Beech 1900D incident near Denver International Airport, Colorado, December 3, 2011
On December 3, 2011 at about 3:30 pm local time, a Beech 1900D, registered N247GL, suffered minor damage in an incident during standing near Denver International Airport, Colorado (Denver International Airport). It was flown under scheduled airline rules (Part 121). The NTSB record does not give the injuries.
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
A failure of the nose landing gear end cap due to fatigue. Contributing to the failure were the ineffective inspection and the unknown effect of grain direction on fatigue life.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made November 2, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- December 3, 2011 · about 3:30 pm local time · cases in 2011
- Place
- Denver International Airport, Colorado · Denver International Airport · cases near this airport · map
- Type
- Incident
- Injuries
- The NTSB record does not give the injuries.
- Weather
- not recorded
- Aircraft
- Beech 1900D · all 1900Ds on the register
- Registration
- N247GL · registry record · serial UE-247
- Damage
- Minor damage
- Flight
- Flight · scheduled airline rules (Part 121)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
During a post flight inspection the pilot discovered a hydraulic leak on the nose landing gear that was emanating from a crack in the nose landing gear end cap. The end cap was examined and found to have failed in fatigue that initiated from multiple origins at an internal diameter. The fatigue had propagated significantly into the wall thickness of the end cap and through the thickness at one location. The striation count revealed that the fatigue crack had initiated and been growing in the end cap for at least 14,898 cycles. The end cap had been inspected using an ultrasonic method recommended by the manufacturer 485 cycles prior to the incident. The crack was present at the time of the inspection which indicated that the inspection method was ineffective in detecting the crack. The timing of the end cap inspection was in compliance with the manufacturer’s recommendation. Examination of the microstructure of the material revealed that the longitudinal grain direction was oriented parallel to the shuttle valve bore in the end cap. Resistance to fatigue can be improved by aligning the principle tension stresses in the end cap with the longitudinal grain direction. It is probable that the manufacturer had determined that the grain direction was a contributing factor to fatigue failure in the end cap and revised the end cap drawing to require a grain direction along the longitudinal axis of the end cap in February 2010. No engineering data to support the drawing revision was made available.
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
- Aircraft inspection event during standing
- Sys/Comp malf/fail (non-power) defining event
The NTSB's findings
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Landing gear system › Nose/tail landing gear › Failure other cases naming the landing gear
- factor Organizational issues › Management › Policy/procedure › Adequacy of policy/proc › Manufacturer
Pilot
- Certificate: airline transport pilot, commercial pilot, private
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 2,979 in this make and model
- Last flight review: May 1, 2011
- Medical certificate: Class 1 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
Co-pilot
- Certificate: commercial pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 129 in this make and model
- Last flight review: October 24, 2011
- Medical certificate: Class 2 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 31,828 hours
- Seats: 19
- Landing gear: retractable
- Engine 1: P&W PT6A SER (turboprop); 0 hours total
- Engine 2: P&W PT6A SER (turboprop); 0 hours total
- Operator: Great Lakes Aviation LTD
The flight
- Departed from: KMTJ Montrose CO
- Destination: KDEN Denver CO
- Flight plan: IFR
- A second pilot was aboard
Weather at the time
- 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 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.
Connections how this case links to the rest of the register
- N247GL on the register today · the tail number may have moved to another aircraft since
- Beechcraft 1900 Airliner 157 registered today · the model family and its accident history
- Beechcraft 6 aircraft on the register
- Engine: P&W PT6A SER 2,218 aircraft carry this series today · as the NTSB recorded it
- Engine: P&W PT6A SER 2,218 aircraft carry this series today · as the NTSB recorded it
- Denver International · nearest airport
- Montrose Regional · departed from
- Accidents and incidents in Colorado 2,860 since 1982 · 384 in the last ten years
- Colorado 7,455 aircraft registered
The whole map of how records connect · these connections as data: /graph/accident/ENG12IA013.json.
The bigger picture in Aviation Analytics: accidents over time since 1982, by model, by phase of flight and conditions, by place and on the map.
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 does not name anyone involved, its policy at this time. A preliminary report can change; the final report usually follows one to two years later, and the page is refreshed when it does.
