Aero Commander 200D accident near Panama City, Florida, June 24, 2017
On June 24, 2017 at about 6:00 pm local time, a 1966 Aero Commander 200D, registered N929DM, was substantially damaged in an accident during approach near Panama City, Florida (Northwest Florida Beaches Intl airport). It was a personal flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). 2 people had minor injuries. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).
Preview. This page is not yet listed for search engines.
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The pilot's inadequate fuel management, which resulted in a total loss of engine power due to fuel starvation. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's failure to use the emergency checklist to restart the engine.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 4, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- June 24, 2017 · about 6:00 pm local time
- Place
- Panama City, Florida · Northwest Florida Beaches Intl · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- 2 people had minor injuries.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Aero Commander 200D D, built 1966 · all 200Ds on the register
- Registration
- N929DM · no longer on the register · serial 304
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The private pilot topped off the airplane's four fuel tanks (20 gallons each, 18.5 of which was usable) before the estimated 2 hour 20 minute flight. He departed with the left main fuel tank selected and switched to each of the other three tanks for about 30 minutes each before turning the selector back to the left main tank for the remainder of the flight. About 20 minutes after switching back to the left main tank, the engine experienced a total loss of power. The pilot reported that the airplane would not maintain altitude, so he focused on making a forced landing and did not use the emergency checklist (which included switching to another fuel tank) to restart the engine. The airplane stalled right before touchdown and landed hard, which resulted in substantial damage to both wings and the fuselage. Postaccident examination of the airplane revealed that the left main fuel tank was intact and empty. The left auxiliary fuel tank was breeched, and a small amount of fuel was found in the tank. The right-wing fuel tanks were not compromised, and about 13 gallons of fuel were drained from the auxiliary tank and about 11.5 gallons were drained from the main tank. Although a fuel supply line to the fuel manifold was found loose during postaccident examination, no fuel stains were observed on the attaching b-nut, fire sleeve, or surrounding area. Based on the condition of the b-nut and lack of stains surrounding the b-nut, the fuel supply line was likely not loose before the accident. During a postaccident engine test-run, the b-nut was correctly installed, and the engine started immediately and ran without hesitation. Examination and the test-run of the engine revealed no evidence of any preaccident mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. Given that the pilot was operating the airplane on the left main fuel tank at the time the engine lost power and that the tank was found empty, the loss of engine power was likely due to fuel starvation, which resulted from the pilot's mismanagement of the fuel. The pilot's failure to use the emergency checklist and select a different tank when the loss of power occurred contributed to 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
- Fuel starvation during approach defining event
- Loss of engine power (total) during approach
- Off-field or emergency landing during landing
- Hard landing during landing (flare/touchdown)
- Collision with terrain or object (not controlled flight into terrain) during landing (flare/touchdown)
The NTSB's findings
- cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Use of equip/system › Pilot
- cause Aircraft › Fluids/misc hardware › Fluids › Fuel › Fluid management
- cause Aircraft › Fluids/misc hardware › Fluids › Fuel › Fluid level
- factor Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Use of checklist › Pilot
Pilot
- Certificate: private
- Ratings: single-engine land
- Flight time: 252.1 hours in all; 20.2 in this make and model; 75.4 in the last 90 days; 16.7 in the last 30 days; 161.6 as pilot in command
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: minor injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 2,879.9 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, February 2, 2017; 29 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 3,000 lb
- Seats: 4
- Landing gear: retractable
- Engine: Continental Motors Inc IO-520A (32B) (piston); 804 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: MAW Malden MO at 3:30 pm
- Destination: ECP Panama City FL
- Flight plan: IFR
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 220° at 8 knots, gusting 18
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: broken clouds at 3,800 ft; scat at 2,900 ft
- Temperature: 86°F (30°C), dew point 73°F (23°C)
- Altimeter: 30.34 inHg
- Observation at 6:28 pm from ECP, 5 miles away
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flig | 1 | |||
| Passengers | 1 |
About this page
Everything above comes from the NTSB's public accident database: the narrative, probable cause and findings are the NTSB's own words, and the coded tables behind its report (pilot, aircraft, flight, weather, injuries, sequence of events) are written out in plain English. Pilots' ages, home towns and medical details are left out on purpose. The docket at the NTSB holds the report as a PDF and the investigation's photographs and documents. This site never names pilots, passengers or anyone else involved. A preliminary report describes what is known soon after the event and can change; the final report, with the probable cause, usually follows one to two years later and this page is refreshed when it does. Case number ERA17LA212.