The U.S. aircraft register, updated daily
Accidents · NTSB CEN15LA183 · Final report

Beech 35 accident near Gordonville, Texas, March 29, 2015

On March 29, 2015 at about 9:00 pm local time, a 1947 Beech 35, registered N80462, was substantially damaged in an accident during initial climb near Gordonville, Texas (Cedar Mills airport). It was a personal flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). 2 people were seriously injured and 2 people had minor injuries. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).

The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged

The pilot's decision to depart from an upsloping, soft grass runway at or near the airplane's maximum gross weight and with a high density altitude, which increased the airplane's ground roll and placed the airplane in close proximity to trees during the initial climb, and the pilot's subsequent inability to adequately compensate for gusting wind conditions, which resulted in a stall/mush and impact with trees and terrain during takeoff.

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

What the record shows

Date
March 29, 2015 · about 9:00 pm local time
Place
Gordonville, Texas · Cedar Mills · map
Type
Accident
Injuries
2 people were seriously injured and 2 people had minor injuries.
Weather
visual conditions (good weather)
Aircraft
Beech 35, built 1947 · all 35s on the register
Registration
N80462 · no longer on the register · serial D-62
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)

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

**This report was modified on August 7, 2020. Please see the docket for this accident to view the original report.** The commercial pilot and three passengers were departing in the single-engine airplane from a 3,000-ft-long grass runway. The pilot reported that he thought that the windsock showed light and variable winds, but a nearby airport reported gusting wind conditions about the time of the accident.  He considered taking off downhill toward a lake, but because of the possibility of a tailwind after passing the tree line, he chose to do a soft field takeoff uphill. The airplane lifted off at an indicated airspeed of 80 mph. As it neared the departure end of the runway, the pilot noticed that the airplane was not climbing as expected, the indicated airspeed seemed unreliable, and the controls felt mushy and near stall speed. Witnesses stated that the airplane traveled about halfway down the runway before it became airborne. One witness stated that he didn't think the engine speed was right and that the airplane was gaining altitude slowly. The other witness reported that the airplane wasn't gaining any altitude and that the engine sounded "strong," and did not cut out.  The airplane collided with trees and a building just beyond the runway before impacting terrain.  An examination of the airplane did not reveal any pre-impact abnormalities. Given the pilot's reported weight and the weight of the 28 gallons of fuel that the pilot reported were onboard, the airplane had a remaining useful load of 379 lbs to account for the 3 other passengers. Therefore, it is likely that the airplane was operating at or near its maximum gross weight at the time of the accident. With the additional factors of an upsloping, grass runway, the airplane's performance would have been degraded and the takeoff distance required would likely have been significantly increased. Although the pilot's operating handbook for the airplane did not contain information about takeoff performance from unpaved runways, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) guidance states that any surface that is not hard and smooth increases the ground roll during takeoff due to the inability of the tires to roll smoothly along the runway. FAA guidance also states that the effect of an airplane's gross weight on takeoff distance is significant. Increased gross weight produces several effects on takeoff performance, including higher lift-off speed, greater mass to accelerate, and an increased retarding force (drag and ground friction). According to the airplane's takeoff distance chart, at its maximum gross weight and the atmospheric conditions at the time of the accident, the airplane would have required a ground roll of about 800 ft and a takeoff distance of about 1,400 ft to clear a 50-ft obstacle at the end of the runway. Additionally, the density altitude was about 2,249 feet. Although the exact point of rotation from the runway could not be determined, witnesses reported the airplane lifted off after traveling about 1,500 ft—much longer than the ground roll estimate in the airplane's takeoff distance chart. Even with the extended ground roll, the airplane should have been capable of climbing well above the 40 to 80 ft trees at the end of the runway in the 1,500 ft remaining after liftoff if it had been within its maximum gross weight limits. It is possible that, as the airplane approached the tree line with no margin for error in altitude, the wind gust reported by the pilot could have affected the airplane's ability to maneuver when it was so close to the trees, resulting in the impact. Ultimately, however, the pilot's decision to takeoff without accounting for the effect of the runway condition and the airplane's high gross weight and high density altitude on takeoff performance resulted in a long takeoff ground roll, reduced climb capability, and impact with trees at the end of the runway in gusting wind conditions.

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

  1. Loss of lift during initial climb defining event
  2. Collision with terrain or object (not controlled flight into terrain) during uncontrolled descent
  3. Part(s) separation from AC during post (impact)

The NTSB's findings

  • cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Aircraft capability › Maximum weight › Capability exceeded
  • cause Personnel issues › Action/decision › Info processing/decision › Decision making/judgment › Pilot
  • cause Environmental issues › Physical environment › Runway/land/takeoff/taxi surface › Soft surface › Effect on operation
  • cause Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena › Temp/humidity/pressure › High density altitude › Effect on operation
  • cause Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena › Wind › Gusts › Effect on operation
  • Environmental issues › Physical environment › Object/animal/substance › Tree(s) › Contributed to outcome

Pilot

  • Certificate: commercial pilot
  • Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instrument: airplane
  • Flight time: 2,165 hours in all; 1,513 in this make and model; 30 in the last 90 days; 10 in the last 30 days; 2,044 as pilot in command
  • Last flight review: June 27, 2014
  • Medical certificate: Class 2 (with waivers/limitations)
  • Seat: left
  • Injury: serious injuries

The aircraft

  • Airframe total time: 4,608 hours
  • Last inspection: annual inspection, November 21, 2014; 19 hours since
  • Maximum gross weight: 2,550 lb
  • Seats: 4
  • Landing gear: retractable
  • Engine: Continental E-228-8 (piston); 0 hours total

The flight

  • Departed from: 3T0 Gordonville TX at 10:00 pm
  • Destination: TYR Tyler TX
  • Flight plan: none
  • Runway 25, 3,000 ft by 60 ft

Weather at the time

  • Light: daylight
  • Wind: from 210° at 9 knots, gusting 15
  • Visibility: 10 statute miles
  • Sky: clear
  • Temperature: 82°F (28°C), dew point 59°F (15°C)
  • Altimeter: 29.97 inHg
  • Observation at 8:55 pm from KGYI, 10 miles away

Injuries

FatalSeriousMinorNone
Flight crew1
Passengers12

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.