The U.S. aircraft register, updated daily
Accidents · NTSB ERA09LA339 · Final report

Pilatus Aircraft LTD PC-12/47 accident near Bridgeport, Connecticut, June 12, 2009

On June 12, 2009 at about 11:56 am local time, a Pilatus Aircraft LTD PC-12/47, registered N877AF, was substantially damaged in an accident during landing (landing roll) near Bridgeport, Connecticut (Igor Sikorsky Memorial Airport). It was an executive or corporate flight under fractional-ownership rules (Part 91 subpart K). No one was hurt; 7 people were on board or involved. The weather was instrument conditions (cloud, fog or low visibility).

The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged

The flight crew's misjudgment of speed and distance, which resulted in an overrun of the wet runway.

Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.

What the record shows

Date
June 12, 2009 · about 11:56 am local time
Place
Bridgeport, Connecticut · Igor Sikorsky Memorial Airport · map
Type
Accident
Injuries
No one was hurt; 7 people were on board or involved.
Weather
instrument conditions (cloud, fog or low visibility)
Aircraft
Pilatus Aircraft LTD PC-12/47
Registration
N877AF · no longer on the register · serial 877
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Executive or corporate flight · fractional-ownership rules (Part 91 subpart K)

The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record

The pilots conducted the VOR 24 approach "to minimums," and when they were not able to visually obtain the runway, they conducted a missed approach. The pilots then received "vectors to final" for the ILS runway 6 approach, and visually acquired the runway lights at the decision altitude of 307 feet. They continued the landing, extending the landing gear and selecting the flaps to 30 degrees. The airplane touched down with less than 1,000 feet of runway remaining, and the pilots applied maximum reverse thrust and "more than average braking." The airplane began to hydroplane on the wet runway, and impacted a blast fence about 350 feet off the departure end of the runway. Both pilots reported they did not perform a landing distance calculation prior to landing and knew they were "landing long." They also reported no mechanical deficiencies with the airplane or engine. Examination of the engine revealed signatures of full power with the propeller in full reverse mode, at the time of impact. The airplane manufacturer recommended a landing configuration using 40 degrees of flaps. In a 40-degree flap configuration, with reverse thrust, the required landing distance for the airplane was 2,013 feet. In a configuration of 30 degrees of flaps, and no reverse thrust, the airplane required 2,933 feet of landing distance. The Safety Board issued recommendations regarding removal of the blast fence after two previous accidents, beginning 15 years prior to this accident.

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

  1. Runway excursion during landing (landing roll) defining event
  2. Collision with terrain or object (not controlled flight into terrain) during landing (landing roll)

The NTSB's findings

  • cause Personnel issues › Action/decision › Info processing/decision › Decision making/judgment › Pilot
  • factor Environmental issues › Physical environment › Object/animal/substance › Wall/barricade › Contributed to outcome

Pilot

  • Certificate: flight instructor, commercial pilot
  • Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instructor: airplane multi-engine; instructor: airplane single-engine; instructor: instrument airplane; instrument: airplane
  • Flight time: 2,840 hours in all; 660 in this make and model; 67 in the last 90 days; 25 in the last 30 days; 2,600 as pilot in command; 1,700 on instruments
  • Last flight review: June 8, 2009
  • Medical certificate: Class 2 (without waivers/limitations)
  • Seat: left
  • Injury: no injuries

Co-pilot

  • Certificate: flight instructor, commercial pilot
  • Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instructor: airplane single-engine; instructor: instrument airplane; instrument: airplane
  • Flight time: 3,613 hours in all; 2,108 in this make and model; 114 in the last 90 days; 57 in the last 30 days; 3,390 as pilot in command; 1,012 on instruments
  • Last flight review: May 26, 2009
  • Medical certificate: Class 2 (with waivers/limitations)
  • Seat: rgt
  • Injury: no injuries

The aircraft

  • Airframe total time: 983 hours
  • Last inspection: 100-hour inspection, April 21, 2009
  • Maximum gross weight: 10,450 lb
  • Seats: 8
  • Landing gear: retractable
  • Engine: P&W Canada PT6A-67D (turboprop); 0 hours total
  • Operator: Alpha Flying Inc.

The flight

  • Departed from: OWD Norwood MA at 11:11 am
  • Destination: BDR Bridgeport CT
  • Flight plan: IFR
  • Runway 06, 4,677 ft by 150 ft
  • A second pilot was aboard

Weather at the time

  • Light: daylight
  • Wind: from 260° at 5 knots
  • Visibility: 2 statute miles
  • Sky: overcast at 300 ft
  • Temperature: 63°F (17°C), dew point 63°F (17°C)
  • Altimeter: 29.70 inHg
  • Observation at 11:52 am from BDR

Injuries

FatalSeriousMinorNone
Flight crew2
Passengers5

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.