Cessna 172R accident near Hampton, Virginia, April 30, 2010
On April 30, 2010 at about 7:00 pm local time, a Cessna 172R, registered N429FF, was substantially damaged in an accident during landing (flare/touchdown) near Hampton, Virginia (Langley Air Force Base airport). It was an instructional 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 student pilot's inadequate landing flare and improper recovery from a bounced landing. Contributing to the accident was the student’s decision to land with a tailwind.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- April 30, 2010 · about 7:00 pm local time
- Place
- Hampton, Virginia · Langley Air Force Base · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 1 person was on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Cessna 172R · all 172Rs on the register
- Registration
- N429FF · registry record · serial 17281229
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Instructional flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The student pilot was landing at his home airport at the conclusion of a solo cross-country flight. He stated that when he contacted the air traffic control tower he was offered the option of runway 8, which had a tailwind, or 26, which had a crosswind. He stated that he wrongly chose to land on runway 8. During the landing flare, the airplane bounced and the nose landing gear impacted the runway, resulting in substantial damage to the engine firewall. The student pilot reported there were no mechanical malfunctions or anomalies with the airplane. At the time of the accident, the wind was from 230 degrees at 11 knots.
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
- Abnormal runway contact during landing (flare/touchdown) defining event
The NTSB's findings
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Landing flare › Not attained/maintained
- cause Personnel issues › Action/decision › Info processing/decision › Decision making/judgment › Student pilot
- Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena › Wind › Tailwind › Effect on operation
Dual student
- Certificate: student
- Flight time: 58 hours in all; 58 in this make and model; 58 as pilot in command
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 33 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, January 31, 2010
- Maximum gross weight: 2,457 lb
- Seats: 4
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Lycoming IO-360-L2A (piston); 0 hours total
- Operator: Langley Aero Club
The flight
- Departed from: SFQ Suffolk VA at 6:30 pm
- Destination: LFI Hampton VA
- Flight plan: VFR
- Runway 08, 10,000 ft by 150 ft
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 230° at 11 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 81°F (27°C), dew point 48°F (9°C)
- Altimeter: 29.88 inHg
- Observation at 6:55 pm from LFI
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight 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.