Fairchild SA227-AT accident near Pewaukee, Wisconsin, November 15, 2022
On November 15, 2022 at about 9:00 pm local time, a 1985 Fairchild SA227-AT, registered N247DH, was substantially damaged in an accident during approach (IFR final approach) near Pewaukee, Wisconsin (Waukesha County airport). It was a business flight under charter and air-taxi rules (Part 135). 2 people had minor injuries; 1 other was unhurt. The weather was instrument conditions (cloud, fog or low visibility).
Preview. This page is not yet listed for search engines.
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The flight crew’s failure to maintain adequate airspeed and their exceedance of the airplane’s critical angle of attack during the instrument approach, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall. Contributing to the accident was an undetermined anomaly in the airplane flight director system which resulted in the flight crew likely becoming fixated on the anomaly at the expense of airspeed control.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 4, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- November 15, 2022 · about 9:00 pm local time
- Place
- Pewaukee, Wisconsin · Waukesha County · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- 2 people had minor injuries; 1 other was unhurt.
- Weather
- instrument conditions (cloud, fog or low visibility)
- Aircraft
- Fairchild SA227-AT, built 1985 · all SA227-ATs on the register
- Registration
- N247DH · no longer on the register · serial AT-626B
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Business flight · charter and air-taxi rules (Part 135)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The flight crew reported that while on an instrument landing system (ILS) approach with the autopilot system engaged in approach mode, they noticed that the airplane flight director indicated a climbing right turn but the airplane was still tracking the localizer and glideslope. The airplane’s ice protection was on, and no visible ice had accumulated. They reported that they disconnected the autopilot, and the airplane suddenly rolled to the right. They attempted to regain control by increasing engine power and applying counteractive control inputs, but the airplane impacted the ground in a near-wings-level attitude. Examination of the airplane’s primary flight control system and engines after the accident did not reveal any defects. The rudder trim was neutral, and the pitch trim was airplane nose up. Aileron trim could not be determined. Examination of the airplane’s autopilot components revealed deficiencies in the yaw damper system that rendered it inoperative; however, on the accident airplane the yaw damper system was an optional component and was not necessary for airplane operation. Testing of the remaining autopilot components revealed some deficiencies that could have degraded performance but would not have resulted in a complete failure of the automatic flight control system. A performance study based on ADS-B data showed that the airplane intercepted the localizer and glideslope for the ILS approach and was descending in a level attitude. While maintaining the ILS approach guidance, the airplane slowed below the 130 knots (kts) airspeed that the crew stated was the desired approach speed. The airspeed continued to slow to about 102 kts when the ADS-B data indicated that the airplane rolled slightly to the right, likely corresponding to the flight crew’s description of events after they disconnected the autopilot. The airplane continued to slow below 100 kts and the airplane was at a bank angle of 27° right wing down. Subsequently, the descent rate increased to over 4,000 ft/min and airspeed increased while groundspeed remained between 80 and 90 kts. The airplane rolled sharply to the left. The sudden roll and loss of altitude after reaching a low airspeed was consistent with an aerodynamic stall. Based on the available evidence, the airplane entered an inadvertent aerodynamic stall due to exceedance of the critical angle of attack after the flight crew allowed the airspeed to decay during the instrument approach. Although an unknown anomaly in the flight director system could have resulted in the crew becoming fixated on an errant flight director indication at the expense of airspeed control, the postaccident component examination was not able to explain the errant flight director indication that the flight crew described.
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
- Loss of control in flight during approach (IFR final approach) defining event
The NTSB's findings
- Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Navigation system › Attitude & direction › Unknown/Not determined
- Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Airspeed › Not attained/maintained
- Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Angle of attack › Capability exceeded
- Personnel issues › Action/decision › Info processing/decision › Identification/recognition › Flight crew
Pilot
- Certificate: airline transport pilot, commercial pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instructor: airplane single-engine; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 2,848 hours in all; 130,016 in this make and model; 176 in the last 90 days; 57 in the last 30 days; 2,148 as pilot in command; 566 on instruments
- Medical certificate: Class 1 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: minor injuries
Co-pilot
- Certificate: commercial pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 1,320 hours in all; 530,527 in this make and model; 37 in the last 90 days; 6 in the last 30 days; 712 as pilot in command; 0 on instruments
- Medical certificate: Class 1 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: minor injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 29,256 hours
- Last inspection: approved inspection programme, November 11, 2022
- Maximum gross weight: 16,000 lb
- Seats: 12
- Landing gear: retractable
- Engine 1: Garrett TPE331-11U-61 (turboprop); 25,827 hours total
- Engine 2: Garrett TPE331-11U-61 (turboprop); 19,676 hours total
- Operator: UAS Transervices INC
The flight
- Departed from: NEW New Orleans LA at 6:04 pm
- Destination: UES Waukesha WI
- Flight plan: IFR
- Runway 10, 5,849 ft by 100 ft
- A second pilot was aboard
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 060° at 6 knots
- Visibility: 0.5 statute miles
- Sky: overcast at 300 ft
- Temperature: 30°F (-1°C), dew point 30°F (-1°C)
- Altimeter: 30.25 inHg
- Observation at 2:45 pm from KUES
Weather report (METAR): METAR KUES 151445Z 06006KT 1/2SM -SN OVC003 M01/M01 A3025=
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flig | 2 | |||
| Passengers | 1 |
About this page
Everything above comes from the NTSB's public accident database: the narrative, probable cause and findings are the NTSB's own words, and the coded tables behind its report (pilot, aircraft, flight, weather, injuries, sequence of events) are written out in plain English. Pilots' ages, home towns and medical details are left out on purpose. The docket at the NTSB holds the report as a PDF and the investigation's photographs and documents. This site never names pilots, passengers or anyone else involved. A preliminary report describes what is known soon after the event and can change; the final report, with the probable cause, usually follows one to two years later and this page is refreshed when it does. Case number CEN23LA037.
