Cessna 310K accident near El Monte, California, July 14, 2010
On July 14, 2010 at about 3:55 pm local time, a Cessna 310K, registered N6909L, was substantially damaged in an accident during takeoff near El Monte, California (El Monte 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 pilot’s failure to maintain directional control during the takeoff ground roll.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- July 14, 2010 · about 3:55 pm local time
- Place
- El Monte, California · El Monte Airport · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 1 person was on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Cessna 310K · all 310Ks on the register
- Registration
- N6909L · no longer on the register · serial 310K0009
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The pilot reported that he was conducting takeoffs and landings during a post-annual-inspection maintenance test flight. After touchdown, he had retracted the flaps and increased power when the airplane pulled to the right. The pilot applied full left rudder and reduced power to idle; however, the airplane continued to the right and exited the runway onto the soft ground. Subsequently, the right main landing gear collapsed and the airplane slid to a stop. Examination of the airplane revealed no abnormalities with the engine or flight control systems that would have precluded normal operations.
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
- Loss of control on ground during takeoff defining event
- Runway excursion during takeoff (rejected takeoff)
- Landing gear collapse during takeoff (rejected takeoff)
The NTSB's findings
- 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 › Pilot
Pilot
- Certificate: private
- Ratings: single-engine land
- Flight time: 2,500 hours in all; 1,200 in this make and model
- Last flight review: July 29, 2009
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Last inspection: annual inspection, July 11, 2010
- Maximum gross weight: 5,960 lb
- Seats: 6
- Landing gear: retractable
- Engine 1: Cont Motor IO-470 SERIES (piston); 0 hours total
- Engine 2: Cont Motor I0-470 SERIES (piston); 0 hours total
- Operator: Lightning Aircraft CORP
The flight
- Departed from: EMT El Monte CA at 3:45 pm
- Destination: EMT El Monte CA
- Flight plan: none
- Runway 19, 3,995 ft by 75 ft
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Visibility: 13 statute miles
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 0°F (-18°C), dew point 0°F (-18°C)
- Altimeter: 29.89 inHg
- Observation at 3:50 pm from EMT
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.
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.