Cessna 182 accident near Elkton, Maryland, May 21, 2014
On May 21, 2014 at about 12:10 pm local time, a 1998 Cessna 182, registered N182PJ, was substantially damaged in an accident during landing (landing roll) near Elkton, Maryland (Cecil County Airport). It was a personal flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). No one was hurt; 3 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 pilot’s failure to attain the proper touchdown point during a no-flap landing to a wet, down-sloping runway, and the airplane's dynamic hydroplaning after touchdown, which resulted in a runway overrun. Contributing to the accident was a total loss of electrical power due to an alternator failure.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- May 21, 2014 · about 12:10 pm local time
- Place
- Elkton, Maryland · Cecil County Airport · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 3 people were on board or involved.
- Weather
- instrument conditions (cloud, fog or low visibility)
- Aircraft
- Cessna 182 S, built 1998 · all 182s on the register
- Registration
- N182PJ · registry record · serial 18280270
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The airline transport pilot was conducting a personal cross-country flight in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) when the airplane experienced a total electrical failure. The pilot elected to divert to a nearby airport, which had a 2,989-ft-long runway. After reporting the airport in sight, the pilot attempted a no-flap landing; however, the pilot reported that the brakes were ineffective, and he was unable to stop the airplane on the wet, down-sloping runway. He pulled the emergency (parking) brake handle and intentionally turned off the runway in an attempt to use an access road as additional distance to stop. The airplane subsequently struck a fence and other obstructions before it came to rest. During a postaccident phone call to the air traffic control facility that was handling the flight, the pilot stated the airplane landed "without brakes," "without flaps," and that they "landed long on the runway." Examination of the airplane's electrical system revealed that the alternator provided no output because the negative (ground) field brush was completely worn down to the braided lead, which became severed. The pilot should have received cockpit indications from the ammeter and from the low voltage warning light before the complete loss of electrical power. The pilot stated that despite "aggressive" application of brakes upon touchdown, the airplane would not slow down. It is possible that the airplane entered a state of dynamic hydroplaning on the wet runway, which would have rendered the brakes ineffective. Both the wet runway and lack of flaps on landing are factors which can significantly increase an airplane's landing distance. Given these conditions, the pilot should have more precisely controlled the airplane's descent angle throughout the approach in order to touch down within the shortest possible distance. It is likely that the decreased runway length available for landing, combined with dynamic hydroplaning due to the wet runway, resulted in the pilot's inability to stop the airplane on the runway.
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
- Electrical system malf/failure during enroute (cruise)
- Emergency descent initiated during enroute (descent)
- Runway excursion during landing (landing roll) defining event
- Collision with terrain or object (not controlled flight into terrain) during landing (landing roll)
The NTSB's findings
- factor Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Electrical power system › AC generator › alternator › Failure
- Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Flight control system › TE flap control system › Inoperative
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Descent/approach/glide path › Not attained/maintained
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Airspeed › Not attained/maintained
- Environmental issues › Physical environment › Runway/land/takeoff/taxi surface › Wet surface › Effect on equipment
- Environmental issues › Physical environment › Terrain › Sloped/uneven terrain › Effect on equipment
Pilot
- Certificate: airline transport pilot, commercial pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instrument: airplane; rotorcraft: helicopter
- Flight time: 3,960 hours in all; 1,200 in this make and model; 60 in the last 90 days; 20 in the last 30 days; 3,960 as pilot in command
- Last flight review: August 29, 2012
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
Passenger
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: no injuries
Passenger
- Seat: rear
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 1,264.5 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, June 1, 2013; 162 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 3,110 lb
- Seats: 4
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Lycoming IO-540-AB1A5 (piston); 1,264 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: SEG Selinsgrove PA at 11:00 am
- Destination: OAJ Jacksonville NC
- Flight plan: IFR
- Runway 13, 2,989 ft by 70 ft
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Visibility: 6 statute miles
- Sky: broken clouds at 6,000 ft; scat at 3,000 ft
- Temperature: 61°F (16°C), dew point 55°F (13°C)
- Altimeter: 30.00 inHg
- Observation at 11:54 am from APG, 11 miles away
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 1 | |||
| Passengers | 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.