Airbus Helicopters INC AS350B3 accident near Plant City, Florida, May 1, 2024
On May 1, 2024 at about 8:00 pm local time, a 2019 Airbus Helicopters INC AS350B3, registered N413JM, was substantially damaged in an accident during maneuvering (hover) near Plant City, Florida. It was a positioning flight under public-use (government) rules. No one was hurt; 2 people were on board or involved. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The pilot’s inadequate yaw control of the helicopter while maneuvering at a low altitude and airspeed, which resulted in a hard landing.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- May 1, 2024 · about 8:00 pm local time
- Place
- Plant City, Florida · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 2 people were on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Airbus Helicopters INC AS350B3 B3e, built 2019
- Registration
- N413JM · registry record · serial 8646
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Positioning flight · public-use (government) rules
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
During the enroute portion of the flight, the pilot in the left seat of the helicopter requested a transfer of control from the pilot in the right seat so that he could gain proficiency in preparation for obtaining a flight instructor certificate. After a positive transfer of control, the pilot in the left seat successfully conducted a confined-area approach to a 15-ft hover, then departed to search for an area to conduct a second approach. When the helicopter was about 50 ft above ground level (agl) and at an airspeed of about 20 kts, its forward airspeed slowed, and it entered a left turn that the pilot’s control inputs were ineffective in arresting. The turn progressed into a full rotation to the left and the helicopter completed two or three full rotations before impacting the ground, separating the right skid and tail rotor and damaging the tailboom and lower vertical fin. Postaccident examination of the airframe revealed that all damage features observed on the tailboom, aft ring frame, and tail rotor gearbox were consistent with overload structural failures sustained during the hard landing. The separated tail rotor blade did not show significant fragmentation, consistent with unpowered separation of the blade, likely due to impact with the ground after the tail rotor gearbox separated from the airframe. The tail rotor control system was continuous to the point where the tail rotor gearbox had separated from the airframe. One of six attachment bolts for the No. 1 tail rotor driveshaft (TRDS) hanger bearing support was not present in its installed location. The bolt was found lying in the tray area of the TRDS cover, and the respective nut was not found. The five remaining attachment bolts for the No. 1 TRDS hanger bearing support were found loose, consistent with having been inadequately torqued when installed during maintenance activities performed about 1 month before the accident. However, the tail rotor driveshafts showed no evidence of anomalous wear or preimpact fracture; thus, it is unlikely that the improper maintenance of the No. 1 TRDS hanger bearing support attachment hardware was a factor in this accident. No evidence of a pre-accident mechanical malfunction of the helicopter, control systems, or components that would have precluded normal operation was identified. Although the pilot stated that his control inputs were ineffective to counter the helicopter’s uncommanded left turn, data recovered from the engine data recorder (EDR) showed that the tail rotor potentiometer (XPA) value peaked only at 58.82% (consistent with a pedal position value of only 74.5%) and for only 1 second. This indicated that the pilot did not push the right pedal to its fullest extent and did not push it long enough for the pedal input to effectively counter the uncommanded left turn. According to a safety notice published by the helicopter manufacturer, all types of single-rotor helicopters can be susceptible to unanticipated left yaw at low speed. The notice indicated that unanticipated yaw has historically been referred to as “loss of tail rotor effectiveness,” but noted that the term “wrongly implies that tail rotor efficiency is reduced.” The notice stated that, when an unanticipated left yaw situation is encountered, “swift corrective action is needed in response, otherwise loss of control and possible accident may result.” According to the notice, “the key feature of an unanticipated left yaw recovery is large amplitude right pedal input. Recovery may not be immediate but will occur if the pilot persists in maintaining right pedal.” The helicopter was equipped with a cockpit image recorder that could have provided additional data to better understand the sequence of events leading up to the accident. However, it did not record the accident flight or any other flights in the previous 90 days and would not record when examined after the accident. The required annual functional check of the system, which maintenance records indicated was performed about 1 month before the accident, should have detected and rectified the malfunction before returning the helicopter to service.
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
- Hard landing during landing
- Loss of tail rotor effectiveness during maneuvering (hover) defining event
The NTSB's findings
- Aircraft › Aircraft propeller/rotor › Tail rotor drive system › Tail rotor drive shaft › Incorrect service/maintenance
- Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Aircraft control › Pilot
- Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Yaw control › Not attained/maintained
- Aircraft › Fluids/misc hardware › Misc hardware › (general) › Inadequate inspection
Pilot
- Certificate: commercial pilot
- Ratings: single-engine land; instrument: airplane; rotorcraft: helicopter
- Flight time: 2,322 hours in all; 800 in this make and model; 23 in the last 90 days; 13 in the last 30 days; 2,118 as pilot in command
- Last flight review: March 1, 2023
- Medical certificate: Class 2 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
Co-pilot
- Certificate: private
- Ratings: rotorcraft: helicopter
- Flight time: 132 hours in all; 132 in this make and model; 26 in the last 90 days; 10 in the last 30 days; 21 as pilot in command
- Last flight review: April 2, 2024
- Medical certificate: Class 2 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 1,982 hours
- Last inspection: 100-hour inspection, April 4, 2024; 12.3 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 5,225 lb
- Seats: 7
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Safran Arriel 2D (turboshaft); 1,982 hours total
- Operator: Hillsborough County Sheriff'S Office
The flight
- Departed from: LAL Lakeland FL at 7:45 pm
- Destination: VDF Tampa FL
- Flight plan: none
- A second pilot was aboard
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: scat at 7,000 ft
- Temperature: 95°F (35°C), dew point 61°F (16°C)
- Altimeter: 29.93 inHg
- Observation at 3:55 pm from PCM, 4 miles away
Weather report (METAR): KPCM 011955Z AUTO 00000KT 10SM SCT070 SCT080 SCT110 35/16 A2993 RMK AO2
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 2 |
Photographs from the investigation 7 pictures from the NTSB's docket, as the NTSB released them
Photo 1 – View of Helicopter as Found (HCSO)
Photo 2 – View of Wrinkled Tailboom, Vertical Stabilizer, and Separated T/R Gearbox (HCSO)
Photo 3 – View of Dismounted and Damaged No. 1 T/R Driveshaft Bearing (HCSO)
Photo 4 – View of Hanger Bearing Support Bracket with Displaced Elastomeric Bushing (HCSO)
Photo 5 – View of Separated T/R Gearbox (HCSO)
Photo 6 – View of Tailrotor Hub and Blade Assembly (HCSO)
Photo 7 – View of Separated Red T/R Blade as Found (HCSO)The NTSB's photographs with the NTSB's captions, at screen size. Open a picture to see it full size or to report one that should not be shown.
Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report
13 documents, released by the NTSB on May 21, 2026. 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 | Pilot/operator Aircraft Accident Report, NTSB Form 6120.1 | PDF, 11 pages | View Download |
| 2 | Pilot's Statement | PDF, 1 page | View Download |
| 3 | Second Pilot's Statement | PDF, 1 page | View Download |
| 4 | Wreckage and Maintenance Email Discussion | PDF, 3 pages | View Download |
| 5 | Airworthiness Group Factual Report | PDF, 14 pages | View Download |
| 6 | Airworthiness Group Factual Report - Attachment 1 | PDF, 6 pages | View Download |
| 7 | Airworthiness Group Factual Report - Attachment 2 | PDF, 41 pages | View Download |
| 8 | Airworthiness Group Factual Report - Attachment 3 | PDF, 8 pages | View Download |
| 9 | Airworthiness Group Factual Report - Attachment 4 | PDF, 5 pages | View Download |
| 10 | Airworthiness Group Factual Report - Attachment 5 | PDF, 5 pages | View Download |
| 11 | Safety Information Notice_airbus | PDF, 4 pages | View Download |
| 12 | Photo Array | PDF, 7 pages · our copy | View Download |
| 13 | Statement of Party Representatives to NTSB Investigation Hcso | PDF, 14 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.
