The U.S. aircraft register, updated daily
Accidents · NTSB CEN21LA351 · Final report

Amateur-built Mark IV accident near Rushville, Nebraska, August 2, 2021

On August 2, 2021 at about 9:54 pm local time, a 1997 amateur-built Mark IV, registered N1361S, was substantially damaged in an accident during initial climb near Rushville, Nebraska. It was a personal flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). 2 people were seriously injured. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).

The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged

A total loss of engine power due to an obstruction of airflow to the engine as a result of the landing brake being deployed in flight.

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

What the record shows

Date
August 2, 2021 · about 9:54 pm local time
Place
Rushville, Nebraska · map
Type
Accident
Injuries
2 people were seriously injured.
Weather
visual conditions (good weather)
Aircraft
Amateur-built Mark IV NO SERIES, built 1997
Registration
N1361S · registry record · serial 0074
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)

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

The pilot reported that after takeoff in the experimental airplane, he noticed that all four cylinder head temperatures (CHT) were higher than they should have been as indicated on the engine monitoring device. He noticed that the CHT never stabilized and never decreased in temperature after the takeoff. The pilot attempted to reduce the high CHT with the throttle and mixture and the CHT kept rising. The pilot decided to return to the departure airport. During the flight back to the airport, the CHT still kept rising, and the engine ceased producing power. The pilot maneuvered the airplane for a forced landing to an open grass field surrounded by rolling prairie and trees. During the forced landing, the nose wheel and the main landing gear collapsed, and the airplane came to rest on the fuselage. Postaccident examination of the landing brake actuator revealed that it likely failed due to compressive overload on the actuator while positioned in the fully extended position. The actuator extension tube was found positioned about midway between the extended and retracted positions The flanges on the nut were fractured in overstress consistent with a compression overload. The brush that is normally attached to the nut above the flange was found in the fully retracted position, indicating that after the nut flanges fractured, the extension tube likely moved to the fully retracted position, pushing the brush along with it. Based on the examination of the landing brake actuator, the landing brake was likely fully extended at the time of the accident. The extended landing brake would have blocked airflow to the engine, causing the engine to overheat and cease producing power. If a cockpit indication system for the landing brake had been installed, the pilot likely could have known the status of the landing brake during the flight and thus retract it. It is likely that the pilot either forgot to retract the landing brake after the previous landing or the pilot may have inadvertently activated it before the loss of engine power. Based on the available evidence it could not be determined exactly when the landing brake was deployed.

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 engine power (total) during initial climb defining event
  2. Off-field or emergency landing during emergency descent
  3. Landing gear collapse during landing
  4. Collision during takeoff/land during landing

The NTSB's findings

  • Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Use of equip/system › Pilot
  • Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena › Temp/humidity/pressure › High temperature › Effect on equipment
  • Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Indicating/recording systems › Instrument panel › Not installed/available
  • Personnel issues › Action/decision › Action › Incorrect action performance › Pilot
  • Aircraft › Aircraft power plant › Engine (reciprocating) › (general) › Failure
  • Aircraft › Aircraft power plant › Engine (reciprocating) › (general) › Capability exceeded

Pilot

  • Certificate: commercial pilot
  • Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instrument: airplane
  • Flight time: 788 hours in all; 300 in this make and model; 20 in the last 90 days; 11 in the last 30 days; 727 as pilot in command
  • Last flight review: April 26, 2020
  • Medical certificate: Class 2 (with waivers/limitations)
  • Seat: left
  • Injury: serious injuries

The aircraft

  • Airframe total time: 854 hours
  • Last inspection: annual inspection, March 1, 2021
  • Maximum gross weight: 2,200 lb
  • Seats: 2
  • Landing gear: retractable
  • Engine: Lycoming Engines O-360-EXP (piston); 854 hours total

The flight

  • Departed from: GRN Gordon NE at 3:45 pm
  • Destination: LND Lander WY
  • Flight plan: none

Weather at the time

  • Light: daylight
  • Visibility: 9 statute miles
  • Sky: clear
  • Temperature: 95°F (35°C), dew point 39°F (4°C)
  • Altimeter: 30.08 inHg
  • Observation at 3:52 pm from KIEN, 10 miles away

Weather report (METAR): KIEN 022152Z AUTO VRB06KT 9SM CLR 35/04 A3008 RMK AO2 SLP151 T03500044 $

Injuries

FatalSeriousMinorNone
Flight crew1
Passengers1

Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report

11 documents, released by the NTSB on February 24, 2023. 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.

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.