Silvaire LUSCOMBE 8A accident near New Port Richey, Florida, March 27, 2025
On March 27, 2025 at about 4:40 pm local time, a 1957 Silvaire LUSCOMBE 8A, registered N28790, was substantially damaged in an accident during enroute near New Port Richey, Florida. It was a personal flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). No one was hurt; 1 person was on board or involved. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).
Preview. This page is not yet listed for search engines.
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
Maintenance personnel’s inadequate inspection of the exhaust system, which allowed exhaust gases to enter the induction system from cracks in the exhaust manifold, resulting in a total loss of engine power and a subsequent forced landing.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 4, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- March 27, 2025 · about 4:40 pm local time
- Place
- New Port Richey, Florida · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 1 person was on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Silvaire LUSCOMBE 8A, built 1957 · all LUSCOMBE 8As on the register
- Registration
- N28790 · registry record · serial 1551
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The airplane had recently undergone significant maintenance, including an engine overhaul, airframe reassembly, and an annual inspection. The accident flight was the third flight after the maintenance was completed. While flying at an altitude of 800 ft, the pilot reported a total loss of engine power. The pilot attempted to restart the engine but was unsuccessful. The pilot performed a forced landing in a grassy area, and during the landing, the airplane struck a rut in the grass and flipped over, resulting in substantial damage to the vertical stabilizer, the rudder, the horizontal stabilizer, and the left wing. Postaccident examination of the wreckage revealed that the spark plugs and internal portions of the cylinders were dark and soot-covered. This was consistent with an overly rich mixture during engine operation. Further examination of the airplane revealed that the exhaust system was severely corroded, with metal thinning at multiple locations and was porous in other locations. The portions of the exhaust system that were within the carburetor heat shroud displayed cracks that contained exhaust deposits, and there were exhaust deposits within the carburetor heat shroud. This is consistent with the cracks being present prior to the accident, and allowing exhaust gases to enter the carburetor heat system. Even if the carburetor heat was off at the time of the loss of power, some of the exhaust gases would still be able to enter the engine’s induction system, which would result in an enrichment of the fuel/air mixture. It is likely that during the test flight, sufficient exhaust gases entered the induction system, making the fuel/air mixture overly rich and resulting in the loss of engine power. The airplane’s most recent annual inspection had been completed less than a month prior to the accident, and the airplane had flown for only about 2.5 hours since then. It is unlikely that the observed corrosion occurred within that short period. While the mechanic reported that he didn’t believe that the exhaust was in that condition at the time of the annual inspection, the pilot confirmed that the exhaust had not been changed since the annual inspection. Given this information, it is likely that the mechanic failed to properly inspect the exhaust during the inspection and reassembly process. Had the mechanic performed a proper inspection, he would have found the exhaust in an unairworthy condition.
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
- Nose over/nose down during landing (landing roll)
- Loss of engine power (total) during enroute
- Powerplant sys/comp malf/fail during enroute defining event
The NTSB's findings
- Aircraft › Aircraft power plant › Engine exhaust › (general) › Fatigue/wear/corrosion
- Aircraft › Aircraft power plant › Engine exhaust › (general) › Inadequate inspection
- Personnel issues › Task performance › Inspection › Scheduled/routine inspection › Maintenance personnel
Pilot
- Certificate: private
- Ratings: single-engine land
- Flight time: 722 hours in all; 695 in this make and model; 0.4 in the last 90 days; 650 as pilot in command; 0 on instruments
- Last flight review: June 13, 1999
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: minor injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 1,913 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, March 1, 2025; 2 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 1,260 lb
- Seats: 2
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Continental Aerospace Technolo A-65-8F (piston); 1,969 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: X39 Tampa FL at 4:00 pm
- Flight plan: none
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: a few clouds at 25,000 ft
- Temperature: 84°F (29°C), dew point 57°F (14°C)
- Altimeter: 30.26 inHg
- Observation at 12:53 pm from TPA, 18 miles away
Weather report (METAR): KTPA 271653Z VRB03KT 10SM FEW250 29/14 A3026 RMK AO2 SLP244 T02890139
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flig | 1 |
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 docket at the NTSB holds the report as a PDF and the investigation's photographs and documents. This site 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 ERA25LA159.
