Piper PA28-200 accident near Jonesboro, Arkansas, June 10, 2015
On June 10, 2015 at about 10:40 am local time, a 1976 Piper PA28-200, registered N872CS, was substantially damaged in an accident during enroute (climb to cruise) near Jonesboro, Arkansas (Jonesboro Municipal Airport). It was a personal 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
Maintenance personnel's improper engine oil drain valve installation, which led to engine oil exhaustion and the subsequent loss of engine power after takeoff at an altitude too low for the pilot to execute a forced landing in a suitable area.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- June 10, 2015 · about 10:40 am local time
- Place
- Jonesboro, Arkansas · Jonesboro Municipal Airport · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 2 people were on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Piper PA28-200, built 1976 · all PA28-200s on the register
- Registration
- N872CS · no longer on the register · serial 28R-7635304
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The private pilot was taking off for a personal flight. The pilot reported that, about 3 to 5 minutes after takeoff, the oil light illuminated and that, shortly thereafter, while the airplane was about 1,800 ft mean sea level, the oil pressure gauge indicated 0. About 20 to 30 seconds later, a total loss of engine power occurred. The pilot attempted to return to the departure airport but was unable to reach the runway due to insufficient altitude. The pilot subsequently conducted a forced landing in a parking lot, during which the airplane impacted a sign pole. Examination of the airplane revealed that, during retraction, the nose landing gear (NLG) had contacted and broken the engine oil drain valve, which was the incorrect part number. The airplane manufacturer had previously issued a service letter, which noted that, when the wrong part number drain valve was installed, it was possible that during NLG retraction the valve may contact the NLG drag link, become actuated, and allow the oil to be drained out in flight. The accident flight was the first flight since the drain valve had been replaced the previous day during a 100-hour/annual inspection. Given the evidence, maintenance personnel did not install the correct part number drain valve during the inspection, which resulted in it contacting the NLG and breaking. The oil then drained from the broken valve, which resulted in oil exhaustion and the subsequent loss of engine power.
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
- Aircraft maintenance event during prior to flight
- Part(s) separation from AC during enroute (climb to cruise)
- Powerplant sys/comp malf/fail during enroute (climb to cruise) defining event
- Loss of engine power (total) during enroute (climb to cruise)
- Loss of engine power (total) during emergency descent
- Collision with terrain or object (not controlled flight into terrain) during landing
The NTSB's findings
- cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Maintenance › Replacement › Maintenance personnel
- cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Maintenance › Scheduled/routine maintenance › Maintenance personnel
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft power plant › Engine (reciprocating) › Recip eng oil sys › Incorrect service/maintenance
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Altitude › Not specified
- Environmental issues › Physical environment › Object/animal/substance › Pole › Contributed to outcome
Pilot
- Certificate: private
- Ratings: single-engine land; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 273 hours in all; 36 in this make and model; 51 in the last 90 days; 17 in the last 30 days; 212 as pilot in command
- Last flight review: December 14, 2014
- Medical certificate: Class 2 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
Pilot-Rated Passenger
- Certificate: private
- Ratings: single-engine land
- Flight time: 77 hours in all; 9 in this make and model; 45 in the last 90 days; 31 in the last 30 days; 69 as pilot in command
- Last flight review: May 15, 2015
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 3,831.5 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, June 9, 2015
- Maximum gross weight: 2,650 lb
- Seats: 4
- Landing gear: retractable
- Engine: Lycoming IO-360-C1C (piston); 1,832 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: JBR Jonesboro AR at 10:35 am
- Destination: SBR Stillwater OK
- Flight plan: none
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 68°F (20°C), dew point 66°F (19°C)
- Altimeter: 29.86 inHg
- Observation at 10:40 am from JBR, 1 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.