The U.S. aircraft register, updated daily
Accidents · NTSB WPR11FA242 · Final report

Cessna 172R accident near Wendover, Utah, June 1, 2011

On June 1, 2011 at about 8:33 pm local time, a Cessna 172R, registered N475ER, was substantially damaged in an accident during approach (VFR go-around) near Wendover, Utah (Wendover airport). It was a business flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). 4 people were killed. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).

The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged

The pilot did not maintain adequate airspeed during the downwind turn resulting in an aerodynamic stall, in-flight loss of control, and spin. Contributing to the accident was the pilot’s inadequate preflight planning and exceedance of the approved weight and balance envelope.

Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.

What the record shows

Date
June 1, 2011 · about 8:33 pm local time
Place
Wendover, Utah · Wendover · map
Type
Accident
Injuries
4 people were killed.
Weather
visual conditions (good weather)
Aircraft
Cessna 172R · all 172Rs on the register
Registration
N475ER · registry record · serial 17280670
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Business flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)

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

About 2 hours after takeoff the pilot contacted air traffic control (ATC) services requesting that the controller identify his airplane on radar and provide him with location information. The controller provided the location information and vectors to the requested airport. A review of the ATC communications indicated that the pilot was unsure of his location and was low on fuel. At this point in the flight, the airplane's center of gravity (cg) was calculated to be 2.3 inches aft of the aft cg limit. Generally, as the cg moves aft beyond the aft limit there is an increasing likelihood that the airplane will enter a realm of decreasing pitch stability and have tail-heavy flight characteristics. The pilot attempted to land on a runway with an 80-degree crosswind that was 24 knots gusting to 28 knots. The airplane flew almost sideways down the runway and touched down on the runway several times before climbing back into the air. Surveillance video captured images of the airplane climbing above the runway; between 300 and 400 feet above ground level (agl) it made a right-hand turn, then plummeted vertically and impacted the ground. The sudden change from a 24-knot left crosswind to a 24-knot tailwind during the pilot’s execution of the right-hand turn towards the downwind leg of the landing pattern, combined with some pitch sensitivity due to the cg location, most likely induced an aerodynamic stall and subsequent loss of lift that was not anticipated nor compensated for by the pilot. A postaccident examination of the airplane revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. The pilot did not receive a weather brief from flight services, nor had he logged in to the Federl Aviation Administration's on-line flight planning system.

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. Aircraft loading event during prior to flight
  2. Preflight or dispatch event during prior to flight
  3. Loss of control in flight during approach (VFR go-around) defining event
  4. Collision with terrain or object (not controlled flight into terrain) during uncontrolled descent

The NTSB's findings

  • cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Altitude › Not attained/maintained
  • cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › Aircraft control › Pilot
  • cause Aircraft › Aircraft handling/service › Loading › (general) › Incorrect use/operation
  • factor Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena › Wind › Crosswind › Ability to respond/compensate
  • cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Planning/preparation › Weight/balance calculations › Pilot

Pilot

  • Certificate: private
  • Ratings: single-engine land
  • Flight time: 186 hours in all; 0 in the last 90 days; 1 in the last 30 days
  • Last flight review: October 8, 2010
  • Medical certificate: Class 3 (with waivers/limitations)
  • Seat: left
  • Injury: fatal

The aircraft

  • Last inspection: 100-hour inspection, May 26, 2011; 17 hours since
  • Maximum gross weight: 2,558 lb
  • Seats: 4
  • Landing gear: fixed
  • Engine: Lycoming IO360 SER (piston); 0 hours total
  • Operator: C/O G&B Investment Management INC

The flight

  • Departed from: KSGU St George UT at 6:00 pm
  • Destination: KPVU Provo UT
  • Flight plan: none
  • Runway 26, 8,000 ft by 150 ft

Weather at the time

  • Light: daylight
  • Wind: from 200° at 24 knots, gusting 28
  • Visibility: 10 statute miles
  • Sky: clear
  • Temperature: 79°F (26°C), dew point 19°F (-7°C)
  • Altimeter: 29.76 inHg
  • Observation at 8:35 pm from KENV

Injuries

FatalSeriousMinorNone
Flight crew1
Passengers3

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 N475ER the same tail number, which may have belonged to a different aircraft at the time

1999-11-20MIA00LA027 · accident near Daytona Beach, FL · substantial damage · no injuries

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.