The U.S. aircraft register, updated daily
Accidents · NTSB ERA23LA121 · Final report

Amateur-built LANCAIR 4P accident near Hartford, Connecticut, January 28, 2023

On January 28, 2023 at about 8:42 pm local time, a 2019 amateur-built LANCAIR 4P, registered N550LX, was substantially damaged in an accident during takeoff near Hartford, Connecticut (Hartford-Brainard Airport). It was a personal flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). 1 person was seriously injured. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).

The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged

The pilot’s takeoff with a significant fuel imbalance, which resulted in the airplane lacking the roll authority to overcome the left rolling tendency and subsequently impacting terrain. Contributing to the accident was the pilot’s inadequate preflight inspection and the gusting crosswind.

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

What the record shows

Date
January 28, 2023 · about 8:42 pm local time
Place
Hartford, Connecticut · Hartford-Brainard Airport · map
Type
Accident
Injuries
1 person was seriously injured.
Weather
visual conditions (good weather)
Aircraft
Amateur-built LANCAIR 4P NO SERIES, built 2019
Registration
N550LX · registry record · serial 006
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)

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

The pilot of the turbine-powered, experimental amateur-built airplane had ongoing issues with fuel migrating from the right wing fuel tank to the left wing tank when the airplane sat in the hangar for several days or more. Multiple witnesses at the airport on the day of the accident observed the airplane sitting with its left-wing low while parked in the hangar and on the ramp; however, the pilot did not notice the leaning during his preflight inspection nor did he visually check the fuel tanks before flight. The pilot recalled that before takeoff both fuel gauges indicated 38 gallons of fuel was present in each fuel tank. The pilot taxied for takeoff and performed a rejected takeoff due to “something not feeling right” with the airplane. The pilot returned to the ramp environment and taxied around briefly, before deciding to return to the runway for another takeoff attempt. During the second takeoff, at rotation, the airplane briefly climbed but immediately began a roll and turn to the left. The pilot attempted to correct the left roll by applying right roll with the flight controls and by reducing engine power; however, the left roll and turn continued. The airplane impacted terrain in a left turn with the left wing impacting the ground first. Subsequently, the airplane cartwheeled and an explosion and postcrash fire immediately ensued. The pilot was ejected from the airframe during the impact and was rescued by first responders. Data recovered from the primary flight display (PFD) found that the last indicated fuel quantity recorded, during the second taxi for departure, was 82 gallons in the left tank and 39 gallons in the right tank, resulting in an imbalance of 43 gallons. During initial flight testing of the accident airplane make and model, it was found to have a lack of roll control with an imbalance of fuel of 30 gallons below 100 knots airspeed. The accident flight’s takeoff was likely initiated with an imbalance of nearly 43 gallons of fuel, and once the airplane lifted off around 65 knots, the airplane likely lacked the roll authority to stop the left rolling tendencies due to the imbalance. The most recent fuel system maintenance work involved the replacement of an on/off cross-feed valve. The valve was found in the wreckage mostly closed and it had seized; however, it displayed a slight angle towards the open position. It is likely that the slight opening allowed for fuel to migrate from the right wing to the left wing over the course of the 30 days the airplane sat between flights. The pilot had multiple opportunities to notice the fuel imbalance. He could have checked the fuel filler caps during preflight or observed that the PFD displayed a significant fuel imbalance. Furthermore, two witnesses at the airport observed that the airplane was leaning to the left before flight. Given the airplane’s history with a fuel imbalance, the pilot should have checked the airplane’s overall disposition during preflight inspection. Lastly, he performed a rejected takeoff due to something not feeling right with the airplane, but performed no meaningful troubleshooting nor did he exit the airplane before deciding to take off again. Had the pilot ended the flight after the rejected takeoff and checked the fuel, or called for maintenance to examine the airplane, the fuel imbalance likely could have been discovered. Further exacerbating rolling tendency was a gusting crosswind from the airplane’s right side, which likely added to the left rolling tendency the pilot experienced.

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. Loss of control in flight during takeoff defining event
  2. Preflight or dispatch event during prior to flight

The NTSB's findings

  • Personnel issues › Action/decision › Info processing/decision › Identification/recognition › Pilot
  • Aircraft › Fluids/misc hardware › Fluids › Fuel › Inadequate inspection
  • Aircraft › Fluids/misc hardware › Fluids › Fuel › Fluid level
  • Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Fuel system › Fuel distribution › Malfunction
  • Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena › Wind › Crosswind › Contributed to outcome

Pilot

  • Certificate: private
  • Ratings: single-engine land; instrument: airplane
  • Flight time: 1,400 hours in all; 120 in this make and model
  • Medical certificate: Class 3 (without waivers/limitations)
  • Seat: left
  • Injury: serious injuries

The aircraft

  • Airframe total time: 121 hours
  • Last inspection: condition inspection, April 21, 2022
  • Maximum gross weight: 3,850 lb
  • Seats: 4
  • Landing gear: retractable
  • Engine: Pratt & Whitney Canada T74-CP-700 (turboprop); 121 hours total
  • Fire on the ground

The flight

  • Destination: GON Groton CT
  • Flight plan: IFR
  • Runway 20, 4,417 ft by 150 ft

Weather at the time

  • Light: daylight
  • Wind: from 270° at 5 knots, gusting 15
  • Visibility: 10 statute miles
  • Sky: overcast at 20,000 ft
  • Temperature: 50°F (10°C), dew point 21°F (-6°C)
  • Altimeter: 30.21 inHg
  • Observation at 3:46 pm from HFD

Weather report (METAR): SPECI KHFD 282046Z 25009KT 10SM OVC200 10/M06 A3021 RMK AO2 T01001061=

Injuries

FatalSeriousMinorNone
Flight crew1

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

19 documents, released by the NTSB on May 2, 2024. 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.

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.