Amateur-built SONEX accident near Lodi, Wisconsin, July 19, 2016
On July 19, 2016, a amateur-built SONEX, registered N393SX, was substantially damaged in an accident during enroute near Lodi, Wisconsin (Lodi Lakeland airport). It was a personal flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). No one was hurt; 1 person was on board or involved. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The separated rocker arm assembly for undetermined reasons, which resulted in the partial loss of engine power and led to the landing gear collapsing during the subsequent forced landing.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- July 19, 2016
- Place
- Lodi, Wisconsin · Lodi Lakeland · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 1 person was on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Amateur-built SONEX
- Registration
- N393SX · no longer on the register · serial 393
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
During a local flight, the pilot of an experimental amateur-built airplane had a partial engine power loss. He said that the engine sounded different but remained running. He turned the airplane back to the airport and noted he was high and fast. He indicated that he bled off airspeed, as he wanted to avoid buildings before landing. He subsequently reduced power and performed a landing with calm wind present. The airplane's nose and left main landing gear collapsed after touchdown, the airplane skidded to the north side of the runway, and exited the runway into a ditch where it sustained the substantial damage. The airplane was powered by an engine that the pilot/builder assembled from a kit. The airplane accumulated 25 hours of flight time at the time of the accident. The kit manufacturer engine assembly and installation manual had specific rocker shaft instructions that included procedures on how to adjust and install rocker arms. An examination revealed that the threaded shaft of a rocker arm swivel pad had separated at a point on the shaft where there was a cross drilled hole. The remaining rocker arms did not exhibit the appearance of arm adjustment in accordance with the kit manufacturer's assembly manual. Detailed examination of the failed valve adjuster showed it separated into two portions approximately mid length in the shank area between the two threaded areas. This location was coincident with a hole drilled crosswise through the shank of the valve adjuster. The fracture surfaces exhibited crack arrest patterns consistent with a fatigue fracture. The origin of the fatigue fracture appears to be coincident with the edge of the cross-drilled hole. Examination of the exemplar valve adjuster and specifically the cross-drilled hole revealed a roughly finished surface with a pronounced burr around the circumference of the hole. A professional materials engineering publication, in part, stated, "The fatigue strength of components can be reduced merely by the presence of a drilled hole; it is further reduced by failure to remove burrs (incurred during drilling) from the hole edges. Fractures originating at drilled holes are common in complex parts containing internal, intersecting machined passages because of the difficulty and expense of providing adequate break-edge radii at such locations. It could not be determined if the failure of the rocker arm was due to the misassembly of the rocker arm assembly and/or the toolmarks left by the manufacturing process.
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
- Powerplant sys/comp malf/fail during enroute
- Loss of engine power (partial) during enroute defining event
- Off-field or emergency landing during emergency descent
- Collision during takeoff/land during landing
The NTSB's findings
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft power plant › Engine (reciprocating) › Recip eng cyl section › Failure
- Personnel issues › Task performance › Maintenance › Installation › Owner/builder
- Personnel issues › Task performance › Maintenance › Fabrication › Other/unknown
Pilot
- Certificate: sport pilot
- Ratings: single-engine land
- Flight time: 180 hours in all; 180 as pilot in command
- Last flight review: October 30, 2015
- Medical certificate: Sport Pilot
- Seat: unk
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 25 hours
- Last inspection: condition inspection, December 4, 2015
- Maximum gross weight: 1,100 lb
- Seats: 2
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Aerovee (piston); 25 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: 9WN5 Lodi WI
- Destination: 9WN5 Lodi WI
- Flight plan: none
- Runway 09, 1,875 ft by 105 ft
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: a few clouds at 5,500 ft
- Temperature: 81°F (27°C), dew point 63°F (17°C)
- Altimeter: 30.14 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.
Other NTSB records under N393SX the same tail number, which may have belonged to a different aircraft at the time
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.
