Piper PA-46-350P accident near Auburn, Alabama, July 6, 2012
On July 6, 2012 at about 7:55 pm local time, a 1998 Piper PA-46-350P, registered N4133G, was substantially damaged in an accident during landing (flare/touchdown) near Auburn, Alabama (Auburn University Regional airport). It was a personal 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 airplane owner’s failure to have maintenance personnel comply with an aircraft manufacturer's service bulletin to require engine mount inspections for fatigue cracks, which resulted in an undetected fatigue crack, the engine mount failing, and the nose landing gear collapsing during landing.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- July 6, 2012 · about 7:55 pm local time
- Place
- Auburn, Alabama · Auburn University Regional · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 1 person was on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Piper PA-46-350P, built 1998 · all PA-46-350Ps on the register
- Registration
- N4133G · registry record · serial 4636186
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The pilot reported that, as the nose landing gear contacted the runway during landing, he heard the tire squealing. The airplane veered right, the nose landing gear collapsed, and the airplane departed the right side of the runway. Postaccident examination revealed that the engine mount had a circumferential fracture at the nose landing gear attachment foot and that the fracture exhibited features consistent with failure due to fatigue. A longitudinal fracture was also found extending from the circumferential fracture to the outboard end of the attachment foot. The surface of the fracture area displayed a matte black appearance, in contrast to the glossy black appearance of the adjoining support tubes. In addition, green primer, which displayed features consistent with brush strokes, could be seen through the coating in areas near the weld. Before the accident, the manufacturer had issued a series of service bulletins (SB) that required recurring inspections for cracks in the engine mounts in the areas of the nose landing gear actuator attachment feet, the most recent of which was SB-1103D. These inspections required that paint be removed from and around the attachment feet and that corrosion prevention compound be applied after the inspection was completed. Although the nonuniform paint coverage and brush marks around the right attachment foot suggested that the paint might have been removed in accordance with the SB's inspection procedures, no corrosion prevention compound was observed on the accident airplane's engine mount, which indicates that full compliance with the SB had not occurred. Review of the airplane's maintenance log entries revealed that none of the entries referred to compliance with any revision of the SB. The maintenance log entry for the most recent annual inspection, which was performed in July 2011, stated, "Note - SB1103D not performed this date at owner's request." If the airplane owner had maintenance personnel inspect the engine mount in accordance with the SB, the development and propagation of the fatigue cracking at the nose landing gear actuator attachment foot might have been detected and remedied before the 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
- Aircraft maintenance event during prior to flight
- Sys/Comp malf/fail (non-power) during landing (flare/touchdown)
- Landing gear collapse during landing (flare/touchdown) defining event
- Runway excursion during landing (flare/touchdown)
The NTSB's findings
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft structures › (general) › (general) › Fatigue/wear/corrosion
- cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Inspection › Scheduled/routine inspection › Owner/builder
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Landing gear system › Nose/tail landing gear › Failure
Pilot
- Certificate: commercial pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 4,013 hours in all; 1,000 in this make and model; 30 in the last 90 days; 12 in the last 30 days; 4,013 as pilot in command
- Last flight review: November 10, 2011
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 700 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, July 10, 2011; 36 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 4,300 lb
- Seats: 6
- Landing gear: retractable
- Engine: Lycoming TIO 540 SER (piston); 700 hours total
- Operator: System Designs INC
The flight
- Departed from: 8M1 Booneville MS at 6:40 pm
- Destination: AUO Auburn AL
- Flight plan: IFR
- Runway 18, 5,624 ft by 100 ft
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 200° at 6 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 91°F (33°C), dew point 72°F (22°C)
- Altimeter: 29.95 inHg
- Observation at 7:55 pm from AUO
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.