Bae BAE125 accident near Detroit, Michigan, December 3, 2019
On December 3, 2019 at about 1:33 pm local time, a 1986 Bae BAE125, registered N469RJ, was substantially damaged in an accident during landing (flare/touchdown) near Detroit, Michigan (Coleman A Young Muni airport). It was flown under charter and air-taxi rules (Part 135). 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 pilots’ failure to increase approach speed as recommended for flight in icing conditions, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall and subsequent impact with terrain. Contributing to the accident was the failure of the stall warning system to advise the crew of the approaching stall.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- December 3, 2019 · about 1:33 pm local time
- Place
- Detroit, Michigan · Coleman A Young Muni · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 2 people were on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Bae BAE125 800A, built 1986
- Registration
- N469RJ · registry record · serial 258067
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Flight · charter and air-taxi rules (Part 135)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The airline transport pilot rated crew was conducting an instrument landing system (ILS) approach. The air traffic controller at the departure airport advised them of the icing conditions present so the crew turned on the anti-ice system. The airplane did not have any airspeed oscillations during the approach. The flying pilot reported that the right wing "dropped" and a stall occurred as they approached the runway. He stated, “Although flight crew selected the correct Vref speed for the aircraft weight, they failed to add 10 kts for the ‘operation in icing conditions’ statement, per the aircraft checklist.” The stick shaker should have alerted the crew of the approaching stall. However, the flying pilot said that there was no shaker activation during the flight. The non-flying pilot felt the shaker was activated after the airplane came to rest. The reason for the lack of a stick shaker warning was not determined during the investigation. However, the cockpit voice recording confirmed the pilots’ statements. The accident is consistent with the airplane stalling on approach due to ice buildup, and the accident likely would not have occurred had the pilot’s flown the higher approach speed recommended for flight in icing 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
- Structural icing during approach
- Loss of control in flight during landing (flare/touchdown) defining event
- Collision with terrain or object (not controlled flight into terrain) during uncontrolled descent
The NTSB's findings
- Personnel issues › Action/decision › Action › Forgotten action/omission › Flight crew
- Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Indicating/recording systems › Central warning › Not specified
Pilot
- Certificate: airline transport 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: 18,500 hours in all; 7,000 in this make and model; 150 in the last 90 days; 50 in the last 30 days; 16,500 as pilot in command; 850 on instruments
- Last flight review: August 29, 2019
- Medical certificate: Class 1 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
Co-pilot
- Certificate: airline transport 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: 15,895 hours in all; 2,136 in this make and model; 169 in the last 90 days; 59 in the last 30 days; 13,606 as pilot in command; 500 on instruments
- Last flight review: August 29, 2019
- Medical certificate: Class 1 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 19,714 hours
- Last inspection: continuous airworthiness programme, October 16, 2019
- Maximum gross weight: 27,400 lb
- Seats: 10
- Landing gear: retractable
- Engine 1: Honeywell TFE731-5R-1H (turbofan); 8,251 hours total
- Engine 2: Honeywell TFE731-5R-1H (turbofan); 16,262 hours total
- Operator: Business Jet Managers Inc
The flight
- Departed from: YIP Detroit MI at 1:19 pm
- Destination: DET Detroit MI
- Flight plan: IFR
- Runway 33, 5,090 ft by 100 ft
- A second pilot was aboard
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 280° at 8 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: overcast at 1,000 ft
- Temperature: 28°F (-2°C), dew point 27°F (-3°C)
- Altimeter: 29.86 inHg
- Observation at 1:44 pm from KDET
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 2 |
Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report
22 documents, released by the NTSB on March 15, 2022. View them here, or download them; the NTSB redacts some personal details before release, and this site shows the NTSB's own titles rather than its file names.
The same docket at the NTSB · documents without a copy here are fetched from the NTSB when you open them.
Other NTSB records under N469RJ 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.