Mitsubishi MU-2B-36 accident near Hobby Airport, Texas, August 22, 2007
On August 22, 2007 at about 6:15 am local time, a Mitsubishi MU-2B-36, registered N6KF, was involved in an accident near Hobby Airport, Texas (William P Hobby airport). It was a flight of an unrecorded kind under general aviation rules (Part 91). The NTSB record does not give the injuries. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The failure of the ramp employee to maintain clearance from the rotating propeller. A contributing factor was the prevailing night conditions.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- August 22, 2007 · about 6:15 am local time
- Place
- Hobby Airport, Texas · William P Hobby · map
- Type
- Accident · collision on the ground
- Injuries
- The NTSB record does not give the injuries.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Mitsubishi MU-2B-36 · all MU-2B-36s on the register
- Registration
- N6KF · no longer on the register · serial 659
- Damage
- Not recorded
- Flight
- Flight of an unrecorded kind · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The high-wing twin-engine airplane was not damaged and a lineman was seriously injured when the lineman inadvertently walked into the turning propeller for the number 1 engine while undergoing ground operations prior to the night flight. The lineman, who was reported to have completed all required training, recently changed work shifts and collectively had a total of six-months of experience. It was also reported that normally aircrews remove their own wheel chocks. The pilot stated that as the airplane completed both engine starts, in preparation for flight, the employee quickly approached the airplane to unplug the ground power unit (GPU) when he preceded to cross beneath the left wing from forward-to-aft retrieving the left main landing gear wheel chocks. While recovering the left wheel chocks the linemen was struck by the left engine propeller blade sustaining serious injuries. The airplane was standing at the time of the mishap. The pilot-in-command then performed an engine shutdown, exited the aircraft and assisted the injured linemen. Weather at the airport was not a factor in the mishap.
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: flight instructor, commercial pilot, private
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instructor: airplane multi-engine; instructor: airplane single-engine; instructor: instrument airplane; instrument: airplane
- Medical certificate: Unknown
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Last inspection: inspection type not recorded
- Landing gear: retractable
- Engine: Airesearch TPE331-5&6SER (turboprop); 0 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: HOU Houston TX at 5:15 am
- Destination: Hobby Airport TX
- Flight plan: not recorded
- A second pilot was aboard
Weather at the time
- Light: night
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: not recorded; clear
- Temperature: 0°F (-18°C), dew point 0°F (-18°C)
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.