Socata TBM700 accident near Evart, Michigan, April 14, 2015
On April 14, 2015 at about 3:45 pm local time, a 2006 Socata TBM700, registered N850WM, was substantially damaged in an accident during landing (flare/touchdown) near Evart, Michigan (Evart Municipal 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 pilot's failure to follow the Before Landing checklist and to extend the landing gear and the flight instructor’s inadequate supervision, which resulted in a gear-up landing.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- April 14, 2015 · about 3:45 pm local time
- Place
- Evart, Michigan · Evart Municipal Airport · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 2 people were on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Socata TBM700, built 2006 · all TBM700s on the register
- Registration
- N850WM · registry record · serial 353
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Instructional flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The flight instructor and commercial pilot were conducting a local instructional flight as part of an insurance requirement. The flight instructor stated that, after performing pattern work, the pilot performed two landings and that, while performing the approach for a third landing with 0 degree of flaps, the landing gear were not extended at midfield. He stated that this had also happened on the previous two landings. He added that, as the airplane descended into ground effect, he and the pilot realized that the landing gear were not down and "took immediate steps to go around"; however, the airplane contacted the runway surface with the gear up. The pilot stated that he was "distracted" by watching the airplane's airspeed and attitude and that, during touchdown, he heard the airplane contact the runway and that he then applied power to initiate an aborted landing because "there was not much runway left." Given that the flight instructor had noted that the pilot had not extended the landing gear by midfield on the previous two landings, he should have had a heightened focus on the gear's position during the subsequent/accident landing. Further, the Before Landing checklist stated to extend the landing gear and verify that the landing gear position indicator lights were green. If the pilot had followed the Before Landing checklist or if the flight instructor had been adequately supervising the pilot, the landing gear likely would have been extended upon landing.
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
- Landing gear not configured during landing (flare/touchdown) defining event
- Abnormal runway contact during landing (flare/touchdown)
- Collision during takeoff/land during landing (flare/touchdown)
The NTSB's findings
- cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Use of checklist › Student/instructed pilot
- cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Use of equip/system › Student/instructed pilot
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Configuration › Not attained/maintained
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Landing gear system › Gear extension and retract sys › Not used/operated
- cause Personnel issues › Psychological › Attention/monitoring › Monitoring other person › Instructor/check pilot
Pilot
- Certificate: commercial pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instrument: airplane; instrument: helicopter; rotorcraft: helicopter
- Flight time: 4,800 hours in all; 25 in this make and model
- Last flight review: January 17, 2015
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
Flight instructor
- Certificate: flight instructor, commercial pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; single-engine sea; instructor: airplane multi-engine; instructor: airplane single-engine; instructor: instrument airplane; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 8,000 hours in all; 408 in this make and model; 124 in the last 90 days; 20 in the last 30 days; 7,950 as pilot in command; 5,153 on instruments
- Last flight review: August 8, 2013
- Medical certificate: Class 2 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Last inspection: inspection type not recorded, March 2, 2015
- Maximum gross weight: 7,396 lb
- Seats: 6
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Pratt&Whitney PT6A-66D (turboprop); 0 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: 9C8 Evart MI at 3:00 pm
- Destination: 9C8 Evart MI
- Flight plan: none
- Runway 24, 3,804 ft by 75 ft
- A second pilot was aboard
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 110° at 3 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 59°F (15°C), dew point 23°F (-5°C)
- Altimeter: 30.26 inHg
- Observation at 3:34 pm from RQB, 14 miles away
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.
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.