Robinson R-22 Beta accident near Encinitas, California, August 25, 2003
On August 25, 2003 at about 5:10 pm local time, a Robinson R-22 Beta (helicopter), registered N8049V, was destroyed in an accident near Encinitas, California. It was an instructional flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). 1 person was killed. The weather was instrument conditions (cloud, fog or low visibility).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The student pilot's spatial disorientation and inadvertent descent into the ocean while maneuvering to avoid inclement weather. Also causal was the flight instructor's inadequate supervision due to his improper approval of his student's preflight preparation and failure to ensure that the flight could be performed under visual flight rules. Contributing factors were the low cloud condition, and the student's improper weather evaluation and preflight planning.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- August 25, 2003 · about 5:10 pm local time
- Place
- Encinitas, California · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- 1 person was killed.
- Weather
- instrument conditions (cloud, fog or low visibility)
- Aircraft
- Robinson R-22 Beta · all R-22 Betas on the register
- Registration
- N8049V · registry record · serial 2394
- Damage
- Destroyed
- Flight
- Instructional flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
During a daytime solo cross-country flight the student pilot, en route to his private pilot certification examination, became spatially disoriented and inadvertently descended into the ocean while maneuvering to avoid inclement weather. The student's certified flight instructor (CFI) was not present at the airport on the day of the accident flight. The CFI reported that on the previous day he had authorized his student to fly from San Diego to Long Beach, where the examination was to take place. On the day of the accident the student pilot received a weather briefing about 2 hours prior to his departure. He was advised, in part, that instrument meteorological conditions existed and were forecast along a portion of his planned route of flight, and that the conditions were forecast to improve. Thereafter, the student telephoned his flight instructor and discussed the briefing, but (according to the student's CFI) he did not advise the CFI that the weather conditions were, in certain locations, below the limits established for his flying or that instrument weather conditions existed. Without independently verifying the weather forecast, the CFI authorized the flight, and the student took off at his planned departure time on a northerly course paralleling the coastline. After about 9 minutes of flight, at 1009:03, the student pilot stated to a local air traffic controller "I'm in a little trouble" and "I'm gonna start climbing to get out of clouds." The northbound student pilot commenced a left turn while flying northbound over the ocean. This positioned the helicopter farther off shore. During the turn the student pilot said to the controller, at 1009:45, "I need to get out of the clouds visibility is really bad out here." At 1009:50, the controller said "if you would like to go (inland) to the I-5 (interstate freeway) and follow north that's approved." The pilot responded with his last recorded transmission and stated at 1010:00, "Roger I'm gonna start climbing." Recorded radar indicates that the pilot climbed from 200 to 600 feet, whereupon the radar track ended upon completion of a left 360-degree turn. The helicopter wreckage was located 0.3 miles from its last radar location, and about 0.5 miles offshore. An Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) aviation safety inspector was located near the shoreline. He reported observing fog along the coast and said the visibility was about 1/8-mile. The student's CFI subsequently acknowledged to the Safety Board investigator that he had not independently ascertained the weather, but had relied upon what the student told him in authorizing the flight. The CFI reported that, had he known the actual weather conditions, he would not have authorized the flight. The FAA requires, before a CFI authorizes a student's solo cross-country flight, that the CFI has reviewed the current and forecast weather conditions and has determined that the flight can be completed under visual flight rules.
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
Dual student
- Certificate: student
- Flight time: 81 hours in all; 81 in this make and model; 14 in the last 90 days; 7 in the last 30 days; 31 as pilot in command; 0 on instruments
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: fatal
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 4,103 hours
- Last inspection: 100-hour inspection, August 1, 2003
- Maximum gross weight: 1,370 lb
- Seats: 2
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Lycoming O-320-B2C (piston); 0 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: MYF San Diego CA at 5:00 pm
- Destination: LGB Long Beach CA
- Flight plan: VFR
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: at 6 knots
- Visibility: 0.1 statute miles
- Temperature: 70°F (21°C), dew point 64°F (18°C)
- Altimeter: 29.95 inHg
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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.
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.
