The U.S. aircraft register, updated daily
Accidents · NTSB ERA14CA185 · Final report

Cessna 205A accident near Leesburg, Virginia, April 8, 2014

On April 8, 2014 at about 3:30 pm local time, a 1964 Cessna 205A, registered N4862U, was substantially damaged in an accident during landing (flare/touchdown) near Leesburg, Virginia (Leesburg Executive 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 pilot's inadequate compensation for the wind conditions during landing, resulting in a runway excursion and impact with terrain. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's inadequate evaluation of the wind conditions.

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

What the record shows

Date
April 8, 2014 · about 3:30 pm local time
Place
Leesburg, Virginia · Leesburg Executive · map
Type
Accident
Injuries
No one was hurt; 1 person was on board or involved.
Weather
visual conditions (good weather)
Aircraft
Cessna 205A, built 1964
Registration
N4862U · registry record · serial 205-0562
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)

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

According to the pilot's origination airport, which was 21 nautical miles from the destination airport, there was a 6 knot wind when he departed. The pilot flew west and encountered turbulence after clearing the Washington D.C. Special Flight Rules Area. Twenty five minutes into the flight, the pilot discovered that his destination airport, which was several miles away, was not reporting wind. Expecting wind similar to what he experienced at his originating airport, the pilot proceeded to the destination airport and entered the traffic pattern on the downwind leg. In order to maintain his course he entered a crab angle. The pilot turned to the base leg of the traffic pattern and then established himself on final approach where he observed about a 12 knot wind indication from the windsock. He maneuvered the airplane into a left wing low attitude with full right rudder in order to line up with the centerline of runway 35. Once over the runway, the pilot flared the airplane nose; however, a strong wind gust pushed it to the right. He applied full power to initiate a go around maneuver, but the wind continued to carry the airplane to the right. The left main landing gear touched down in "soggy" grass terrain and the nose landing gear subsequently impacted the ground. The airplane then nosed over and came to rest inverted. Postaccident examination of the wreckage revealed substantial damage to the engine firewall, fuselage, and left wing. The pilot reported no mechanical malfunctions or anomalies with the airframe or engine that would have precluded normal operation. At the time of the accident, the wind at Washington-Dulles International Airport was reported from 300 at 19 knots gusting to 32 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

  1. Loss of control in flight during landing (flare/touchdown) defining event
  2. Runway excursion during landing (flare/touchdown)
  3. Nose over/nose down during landing (flare/touchdown)

The NTSB's findings

  • cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Directional control › Not attained/maintained
  • cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Aircraft control › Pilot
  • cause Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena › Wind › Gusts › Response/compensation
  • factor Personnel issues › Action/decision › Info processing/decision › Identification/recognition › Pilot
  • Environmental issues › Operating environment › Meteorological services › Meteo equip coverage/avail › Availability of related info
  • Environmental issues › Physical environment › Terrain › (general) › Contributed to outcome

Pilot

  • Certificate: private
  • Ratings: single-engine land
  • Flight time: 183 hours in all; 6 in this make and model; 22 in the last 90 days; 13 in the last 30 days; 89 as pilot in command; 0 on instruments
  • Last flight review: October 14, 2013
  • Medical certificate: Class 3 (with waivers/limitations)
  • Seat: left
  • Injury: no injuries

The aircraft

  • Airframe total time: 4,354 hours
  • Last inspection: annual inspection, April 1, 2014; 8 hours since
  • Maximum gross weight: 2,899 lb
  • Seats: 6
  • Landing gear: fixed
  • Engine: Cont Motor IO-470-S (piston); 2,434 hours total

The flight

  • Departed from: HEF Manassas VA at 3:00 pm
  • Destination: JYO Leesburg VA
  • Flight plan: VFR
  • Runway 35, 5,499 ft by 100 ft

Weather at the time

  • Light: daylight
  • Wind: from 300° at 19 knots, gusting 32
  • Visibility: 10 statute miles
  • Sky: broken clouds at 12,000 ft; scat at 5,500 ft
  • Temperature: 61°F (16°C), dew point 39°F (4°C)
  • Altimeter: 29.55 inHg
  • Observation at 3:45 pm from IAD, 10 miles away

Injuries

FatalSeriousMinorNone
Flight crew1

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.