: 30.14 inHg
- Observation at 1:53 am from KMSY
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cabi | 3 | |||
| Flight crew | 2 | |||
| Passengers | 131 |
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.
About this page
Everything above comes from the NTSB's public accident database: the narrative, probable cause and findings are the NTSB's own words, and the coded tables behind its report (pilot, aircraft, flight, weather, injuries, sequence of events) are written out in plain English. Pilots' ages, home towns and medical details are left out on purpose. The documents and photographs are the NTSB's docket, the folder of records gathered during the investigation, shown as the NTSB released them (the NTSB redacts some personal details first) and listed under the NTSB's own titles. This site's own text never names pilots, passengers or anyone else involved. A preliminary report describes what is known soon after the event and can change; the final report, with the probable cause, usually follows one to two years later and this page is refreshed when it does. Case number CEN15IA225.