The U.S. aircraft register, updated daily
Accidents · NTSB OPS12IA303 · Final report

Embraer EMB-145LR incident near Farmersville, Texas, January 25, 2012

On January 25, 2012 at about 1:27 am local time, a Embraer EMB-145LR, registered N639AE, was involved in an incident during enroute (climb to cruise) near Farmersville, Texas. It was flown under scheduled airline rules (Part 121). No one was hurt; 53 people were on board or involved.

The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged

The flight's continued operation through an area containing substantial convective weather activity. Contributing to the accident was the air traffic control/traffic management unit's lack of awareness and recognition of the effect of weather movement on the departure route in use and the flight crew's acceptance of a route and limited weather deviation that was inadequate to maintain a safe distance from the thunderstorms in the area.

Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made November 2, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.

What the record shows

Date
January 25, 2012 · about 1:27 am local time · cases in 2012
Place
Farmersville, Texas · map
Type
Incident
Injuries
No one was hurt; 53 people were on board or involved.
Weather
not recorded
Aircraft
Embraer EMB-145LR · all EMB-145LRs on the register
Registration
N639AE · registry record · serial 145182
Damage
Not recorded
Flight
Flight · scheduled airline rules (Part 121)

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

A regional jet departed from Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport on a scheduled passenger flight to Madison, Wisconsin. About 15 minutes after takeoff, the crew declared an emergency because the airplane had been struck by lightning and requested to divert to Little Rock, Arkansas. After landing, the airplane was inspected and found to have sustained damage from the lightning strike requiring repairs to the left wing skin and rivets and replacement of the left wingtip and aileron. At the time of the incident, the airplane was being handled by controllers at the Fort Worth Air Traffic Control Center. Significant convective weather was in the area and along the airplane's route, resulting in closures of several routes into and out of the Dallas area. The controllers did not provide specific information on the location of the convective activity along the airplane's route until the crew asked for the information. However, in response to a question, the controllers did advise the crew that there was moderate to heavy precipitation ahead. The crew attempted to identify areas where they could divert to avoid the convective activity, but the controller was unable to approve significant deviations because of other traffic flows in the vicinity. Shortly afterward, the lightning strike occurred. Because of the lightning strike and requests for weather deviations by other aircraft flying through the same area, the center's Traffic Management Unit began rerouting aircraft away from the area and toward other routes less affected by convective weather. When interviewed, traffic management staff noted that this pattern was normal: it was not unusual to wait until pilots refused to fly a route because of weather impact before discontinuing its use. This incident was included as an example in a recommendation letter to the FAA, available at http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2012/A-12-018-020.pdf, which recommends improved transmission of real-time lightning data to both controllers and pilots.

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. Windshear or thunderstorm during enroute (climb to cruise) defining event

The NTSB's findings

  • cause Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena › Convective weather › Thunderstorm › Decision related to condition
  • factor Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena › Convective weather › Thunderstorm › Awareness of condition
  • factor Personnel issues › Action/decision › Info processing/decision › Identification/recognition › ATC personnel
  • factor Personnel issues › Action/decision › Action › Lack of action › ATC personnel
  • factor Personnel issues › Action/decision › Action › Lack of action › Flight crew

The aircraft

  • Seats: 55
  • Landing gear: fixed
  • Engine 1: (turbofan); 0 hours total
  • Engine 2: (turbofan); 0 hours total
  • Operator: American Eagle Airlines INC

The flight

  • Departed from: DFW Fort Worth TX at 1:16 am
  • Destination: MSN Madison WI
  • Flight plan: IFR
  • A second pilot was aboard

Weather at the time

  • Temperature: 0°F (-18°C), dew point 0°F (-18°C)

Injuries

FatalSeriousMinorNone
Cabi1
Flight crew2
Passengers50

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

2 documents, released by the NTSB on October 26, 2012. 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.

#DocumentWhat it is
1 Weather and radar Data zip file Download
2 ATC 3 - Factual Report of Group Chairman 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.

Connections how this case links to the rest of the register

Aircraft
Place

The whole map of how records connect · these connections as data: /graph/accident/OPS12IA303.json.

The bigger picture in Aviation Analytics: accidents over time since 1982, by model, by phase of flight and conditions, by place and on the map.

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 does not name anyone involved, its policy at this time. A preliminary report can change; the final report usually follows one to two years later, and the page is refreshed when it does.