Cessna 172 accident near Scottsdale, Arizona, March 6, 2016
On March 6, 2016 at about 4:45 pm local time, a 2006 Cessna 172, registered N6023V, was substantially damaged in an accident during landing (flare/touchdown) near Scottsdale, Arizona (Scottsdale airport). 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).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The failure of the student pilot to maintain pitch control while landing, which resulted in a hard landing, loss of directional control, and runway excursion.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- March 6, 2016 · about 4:45 pm local time
- Place
- Scottsdale, Arizona · Scottsdale · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 1 person was on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Cessna 172 S, built 2006 · all 172s on the register
- Registration
- N6023V · registry record · serial 172S10198
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The solo student pilot reported that the airplane bounced after touched down, then veered off the runway to the left and came to a stop in gravel. A postaccident exam revealed substantial damage to the firewall. According to the student pilot there were no preimpact mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airframe or engine that would have precluded normal operation.
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
- Abnormal runway contact during landing (flare/touchdown) defining event
- Runway excursion during landing
The NTSB's findings
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Pitch control › Not attained/maintained
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Directional control › Not attained/maintained
- cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Aircraft control › Student/instructed pilot
Pilot
- Certificate: student
- Flight time: 11 hours in all; 11 in this make and model; 11 in the last 90 days; 1.5 in the last 30 days
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Last inspection: inspection type not recorded
- Maximum gross weight: 2,300 lb
- Seats: 4
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Lycoming IO-360-L2A (piston); 0 hours total
- Operator: Sawyer Aviation
The flight
- Departed from: SDL Scottsdale AZ at 4:40 pm
- Destination: SDL Scottsdale AZ
- Flight plan: none
- Runway 03, 8,249 ft by 100 ft
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 140° at 7 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 70°F (21°C), dew point 27°F (-3°C)
- Altimeter: 29.95 inHg
- Observation at 4:53 pm from KSDL
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 1 |
Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report
The docket, the folder of records gathered during an investigation (maintenance records, photographs, witness statements, examinations), has not been read from the NTSB for this case yet; the list appears here once it has. Open the docket at the NTSB.
Other NTSB records under N6023V the same tail number, which may have belonged to a different aircraft at the time
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.