Cessna 172 accident near London, Ohio, April 18, 2023
On April 18, 2023 at about 10:20 pm local time, a 1977 Cessna 172, registered N734GB, was substantially damaged in an accident during approach (VFR pattern final) near London, Ohio (Madison County airport). It was an instructional flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). 2 people were killed. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The flight instructor’s failure to maintain adequate airspeed and his exceedance of the airplane’s critical angle of attack, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall at an altitude too low for recovery.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- April 18, 2023 · about 10:20 pm local time
- Place
- London, Ohio · Madison County · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- 2 people were killed.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Cessna 172 N, built 1977 · all 172s on the register
- Registration
- N734GB · no longer on the register · serial 17268833
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Instructional flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The accident occurred during what was likely the student pilot’s first instructional flight. According to ADS-B data, the airplane was on final approach to the runway for landing in gusty wind conditions, when the accident occurred. The airplane’s calculated airspeed during the final approach was decelerating, and about 150 ft from the runway threshold, it was about 18 knots above its published stall speed given its configuration. The airplane subsequently impacted the ground about 1 ft from the edge of the runway in a near-vertical nose-down, left-wing-low attitude and came to rest inverted. Postaccident examination of the airplane revealed that the damage signatures observed on the wreckage were consistent with a relatively low energy impact, with the majority of the damage being to the forward portion of the airframe. The engine and propeller were compressed aft and up into the fuselage. The flaps were found extended to the 40° position. No evidence of any preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures were identified that would have precluded normal operation of the airplane. The observed impact signatures were indicative of the airplane encountering an aerodynamic stall at low altitude. Postaccident toxicological testing showed that the student pilot had used the antidepressant medication venlafaxine. This medication and some conditions it may be used to treat have some potential to impair performance. However, considering the accident circumstances, including the student pilot’s limited baseline piloting skill and experience, his limited flight safety responsibilities on the first instructional flight, and the presence of the qualified flight instructor, it is unlikely that the student pilot’s venlafaxine use, or any associated underlying condition, contributed to the accident. Given the decelerating airspeed trend observed in the recorded data and the impact attitude of the airplane, it is likely that the flight instructor did not ensure that sufficient airspeed was maintained and the airplane’s critical angle of attack was exceeded, which resulted in an aerodynamic stall while on final approach to land.
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
- Aerodynamic stall/spin during approach (VFR pattern final)
- Loss of control in flight during approach (VFR pattern final) defining event
- Collision with terrain or object (not controlled flight into terrain) during uncontrolled descent
The NTSB's findings
- Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Aircraft control › Instructor/check pilot
- Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Airspeed › Not attained/maintained
- Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Angle of attack › Capability exceeded
Flight instructor
- Certificate: airline transport pilot, flight instructor, commercial pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instructor: airplane multi-engine; instructor: airplane single-engine; instructor: instrument airplane; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 9,890 hours in all
- Medical certificate: Class 2 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: fatal
Dual student
- Flight time: 0 hours in all; 0 in this make and model
- Medical certificate: None
- Seat: left
- Injury: fatal
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 7,531.5 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, April 13, 2023
- Seats: 4
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Lycoming O-320-E2D (piston); 7,531 hours total
The flight
- Flight plan: none
- Runway 27, 4,000 ft by 75 ft
- A second pilot was aboard
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 280° at 16 knots, gusting 19
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 57°F (14°C), dew point 21°F (-6°C)
- Altimeter: 29.92 inHg
- Observation at 6:35 pm from UYF
Weather report (METAR): KUYF 182235Z AUTO 28016G19KT 10SM CLR 14/M06 A2992 RMK AO2
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 2 |
Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report
14 documents, released by the NTSB on February 20, 2025. 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.
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.
