Schweizer G164B accident near Oslo, Minnesota, June 15, 1996
On June 15, 1996 at about 10:45 pm local time, a Schweizer G164B, registered N36311, was substantially damaged in an accident near Oslo, Minnesota. It was an aerial application (crop spraying) flight under agricultural flying rules (Part 137). 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 not using carburetor heat when the engine began to lose power. Factors in this accident were carburetor ice formation and the soft landing surface the pilot had to use for landing.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- June 15, 1996 · about 10:45 pm local time
- Place
- Oslo, Minnesota · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 1 person was on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Schweizer G164B
- Registration
- N36311 · no longer on the register · serial 764B
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Aerial application (crop spraying) flight · agricultural flying rules (Part 137)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The aerial application flight experienced a gradual power loss during its initial climbout from takeoff. The pilot landed in a field with a soft surface. The airplane nosed over upon touchdown. Examination of the airplane's engine revealed no mechanical aniomalies that would prevent the prodiuction of normal power. The pilot said he had fueled the airplane and checked for water in the fuel before takeoff. He said he had not encountered carburetor ice during previous takeoffs earlier in the day. The pilot said the engine had hesitated on takeoff during the past 2 to 3 weeks. He said it did this on a random basis. The pilot said the airplane's engine had been idling about 5 minutes before takeoff. He said he did not apply carburetor heat when he noticed the power loss. According to an FAA carburetor icing probability chart, the temperature/dew point at the accident site posed a serious threat for carburetor icing at low power settings.
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
Pilot
- Certificate: commercial pilot
- Ratings: single-engine land
- Flight time: 4,300 hours in all; 3,600 in this make and model; 83 in the last 90 days; 80 in the last 30 days; 4,100 as pilot in command
- Medical certificate: Class 2 (valid medical--no waivers/lim.)
- Seat: ctr
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 787 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, April 26, 1996; 87 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 5,200 lb
- Seats: 1
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: P&W 1340 (piston); 0 hours total
- Operator: Sky Tractor Supply Company
The flight
- Departed from: PVT at 10:45 pm
- Destination: PVT
- Flight plan: none
- Runway 0
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 130° at 3 knots
- Visibility: 15 statute miles
- Sky: broken clouds at 2,000 ft; not recorded
- Temperature: 84°F (29°C), dew point 61°F (16°C)
- Altimeter: 29.00 inHg
- Observation at 10:46 pm from GFK, 55 miles away
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crew | 1 |
Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report
The docket, the folder of records gathered during an investigation (maintenance records, photographs, witness statements, examinations), has not been read from the NTSB for this case yet; the list appears here once it has. Open the docket 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.