Cessna 310R accident near Duluth, Minnesota, June 27, 2024
On June 27, 2024 at about 4:45 pm local time, a 1975 Cessna 310R, registered N5080J, was substantially damaged in an accident during takeoff near Duluth, Minnesota (Duluth International 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
The failure of the left engine induction coupling during takeoff, which resulted in a total loss of left engine power and an uncommanded left yaw/roll due to asymmetrical thrust and increased drag, from which the pilot had insufficient altitude to recover control of the airplane.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- June 27, 2024 · about 4:45 pm local time
- Place
- Duluth, Minnesota · Duluth International · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 2 people were on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Cessna 310R, built 1975 · all 310Rs on the register
- Registration
- N5080J · registry record · serial 310R0200
- 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 he was conducting a post-maintenance flight after some adjustments were made to the multi-engine airplane’s avionics equipment. The pilot flew an instrument landing system (ILS) approach and made a full-stop landing on the runway. After a brief wait, as instructed by the air traffic controller, the pilot began his next takeoff. Shortly after rotation, the airplane rolled to the left, and the pilot was unable to regain airplane control using aileron and rudder inputs. The airplane settled into the ground in a near-level attitude. During the impact sequence, the nose landing gear and right main landing gear collapsed, which resulted in substantial damage to the right wing and fuselage. Examination of the airplane revealed that the left engine’s rubber accordion coupling in the induction system between the throttle body and the engine was split. There was no impact damage in the area of the engine and this split was not due to the damage during the accident sequence. No other anomaly was discovered that would have prevented normal operation. The airplane’s most recent annual inspection was conducted about 7 months before the accident, and the airplane had accumulated about 60 hours since the inspection. Review of maintenance information did not reveal a recommended replacement interval for the coupling. Based on the evidence, the split in the induction coupling allowed a large induction leak that likely resulted in a total loss of engine power on the left engine due to the lean fuel/air mixture that resulted. The loss of power on the left engine resulted in the uncommanded left yaw/roll due to asymmetrical thrust and increased drag, from which the pilot had insufficient altitude to recover control of the airplane.
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 takeoff
- Loss of engine power (total) during takeoff
- Powerplant sys/comp malf/fail during takeoff defining event
The NTSB's findings
- Aircraft › Aircraft power plant › Engine fuel and control › Fuel control/carburetor › Failure
- Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Lateral/bank control › Not attained/maintained
- Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Yaw control › Not attained/maintained
Pilot
- Certificate: airline transport pilot, flight instructor, commercial pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; multi-engine sea; single-engine land; single-engine sea; instructor: airplane multi-engine; instructor: airplane single-engine; instructor: instrument airplane; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 25,000 hours in all; 4,000 in this make and model; 30 in the last 90 days; 15 in the last 30 days; 25,000 as pilot in command; 10,000 on instruments
- Last flight review: December 20, 2023
- Medical certificate: Class 2 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 10,000 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, December 1, 2023; 60 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 5,700 lb
- Seats: 6
- Landing gear: retractable
- Engine 1: Continental IO-520-MB (piston); 1,100 hours total
- Engine 2: Continental IO-520-MB (piston); 1,100 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: SUW Superior WI at 4:00 pm
- Flight plan: none
- Runway 9, 10,591 ft by 150 ft
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 110° at 6 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: scat at 3,800 ft
- Temperature: 66°F (19°C), dew point 48°F (9°C)
- Altimeter: 29.98 inHg
- Observation at 11:55 am from KDLH
Weather report (METAR): METAR KDLH 271655Z 11006KT 10SM SCT038 SCT120 19/09 A2998 RMK AO2 SLP156 T01890089=
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 1 | |||
| Passengers | 1 |
Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report
The NTSB has not released the docket for this case yet. The docket, the folder of records gathered during an investigation (maintenance records, photographs, witness statements, examinations), is usually released when the investigation is nearly complete, and the list here is refreshed when it appears. Check 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.