Cessna 172M accident near Hamilton, Montana, May 20, 2006
On May 20, 2006 at about 8:00 pm local time, a Cessna 172M, registered N12808, was substantially damaged in an accident near Hamilton, Montana (Ravalli County Airport). It was a personal flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). No one was hurt; 4 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 compensation for the wind conditions during the landing roll which resulted in his failure to maintain directional control. Factors included variable winds and gusty crosswinds.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- May 20, 2006 · about 8:00 pm local time
- Place
- Hamilton, Montana · Ravalli County Airport · map
- Type
- Accident · collision on the ground
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 4 people were on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Cessna 172M · all 172Ms on the register
- Registration
- N12808 · no longer on the register · serial 17262278
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
As the pilot neared the airport, he was advised by the UNICOM operator that the winds were 270 degrees at 15 knots, gusting to 25 knots. As he rolled out on a left downwind for runway 16, the pilot determined that there was a strong crosswind due to the amount of crab required to hold a ground track parallel to the runway. As the pilot was turning onto final, the UNICOM operator advised him that at that point in time, the winds were blowing at 10 knots. In order to maintain the proper ground track on final, the pilot crabbed the aircraft into the wind, and then switched to a wing-low forward slip on short final. Although the touchdown was uneventful, about 50 feet into the ground roll, the aircraft encountered a strong crosswind gust from the right. The pilot was unable to adequately compensate for the effects of the gust, and the aircraft's right wing lifted, and the aircraft headed toward the left side of the runway. After departing the runway, the aircraft entered a large ditch, impacting its far side with sufficient force to result in substantial damage. After the accident, it was determined that due to building weather in the nearby mountains, the winds in the area were almost constantly changing direction and velocity.
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
Pilot
- Certificate: private
- Ratings: single-engine land
- Flight time: 74 hours in all; 5 in this make and model; 21 in the last 90 days; 5 in the last 30 days
- Medical certificate: Class 3
The aircraft
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Lycoming O-320-E2C (piston); 0 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: KBZN Bozeman MT
- Destination: 6S5 Hamilton MT
- Flight plan: VFR
- Runway 16
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 270° at 15 knots, gusting 25
- Temperature: 0°F (-18°C), dew point 0°F (-18°C)
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crew | 1 | |||
| Passengers | 3 |
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.