Cessna 172 accident near Danbury, Connecticut, July 30, 2017
On July 30, 2017 at about 2:25 pm local time, a 2006 Cessna 172, registered N612DF, was substantially damaged in an accident during initial climb near Danbury, Connecticut (Danbury Muni airport). It was a personal 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 pilot's exceedance of the airplane's critical angle of attack during initial climb, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's decision to operate the airplane above its maximum gross weight, which likely reduced its takeoff performance.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- July 30, 2017 · about 2:25 pm local time
- Place
- Danbury, Connecticut · Danbury Muni · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- 1 person was killed and 2 people were seriously injured.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Cessna 172 S, built 2006 · all 172s on the register
- Registration
- N612DF · no longer on the register · serial 172S10201
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The private pilot and two passengers were departing in the airplane from the 4,422-ft-long asphalt runway. A witness reported that, while still over the runway, the airplane began to lose altitude, then entered a nose-high attitude. The airplane subsequently entered a left-turning descent consistent with an aerodynamic stall. Examination of the wreckage did not reveal any preimpact mechanical anomalies; although the ignition key was found in the left magneto position, the preimpact position of the key could not be determined. Performance calculations revealed that the airplane should have used less than half the available runway distance to clear a 50-ft obstacle at maximum gross weight with flaps extended to 10°. Weight and balance calculations revealed that the airplane was operating about 59 lbs over its maximum allowable gross weight at the time of the accident, and the flaps were found in the retracted position. It is likely that the pilot noticed the airplane's degraded climb performance after takeoff and attempted to compensate by increasing the airplane's pitch attitude, which resulted in decaying airspeed, an exceedance of the critical angle of attack, and an aerodynamic stall.
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 loading event during prior to flight
- Aerodynamic stall/spin during initial climb defining event
- Collision with terrain or object (not controlled flight into terrain) during uncontrolled descent
The NTSB's findings
- cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Aircraft control › Pilot
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Angle of attack › Not attained/maintained
- factor Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Aircraft capability › Maximum weight › Incorrect use/operation
- factor Personnel issues › Action/decision › Info processing/decision › Decision making/judgment › Pilot
- Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Configuration › Incorrect use/operation
Pilot
- Certificate: private
- Ratings: single-engine land; rotorcraft: helicopter
- Flight time: 582 hours in all
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: fatal
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 4,013 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, July 21, 2017; 17 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 2,550 lb
- Seats: 4
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Lycoming IO-360-L2A (piston); 0 hours total
- Operator: Arrow Aviation LLC
The flight
- Departed from: DXR Danbury CT at 2:25 pm
- Destination: DXR Danbury CT
- Flight plan: none
- Runway 26, 4,422 ft by 150 ft
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 350° at 9 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 73°F (23°C), dew point 54°F (12°C)
- Altimeter: 30.03 inHg
- Observation at 2:53 pm from KDXR
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 1 | |||
| Passengers | 2 |
Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report
11 documents, released by the NTSB on June 17, 2019. View them here, or download them; the NTSB redacts some personal details before release, and this site shows the NTSB's own titles rather than its file names.
| # | Document | What it is | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Controller Statements | PDF, 2 pages | View Download |
| 2 | Passenger Statements | PDF, 2 pages | View Download |
| 3 | Police Report | PDF, 3 pages | View Download |
| 4 | Weight and Balance Information | PDF, 7 pages | View Download |
| 5 | Excerpt from Information Manual | PDF, 1 page | View Download |
| 6 | Excerpts from Maintenance Records | PDF, 3 pages | View Download |
| 7 | Fueling Record | PDF, 1 page | View Download |
| 8 | Photo Array | PDF, 6 pages | View Download |
| 9 | Toxicological Report | PDF, 1 page | View Download |
| 10 | Statement of Party Representatives to NTSB Investigation | PDF, 10 pages | View Download |
| 11 | Wreckage Release and Evidence Control Forms | PDF, 3 pages | View Download |
The same docket at the NTSB · documents without a copy here are fetched from the NTSB when you open them.
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.