The U.S. aircraft register, updated daily
Accidents · NTSB ERA23LA122 · Final report

Aero Commander 500 accident near Sylacauga, Alabama, January 28, 2023

On January 28, 2023 at about 11:51 pm local time, a 1962 Aero Commander 500, registered N107DF, was substantially damaged in an accident during enroute near Sylacauga, Alabama (Merkel Fld Sylacauga Muni airport). It was a positioning 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 failure to assure there was an adequate amount of fuel onboard to complete the flight, which resulted in a loss of engine power due to fuel exhaustion.

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 11:51 pm local time
Place
Sylacauga, Alabama · Merkel Fld Sylacauga Muni · map
Type
Accident
Injuries
1 person was seriously injured.
Weather
visual conditions (good weather)
Aircraft
Aero Commander 500 B, built 1962 · all 500s on the register
Registration
N107DF · no longer on the register · serial 500B-1191-97
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Positioning flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)

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

The pilot was taking the airplane on a flight to another airport for maintenance. During the preflight inspection, the pilot turned on the electrical power and noticed that the fuel gauge was indicating 80 gallons of fuel. The pilot reported the airplane holds a maximum of 156 gallons of fuel and he calculated that he needed 113 gallons of fuel to legally complete the flight. He informed the fixed base operator (FBO) that he wanted the fuel tanks topped off, but was informed by the ramp technician that the fuel tanks were full and he did not need fuel. The pilot went back to the airplane and removed the fuel cap. He noticed fuel in the filler neck and assumed the fuel tanks were full. He did not push open the anti-siphon fuel valve to see if the tanks were full or if residual fuel was pooled on top of the anti-siphon fuel valve. When the pilot started the engines, he noticed the fuel gauge was flickering and thought it was malfunctioning. He proceeded to depart for the maintenance base. After about 2 hours of flight time both engines lost power. Unable to reach the closest airport, the pilot executed an off-field landing in a cotton field. After landing, the airplane rolled into the trees and the left wing separated from the fuselage. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the left and right wings. According to the fueler at the FBO, she drove out to the airplane to fuel it on the morning of the accident and, after removing the single fuel cap, saw fuel on top of the anti-siphon valve. She used her finger to push down the valve and felt fuel, so she believed the airplane was full of fuel and it did not need additional fuel. Both wing fuel bladders were breached during the accident and a minor amount of fuel was leaked onto the ground. Personnel from the company who recovered the wreckage stated that there was no fuel in the fuel tanks when the airplane was recovered. The fuel quantity transmitter was sent to the manufacturer for examination. Testing of the transmitter revealed no anomalies with the unit. Based on this information, it is likely that the pilot erred in his assessment of the airplane’s fuel quantity prior to departing on the accident flight and that the available quantity of fuel was exhausted, which resulted in the total loss of engine power and the subsequent forced landing.

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. Fuel exhaustion during enroute defining event
  2. Aircraft servicing event during prior to flight

The NTSB's findings

  • Personnel issues › Task performance › Inspection › Preflight inspection › Pilot
  • Aircraft › Fluids/misc hardware › Fluids › Fuel › Fluid level

Pilot

  • Certificate: commercial pilot
  • Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instrument: airplane
  • Flight time: 1,337 hours in all; 366 in this make and model; 260 in the last 90 days; 99 in the last 30 days; 1,248 as pilot in command
  • Last flight review: December 17, 2022
  • Medical certificate: Class 2 (without waivers/limitations)
  • Seat: left
  • Injury: serious injuries

The aircraft

  • Airframe total time: 20,061 hours
  • Last inspection: approved inspection programme, December 14, 2022
  • Maximum gross weight: 6,750 lb
  • Seats: 2
  • Landing gear: retractable
  • Engine 1: Lycoming io-540 (piston); 18,274 hours total
  • Engine 2: Lycoming io-540 (piston); 18,274 hours total
  • Operator: Central Air Southwest INC

The flight

  • Departed from: VDF Tampa FL at 4:05 pm
  • Destination: BHM Birmingham AL
  • Flight plan: IFR
  • Runway 09, 5,390 ft by 100 ft

Weather at the time

  • Light: dusk
  • Visibility: 10 statute miles
  • Sky: overcast at 10,000 ft; scat at 100 ft
  • Temperature: 54°F (12°C), dew point 23°F (-5°C)
  • Altimeter: 30.28 inHg
  • Observation at 11:55 pm from KSCD, 2 miles away

Weather report (METAR): KSCD 282355Z AUTO 00000KT 10SM OVC100 12/M05 A3028 RMK AO2 T01211050 10163 20121

Injuries

FatalSeriousMinorNone
Flight crew1

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

7 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.