Cessna 172N accident near Pearland, Texas, February 17, 2025
On February 17, 2025 at about 4:47 am local time, a 1978 Cessna 172N, registered N2913E, was substantially damaged in an accident during initial climb near Pearland, Texas (Pearland Regional 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 pilot’s poor flight planning and decision making, which resulted in a loss of engine power due to fuel exhaustion.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- February 17, 2025 · about 4:47 am local time
- Place
- Pearland, Texas · Pearland Regional Airport · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 1 person was on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Cessna 172N, built 1978 · all 172Ns on the register
- Registration
- N2913E · registry record · serial 17271371
- 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 about 10 miles away from his intended destination, following a cross-country flight, the airplane experienced “engine or fuel problems.” He stated that he performed the emergency procedures and that the engine power did not improve. The pilot contacted air traffic control and diverted to a closer airport. He stated that he forgot to extend the airplane’s flaps during his approach, and the airplane “came in to land extremely fast.” According to the pilot, the airplane touched down midfield, and the pilot determined that there was insufficient usable runway and he initiated a go-around. The airplane reached about 300-400 ft above ground level and subsequently lost all engine power. The airplane impacted terrain and came to rest inverted in trees, which resulted in substantial damage to both wings, the fuselage, and the empennage. Postaccident examination of the airplane revealed that both fuel tanks were intact and contained no observable fuel. There were no discernible indications of fuel on nearby vegetation or fuel dye stains on any airplane surfaces. The pilot discussed his cross-country flight with a flight instructor before departing. According to the instructor, the pilot stated that the total flight time would be 4 hours. The instructor told the pilot to purchase fuel once he landed at his destination before returning, and the pilot acknowledged. According to the pilot, he conducted a touch-and-go landing before departing back to his original departure point. The pilot stated that he did not refuel because both fuel tank gauges indicated that they were above half full.
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
- Landing area overshoot during landing (aborted after touchdown)
- Fuel exhaustion during initial climb defining event
- Collision with terrain or object (not controlled flight into terrain) during initial climb
The NTSB's findings
- Personnel issues › Task performance › Planning/preparation › Fuel planning › Pilot
- Aircraft › Fluids/misc hardware › Fluids › Fuel › Fluid level
- Environmental issues › Physical environment › Object/animal/substance › Tree(s) › Contributed to outcome
- Personnel issues › Action/decision › Info processing/decision › Decision making/judgment › Pilot
Pilot
- Certificate: private
- Ratings: single-engine land; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 252 hours in all; 19.4 in the last 90 days; 19.4 in the last 30 days; 171.1 as pilot in command
- Last flight review: December 30, 2022
- Medical certificate: Class 3
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 12,814.4 hours
- Last inspection: 100-hour inspection, January 20, 2025; 45.2 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 2,300 lb
- Seats: 4
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Lycoming O-320-H2AD (piston); 627 hours total
- Operator: Flying Tigers Flight School LTD
The flight
- Departed from: EFD Houston TX
- Destination: EFD Houston TX
- Flight plan: none
- Runway 32, 4,313 ft by 75 ft
Weather at the time
- Light: night
- Wind: from 020° at 4 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 46°F (8°C), dew point 36°F (2°C)
- Altimeter: 30.31 inHg
- Observation at 10:53 pm from KLVJ
Weather report (METAR): KLVJ 170453Z AUTO 02004KT 10SM CLR 08/02 A3031 RMK AO2 SLP263 T00830022
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 1 |
Photographs from the investigation 2 pictures from the NTSB's docket, as the NTSB released them
The NTSB's photographs with the NTSB's captions, at screen size. Open a picture to see it full size or to report one that should not be shown.
Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report
4 documents, released by the NTSB on May 29, 2025. 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.
| # | Document | What it is | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pilot/operator Aircraft Accident Report, NTSB Form 6120.1 | PDF, 10 pages | View Download |
| 2 | Photos | PDF, 2 pages · our copy | View Download |
| 3 | Witness Statement | PDF, 1 page | View Download |
| 4 | FAA Inspector's Statement | PDF, 1 page | View Download |
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.