Cessna 172S and Cessna 172S accident near San Diego, California, February 3, 2016
On February 3, 2016 at about 7:30 pm local time, 2 aircraft, Cessna 172S (N499DR) and Cessna 172S (N1955L), were involved in the same accident near San Diego, California (Gillespie Field Airport). 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 flight instructor’s failure to maintain awareness while parked on the ramp with the engine operating, which resulted in impact with another parked airplane.
The failure of the flight instructor of the other airplane to maintain awareness while parked on the ramp with the engine operating, which resulted in impact with the parked airplane.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- February 3, 2016 · about 7:30 pm local time
- Place
- San Diego, California · Gillespie Field 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 1
- Cessna 172S, built 2002 · all 172Ss on the register
- Registration
- N499DR · registry record · serial 172S9167
- Damage
- Minor damage
- Flight
- Instructional flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
- Aircraft 2
- Cessna 172S, built 1999 · all 172Ss on the register
- Registration
- N1955L · no longer on the register · serial 172S8121
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Instructional flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative for the Cessna 172S final · quoted from the NTSB record
The flight instructor and student pilot were parked with the airplane's engine running when the airplane began to move forward and to the right. The instructor stated that upon noticing the forward movement, he applied the brakes. He reported that the right rudder/brake pedal was positioned further forward than the left pedal, and upon application of brakes, the right turn increased before the airplane impacted another occupied airplane parked on the ramp, resulting in substantial damage to both. The student pilot reported that he noticed the airplane's movement and tried to alert the instructor; however, the instructor appeared to be distracted. Postaccident examination of the brake system revealed no anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. It is likely that the airplane's nose wheel was initially displaced to the right, which resulted in the airplane's right turn.
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 NTSB's narrative for the Cessna 172S final · quoted from the NTSB record
The airplane was parked on the ramp with its engine not operating when another airplane taxied into it. The other airplane, with a flight instructor and a student pilot onboard, was parked with the engine running when it began to move forward and to the right. The instructor stated that upon noticing the forward movement, he applied the brakes. He reported that the right rudder/brake pedal was positioned further forward than the left pedal, and upon application of brakes, the right turn increased before the airplane impacted the parked airplane, resulting in substantial damage to both. The student pilot reported that he noticed the airplane's movement and tried to alert the instructor; however, the instructor appeared to be distracted. Postaccident examination of the brake system revealed no anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. It is likely that the airplane's nose wheel was initially displaced to the right, which resulted in the airplane's right turn when it began to move.
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 for the Cessna 172S from the NTSB's investigation tables, in plain English
What happened, in order
- Ground collision during standing (engine(s) operating) defining event
The NTSB's findings
- cause Personnel issues › Psychological › Attention/monitoring › Task monitoring/vigilance › Instructor/check pilot
- factor Personnel issues › Action/decision › Action › Delayed action › Instructor/check pilot
Flight instructor
- Certificate: flight instructor, commercial pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instructor: airplane single-engine; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 560 hours in all; 254 in this make and model; 140 in the last 90 days; 53 in the last 30 days; 500 as pilot in command; 284 on instruments
- Last flight review: August 15, 2015
- Medical certificate: Class 1 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: no injuries
Dual student
- Certificate: student
- Flight time: 0 hours in all; 0 in this make and model
- Medical certificate: Class 1 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 3,629 hours
- Last inspection: 100-hour inspection, January 29, 2016; 11 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 2,550 lb
- Seats: 4
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Lycoming IO-360-L2A (piston); 3,640 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: SEE San Diego CA
- Destination: SEE San Diego CA
- Flight plan: none
- A second pilot was aboard
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Visibility: 8 statute miles
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 63°F (17°C), dew point 27°F (-3°C)
- Altimeter: 30.34 inHg
- Observation at 7:35 pm from SEE
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 2 |
The factual record for the Cessna 172S from the NTSB's investigation tables, in plain English
What happened, in order
- Ground collision during standing (engine(s) not oper) defining event
The NTSB's findings
- cause Personnel issues › Psychological › Attention/monitoring › Task monitoring/vigilance › Pilot of other aircraft
- factor Personnel issues › Action/decision › Action › Delayed action › Pilot of other aircraft
Flight instructor
- Certificate: flight instructor, commercial pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instructor: airplane multi-engine; instructor: airplane single-engine; instructor: instrument airplane; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 1,530 hours in all; 371 in this make and model; 57 in the last 90 days; 39 in the last 30 days; 1,458 as pilot in command; 980 on instruments
- Last flight review: September 24, 2015
- Medical certificate: Class 1 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: no injuries
Dual student
- Certificate: private
- Ratings: single-engine land
- Flight time: 55 hours in all; 54 in this make and model; 4 in the last 90 days; 4 in the last 30 days
- Medical certificate: Class 3 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 4,502 hours
- Last inspection: 100-hour inspection, December 29, 2015
- Maximum gross weight: 2,558 lb
- Seats: 4
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Lycoming IO-360-L2A (piston); 4,563 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: SEE San Diego CA
- Destination: SEE San Diego CA
- Flight plan: none
- A second pilot was aboard
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 2 |
Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report
The NTSB has not released the docket for this case yet. The docket, the folder of records gathered during an investigation (maintenance records, photographs, witness statements, examinations), is usually released when the investigation is nearly complete, and the list here is refreshed when it appears. Check 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.