Costruzioni Aeronautiche Tecna P2004 BRAVO accident near Carlsbad, California, November 11, 2012
On November 11, 2012 at about 11:30 pm local time, a Costruzioni Aeronautiche Tecna P2004 BRAVO, registered N153TB, was substantially damaged in an accident during takeoff near Carlsbad, California (Mcclellan-Palomar 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 takeoff, which resulted in a runway excursion and collision with parked aircraft. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's lack of experience in the airplane make/model.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 4, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- November 11, 2012 · about 11:30 pm local time
- Place
- Carlsbad, California · Mcclellan-Palomar · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 1 person was on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Costruzioni Aeronautiche Tecna P2004 BRAVO · all P2004 BRAVOs on the register
- Registration
- N153TB · registry record · serial 081
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The pilot intended to practice touch-and-go landings on a runway nearly aligned with the reported 9-knot wind, in clear weather conditions. He noted no mention of any wind gusts in the airport’s automatic terminal information service weather information before he took off. However, the pilot noticed light turbulence during the right crosswind and downwind legs in the traffic pattern. After a short approach and a smooth landing, he applied power, achieved rotation speed, and lifted off again. However, when the airplane was only a few feet off the ground, the wind started to blow it left of the center line. Although the pilot applied full rudder and aileron deflection to counter the crosswind, the airplane continued to track toward the side of the runway and was not climbing at a rate that would clear parked aircraft. The pilot aborted the takeoff, and the airplane subsequently collided with the tail of a parked helicopter, spun a few degrees clockwise, and came to rest on its left wing, which sustained substantial damage. The pilot reported no preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. The pilot reported that he had flown about 3 hours in the accident airplane, which was a light sport airplane. He believed that because of the airplane’s relatively light weight, it was more susceptible to crosswind and turbulence than other airplanes he had flown. He also noted that the controls were configured significantly different than any of the other airplanes he had flown. His previous flights took place in calm air, and the pilot thought that his time in the accident airplane was insufficient to instill the reflexive familiarity necessary to control the airplane during the accident takeoff.
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 in flight during takeoff defining event
- Runway excursion during takeoff (rejected takeoff)
- Collision during takeoff/land during takeoff (rejected takeoff)
The NTSB's findings
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Crosswind correction › Not attained/maintained
- cause Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Directional control › Not attained/maintained
- factor Personnel issues › Experience/knowledge › Experience/qualifications › Total experience w/ equipment › Pilot
- cause Personnel issues › Action/decision › Action › Incorrect action performance › Pilot
Pilot
- Certificate: private
- Ratings: single-engine land; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 564 hours in all; 3 in this make and model; 12 in the last 90 days; 5 in the last 30 days; 478 as pilot in command
- Last flight review: May 15, 2012
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 1,104 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, August 31, 2012; 37 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 1,530 lb
- Seats: 2
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Rotax 912ULS (piston); 0 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: CRQ Carlsbad CA at 11:15 pm
- Destination: CRQ Carlsbad CA
- Flight plan: none
- Runway 24, 4,897 ft by 150 ft
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 270° at 8 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 61°F (16°C), dew point 34°F (1°C)
- Altimeter: 30.19 inHg
- Observation at 10:53 pm from KCRQ
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.
About this page
Everything above comes from the NTSB's public accident database: the narrative, probable cause and findings are the NTSB's own words, and the coded tables behind its report (pilot, aircraft, flight, weather, injuries, sequence of events) are written out in plain English. Pilots' ages, home towns and medical details are left out on purpose. The documents and photographs are the NTSB's docket, the folder of records gathered during the investigation, shown as the NTSB released them (the NTSB redacts some personal details first) and listed under the NTSB's own titles. This site's own text never names pilots, passengers or anyone else involved. A preliminary report describes what is known soon after the event and can change; the final report, with the probable cause, usually follows one to two years later and this page is refreshed when it does. Case number WPR13CA039.