The U.S. aircraft register, updated daily
Accidents · NTSB ERA23FA219 · Final report

Cessna 182 accident near Reliance, Tennessee, May 7, 2023

On May 7, 2023 at about 10:49 pm local time, a 1978 Cessna 182, registered N725AS, was substantially damaged in an accident during enroute (cruise) near Reliance, Tennessee. It was a personal flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). 1 person was killed. The weather was instrument conditions (cloud, fog or low visibility).

The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged

The pilot’s decision to continue an instrument flight into an area of forecast weather with severe to extreme turbulence associated with a line of thunderstorms, which resulted in an in-flight breakup. Contributing was the pilot’s operation of the airplane in excess of its published maneuvering speed.

Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 4, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.

What the record shows

Date
May 7, 2023 · about 10:49 pm local time
Place
Reliance, Tennessee · map
Type
Accident
Injuries
1 person was killed.
Weather
instrument conditions (cloud, fog or low visibility)
Aircraft
Cessna 182 Q, built 1978 · all 182s on the register
Registration
N725AS · registry record · serial 18266640
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)

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

The instrument-rated private pilot departed on an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight and climbed to 9,000 ft mean sea level (msl) on a southeast heading. Radar data indicated that for about the first 2 hours and 30 minutes, the airplane maintained a relatively straight course. Twice the pilot requested air traffic control (ATC) provide radar vectors around weather, confirming with one controller that the airplane was equipped with on-board weather observation capability. During cruise flight, while flying at an airspeed above the airplane’s published maneuvering speed in an area with a valid Convective SIGMET, the airplane encountered the leading edge of precipitation and building cumuliform clouds in convective updrafts. This weather system was associated with a line of forecast thunderstorms and other pilots had reported the presence of severe to extreme turbulence while flying in the vicinity of it. The accident airplane’s heading and altitude changed several times during the final portion of the flight, and these deviations were not instructed by the controller or announced by the pilot. Following a second right turn the controller commented to the pilot, “it looks like you are in a little bit of a descent in a turn is everything alright?” The pilot did not reply to that communication and radar contact with the airplane was lost. A radar performance study indicated that when the airplane was last observed by radar, while flying at an altitude of about 8,850 ft msl, it was operating at a calibrated airspeed of 134 knots, which was 35 knots greater than the published maneuvering speed. Although the radar data did not capture the final descent, the airplane likely began descending after encountering severe to extreme turbulence. During that descent, the airplane’s airspeed which was already well above the published maneuvering speed likely increased and an in-flight break-up occurred, separating both wings and a majority of the right horizontal stabilizer and right elevator from the fuselage. The postaccident examination of the airframe revealed that all fracture surfaces displayed features consistent with overload failure with no evidence of preexisting cracking. The examination of the engine revealed no evidence of any preimpact failures or malfunctions. The airplane was equipped with a Ballistic Recovery Systems (BRS), and that system’s parachute and riser (lanyard) were not recovered following the accident. Examination of the BRS airframe system components revealed that the fire pin actuator was inside the rocket cone with the activation cable still attached, which was consistent with normal activation. Evidence indicated that the forward straps that connected to each front main spar, and the rear straps that were connected to the left and right attach plates on the rear bulkhead, remained connected to their respective bolts at the 3-point shackle. The 3-point shackle, which had separate attach points (bolts) for the forward and aft straps, and for the riser (lanyard) of the parachute, was located within the main wreckage. However, the riser for the airframe parachute was not attached to the 3-point shackle. The 3-point shackle bolt for the parachute riser was not visibly deformed. The other two bolts of the 3-point shackle that secured the forward and aft straps also did not exhibit any visible damage. Examination of a portion of the rear harness revealed that the shock absorption stitching pattern was not peeled/torn, indicating that there was no force applied to the rear harness at the 3-point shackle level. Based on this information, it is likely that the pilot activated the airframe parachute at some point during the accident sequence, the parachute bag properly deployed from its canister, and the forward harness straps opened from their stowed position; however, with the parachute riser not attached to the 3-point shackle, the BRS parachute would have been useless. Because the parachute and riser were not located, it could not be determined why the parachute riser, which last had maintenance performed nearly 6 years earlier, was not attached to the 3-point shackle. The pilot’s logbook was not located; therefore, the date of his last flight review and his instrument currency could not be determined. About 7 months before the accident, he last reported having accumulated 341 total hours of flight experience, of which 265 hours were in the accident airplane make and model. Toxicological testing results were positive for amphetamine, quetiapine, hydroxychloroquine, tadalafil, acetaminophen and ethanol. The FAA considers amphetamine and quetiapine as “Do Not Issue/Do Not Fly” medications. Whether the effects of the pilot’s use of amphetamine, quetiapine, hydroxychloroquine, or any associated underlying conditions contributed to the accident or affected his decision making could not be determined. Some or all of the small amount of detected ethanol could have been the result of postmortem production, and it is unlikely that ethanol effects contributed to the accident. In summary, the relatively low-time instrument pilot, who was flying while using multiple unapproved medications, flew into an area of a forecast convective weather that included precipitation and building cumuliform clouds in convective updrafts. These conditions were associated with a line of thunderstorms and severe to extreme turbulence, the latter of which by definition can render an airplane practically impossible to control. While flying well above the published maneuvering speed for the airplane’s weight, the airplane likely began descending with a corresponding airspeed increase, followed by an abrupt or full-control input that resulted in the in-flight breakup.

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. Altitude deviation during enroute (cruise)
  2. Part(s) separation from AC during enroute (descent)
  3. Collision with terrain or object (not controlled flight into terrain) during uncontrolled descent
  4. Course deviation during enroute (cruise)
  5. Aircraft structural failure
  6. Windshear or thunderstorm during enroute (cruise) defining event

The NTSB's findings

  • Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Airspeed › Capability exceeded
  • Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Use of equip/system › Pilot
  • Personnel issues › Action/decision › Info processing/decision › Decision making/judgment › Pilot
  • Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena › Convective weather › Thunderstorm › Decision related to condition

Pilot

  • Certificate: private
  • Ratings: single-engine land; instrument: airplane
  • Flight time: 363.4 hours in all; 287.4 in this make and model
  • Medical certificate: Class 2 (without waivers/limitations)
  • Seat: left
  • Injury: fatal

The aircraft

  • Airframe total time: 3,265.3 hours
  • Last inspection: annual inspection, September 1, 2022
  • Maximum gross weight: 3,100 lb
  • Seats: 4
  • Landing gear: fixed
  • Engine: Teledyne Continental IO-470-F (33) (piston); 0 hours total

The flight

  • Departed from: SBN South Bend IN at 7:59 pm
  • Destination: JCA Jefferson GA
  • Flight plan: IFR

Weather at the time

  • Light: daylight
  • Wind: from 360° at 10 knots, gusting 29
  • Visibility: 10 statute miles
  • Sky: broken clouds at 4,900 ft; scat at 4,200 ft
  • Temperature: 70°F (21°C), dew point 59°F (15°C)
  • Altimeter: 30.11 inHg
  • Observation at 6:35 pm from KMMI, 12 miles away

Weather report (METAR): KMMI 072235Z AUTO 36010G29KT 10SM SCT042 BKN049 OVC070 21/15 A3011 RMK A01

Injuries

FatalSeriousMinorNone
Flight crew1

Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report

26 documents, released by the NTSB on June 24, 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.

#DocumentWhat it is
1 Witness Statements PDF, 2 pages View Download
2 Record of NTSB Conversations PDF, 11 pages View Download
3 NTSB Memorandum for Record - Federal Aviation Administration Airman File Review PDF, 1 page View Download
4 NTSB Memorandum for Record - Pilot Flight Time from Insurance Paperwork PDF, 1 page View Download
5 Excerpts from Pilot's Operating Handbook and FAA Approved Airplane Flight Manual PDF, 2 pages View Download
6 Maintenance Record Excerpts PDF, 4 pages View Download
7 Weather Factual Report PDF, 36 pages View Download
8 Weather Attachment 1 GIF file Download
9 Weather Attachment 2 GIF file Download
10 Weather Attachment 3 zip file Download
11 Weather Attachment 4 PDF, 7 pages View Download
12 Weather Attachment 5 PDF, 3 pages View Download
13 Weather Attachment 6 zip file Download
14 NTSB Prepared Partial Transcription of Communications PDF, 4 pages View Download
15 FAA Chronological Summary of Flight Communications PDF, 10 pages View Download
16 Flight Plan Information PDF, 2 pages View Download
17 Aircraft Performance Study PDF, 9 pages View Download
18 N725AS radar Data data file Download
19 Wing Examination Summary PDF, 14 pages View Download
20 Airplane Information and Brs System Description and Examination Summary PDF, 22 pages View Download
21 Toxicological Report PDF, 1 page View Download
22 Medical Factual Report PDF, 8 pages View Download
23 Multiple Electronic Devices - Specialist's Factual Report PDF, 9 pages View Download
24 Attachment 1 to Multiple Electronic Devices - Specialist's Factual Report data file Download
25 Statement of Party Representatives to NTSB Investigation PDF, 10 pages View Download
26 Release of Aircraft Wreckage, NTSB Form 6120.15, and NTSB Evidence Control Forms PDF, 10 pages View Download

The same docket at the NTSB · documents without a copy here are fetched from the NTSB when you open them.

Other NTSB records under N725AS the same tail number, which may have belonged to a different aircraft at the time

2013-10-27ERA14CA023 · accident near Wauchula, FL · substantial damage · no injuries

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 documents and photographs are the NTSB's docket, the folder of records gathered during the investigation, shown as the NTSB released them (the NTSB redacts some personal details first) and listed under the NTSB's own titles. This site's own text 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 ERA23FA219.