The U.S. aircraft register, updated daily
Accidents · NTSB ERA17FA272 · Final report

Cessna 172 accident near New Milford, Connecticut, August 11, 2017

On August 11, 2017 at about 1:17 pm local time, a 1974 Cessna 172, registered N1727V, was substantially damaged in an accident during initial climb near New Milford, Connecticut (Candlelight Farms airport). It was an instructional flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). 1 person was killed and 2 people were seriously injured. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).

The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged

The flight instructor's failure to ensure that the wing flaps were properly configured for takeoff, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall and loss of control during the initial climb.

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

What the record shows

Date
August 11, 2017 · about 1:17 pm local time
Place
New Milford, Connecticut · Candlelight Farms · map
Type
Accident
Injuries
1 person was killed and 2 people were seriously injured.
Weather
visual conditions (good weather)
Aircraft
Cessna 172 M, built 1974 · all 172s on the register
Registration
N1727V · no longer on the register · serial 17263727
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Instructional flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)

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

The student pilot, who had 15 hours of flight experience, was performing an instructional flight with her flight instructor and a passenger. According to GPS data, the airplane landed on and then took off from a grass airstrip, climbed about 150 ft, then collided with terrain about 1,000 ft past the end of the runway. There were no known eyewitnesses, and the student pilot and passenger did not recall the accident due to their injuries. The flight instructor was fatally injured. An examination of the wreckage did not reveal any evidence of a preaccident mechanical malfunction or anomaly. An examination of the flight controls revealed that the wing flaps were in the fully extended (40º) position at impact. The airplane's operating checklist stated that normal and obstacle clearance takeoffs are performed with wing flaps up, and flap settings greater than 10º are not recommended at any time for takeoff. Upon landing on the grass runway, the flaps should have been retracted as part of the after-landing checklist, then confirmed up as part of the before takeoff and takeoff checklists. It is likely that the flap setting at the time of takeoff resulted in an aerodynamic stall and loss of control during the initial climb. It could not be determined who was at the controls at the time of the takeoff and loss of airplane control; however, the flight instructor, as pilot-in-command, was responsible for the operation and safety of the flight and should have ensured that the flaps were retracted before takeoff. He also should have anticipated and corrected any significant errors made by the student.

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. Aerodynamic stall/spin during initial climb defining event
  2. Collision with terrain or object (not controlled flight into terrain) during uncontrolled descent

The NTSB's findings

  • cause Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Flight control system › TE flap control system › Incorrect use/operation
  • cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Configuration › Incorrect use/operation
  • cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Aircraft capability › Climb capability › Not attained/maintained
  • cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Use of checklist › Instructor/check pilot
  • cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Use of equip/system › Instructor/check pilot

Flight instructor

  • Certificate: flight instructor, commercial pilot
  • Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instructor: airplane multi-engine; instructor: airplane single-engine; instrument: airplane
  • Flight time: 3,900 hours in all
  • Last flight review: May 13, 2016
  • Medical certificate: Class 2 (with waivers/limitations)
  • Seat: rgt
  • Injury: fatal

Dual student

  • Flight time: 15 hours in all; 15 in this make and model
  • Medical certificate: None
  • Seat: left
  • Injury: serious injuries

The aircraft

  • Airframe total time: 8,478 hours
  • Last inspection: 100-hour inspection, June 28, 2017; 85 hours since
  • Maximum gross weight: 2,300 lb
  • Seats: 4
  • Landing gear: fixed
  • Engine: Lycoming O-320-E2D (piston); 8,478 hours total
  • Operator: Arrow Aviation LLC

The flight

  • Departed from: DXR Danbury CT at 12:35 pm
  • Destination: DXR Danbury CT
  • Flight plan: none
  • Runway 35, 2,900 ft by 50 ft
  • A second pilot was aboard

Weather at the time

  • Light: daylight
  • Wind: from 150° at 6 knots
  • Visibility: 10 statute miles
  • Sky: clear
  • Temperature: 75°F (24°C), dew point 63°F (17°C)
  • Altimeter: 30.17 inHg
  • Observation at 1:53 pm from DXR, 12 miles away

Injuries

FatalSeriousMinorNone
Flight crew11
Passengers1

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.

Other NTSB records under N1727V the same tail number, which may have belonged to a different aircraft at the time

2002-08-07IAD02LA082 · accident near Mount Pocono, PA · substantial damage · no injuries

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.