Cessna 210 accident near Louisville, Kentucky, October 4, 2009
On October 4, 2009 at about 4:40 pm local time, a Cessna 210, registered N9443T, was substantially damaged in an accident during approach near Louisville, Kentucky (Bowman Field Airport). It was a personal flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). No one was hurt; 2 people were on board or involved. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
A malfunction of the landing gear extension system due to a fractured hydraulic line. Contributing to the accident was the inadequate inspection and maintenance of the hydraulic line.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- October 4, 2009 · about 4:40 pm local time
- Place
- Louisville, Kentucky · Bowman Field Airport · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 2 people were on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Cessna 210 · all 210s on the register
- Registration
- N9443T · no longer on the register · serial 57243
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
During a flight review, the commercial pilot attempted to lower the landing gear but, after the gear-up light extinguished, the gear down light would not illuminate. After multiple attempts to lower the landing gear, the flight instructor declared an emergency, took control of the airplane, and prepared for a gear-up landing. During touchdown, the airplane left the paved portion of the runway, and was substantially damaged. A postaccident examination of the landing gear system revealed that the hydraulic nose gear door actuator line on the right side of the aircraft failed due to fatigue at the flared end of the line. Review of maintenance records revealed that a high pressure electric fuel pump had been installed in close proximity to the failed line. No identification information or manufacturer information was present on the line and the straight sections of the tubing were not completely straight indicating that it had been bent by hand. A wear mark corresponding to significant contact with another object was observed on the aft side of the upper horizontal portion of the line which was covered by a plastic sleeve wrapped in electrical tape. It was likely that contact at that location produced excessive bending loads on the hydraulic line at the flare which lead to the fatigue fracture. Removal of the plastic sleeve which appeared to have been installed as a chaff guard revealed the existence of two other wear marks on the hydraulic line, one of which was approximately 50 percent of the wall thickness deep. The location of the wear marks corresponded to the location of the electric pump that had been installed and its fuel line fittings. According to the Federal Aviation Administration, tubing should not be nicked, cut, dented, collapsed, or twisted beyond approved limits. When inspection shows a line to be damaged or defective, the entire line should be replaced or, if the damaged section is localized, a repair section may be inserted. Minor dents and scratches in tubing may be repaired. Scratches or nicks not deeper than 10 percent of the wall thickness in aluminum alloy tubing, that are not in the heel of a bend, may be repaired by burnishing with hand tools. Lines with severe die marks, seams, or splits should be replaced. Any crack or deformity in a flare is unacceptable and cause for rejection. A dent less than 20 percent of the tube diameter is not objectionable unless it is in the heel of a bend.
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
- Sys/Comp malf/fail (non-power) during approach defining event
- Landing gear collapse during landing (landing roll)
- Dragged wing/rotor/float/other during landing (landing roll)
The NTSB's findings
- factor Personnel issues › Task performance › Inspection › (general) › Maintenance personnel
- factor Personnel issues › Task performance › Maintenance › (general) › Maintenance personnel
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Landing gear system › Gear extension and retract sys › Damaged/degraded
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Landing gear system › Gear extension and retract sys › Malfunction
Flight instructor
- Certificate: flight instructor, commercial pilot
- Ratings: single-engine land; instructor: airplane single-engine; instructor: instrument airplane; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 2,979 hours in all; 1,142 in this make and model; 12 in the last 90 days; 6 in the last 30 days; 2,838 as pilot in command; 1,261 on instruments
- Last flight review: March 21, 2009
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: no injuries
Pilot
- Certificate: commercial pilot
- Ratings: single-engine land; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 2,580 hours in all; 477 in this make and model; 5 in the last 90 days; 3 in the last 30 days; 2,500 as pilot in command
- Last flight review: October 4, 2009
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 4,354 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, December 12, 2008
- Maximum gross weight: 2,900 lb
- Seats: 4
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Cont Motor I0-470-DCE (piston); 0 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: LOU Louisville KY at 2:20 pm
- Destination: LOU Louisville KY
- Flight plan: not recorded
- Runway 24, 4,326 ft by 75 ft
- A second pilot was aboard
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 220° at 3 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: a few clouds at 3,800 ft
- Temperature: 61°F (16°C), dew point 43°F (6°C)
- Altimeter: 30.11 inHg
- Observation at 4:53 pm from LOU
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 2 |
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.
