The U.S. aircraft register, updated daily
Accidents · NTSB WPR23LA078 · Final report

Airbus Helicopters EC 130 T2 accident near Boulder City, Nevada, December 28, 2022

On December 28, 2022, a 2014 Airbus Helicopters EC 130 T2, registered N835GC, was substantially damaged in an accident during taxi near Boulder City, Nevada (Boulder City Muni airport). It was flown under charter and air-taxi rules (Part 135). 6 people were seriously injured and 1 person had minor injuries. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).

The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged

The pilot’s failure to apply anti-torque pedal input in a sufficient, timely, and sustained manner while attempting to arrest a turn during a hover-taxi, which resulted in a loss of directional control. Contributing to the severity of the occupants’ injuries was the inconsistent performance of the seats’ energy-absorption devices, which was likely due to the rotational forces encountered during the accident which were not required to be accounted for during the seat certification process.

Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made November 2, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.

What the record shows

Date
December 28, 2022 · cases in 2022
Place
Boulder City, Nevada · Boulder City Muni · cases near this airport · map
Type
Accident
Injuries
6 people were seriously injured and 1 person had minor injuries.
Weather
visual conditions (good weather)
Aircraft
Airbus Helicopters EC 130 T2, built 2014 · all EC 130 T2s on the register
Registration
N835GC · registry record · serial 7833
Damage
Substantial damage
Flight
Flight · charter and air-taxi rules (Part 135)

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

The helicopter was returning to the operating base following an air tour flight with six passengers. The helicopter entered a hover-taxi and the pilot initiated a slow left turn with a right crosswind of 11 knots, gusting to 20 kts. After the tail of the helicopter passed through the wind, the tail continued to swing to the right and the helicopter entered a climbing left spin. The pilot told investigators that when the helicopter started turning left, he applied right anti-torque pedal to stop the turn, and when the helicopter continued to spin left, he lowered the cyclic. The helicopter completed about 3 full left turns before descending rapidly and impacting the ground. The helicopter fuselage was substantially damaged, and 5 passengers and the pilot were seriously injured. The helicopter was equipped with an Engine Data Recorder (EDR) that stored pedal potentiometer (position) values and airport security video captured the accident sequence. The data and video evidence are consistent with the pilot initiating a left pedal turn by applying about 1/3 left pedal input (from neutral). After about 90° of heading change, as the tail passed through the wind line, the pilot applied about 3/4 right pedal input followed by reversal to 2/3 left pedal input (in the direction of rotation). The pilot then applied 1/2 - 3/4 right pedal input as he rapidly lowered the collective. The accident helicopter was equipped with an anti-torque Fenestron. Airbus Helicopters published an Information Bulletin that outlines the differing performance characteristics of a Fenestron-equipped helicopter compared to a helicopter with a conventional tail rotor (CTR). As outlined in the bulletin, on a CTR-equipped helicopter the thrust curve is more linear when compared to a Fenestron-equipped helicopter. The effect of a control input with a CTR is almost constant throughout the whole pedal range, while it significantly varies for the Fenestron. The thrust curve slope is larger, and thus the perceived efficiency of the Fenestron is greater, when coming close to the full left pedal stop. An Airbus Helicopters Safety Information Notice regarding unanticipated left yaw states “… use of the rudder pedal … may not cause the yaw to immediately subside, thus causing the pilot to make inadequate use of the pedal to correct the situation because he suspects that it is ineffective when, in fact, thrust capability of the tail rotor available to him remains undiminished.” “The key feature of an unanticipated left yaw recovery is large amplitude right pedal input. Recovery may not be immediate but will occur if the pilot persists in maintaining right pedal. In some instances, the pilot re-centered the pedal before entering again a right pedal input. This cannot help and only delays recovery from the yaw. If the yaw deceleration is not enough, more right pedal must be added, reaching the pedal end-stop if necessary.” The evidence indicates that when the pilot initiated the left hover-taxi turn he failed to apply right anti-torque pedal in a sufficient and timely manner to arrest the left turn. The helicopter subsequently entered an uncontrolled spin before impacting the ground. Six of the seven occupants received serious injuries attributable to the hard landing. The seats installed in the helicopter were equipped with energy-absorbing devices designed to reduce occupant injuries in the event of a hard landing and had been certified to standards established by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and the United States Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Examination of the seats showed inconsistencies in the performance of the energy-absorbing devices. Measurements were taken, and it was noted that the seats did not stroke as expected when compared with the occupant’s overall stature. Energy-attenuating seats are designed to stroke to absorb an occupant’s energy, and the amount of stroke would vary based upon the weight of each occupant. In this accident there were occupants close to the size of a 50th percentile male used in certification; however, the seats did not stroke as expected. Additionally, there were larger occupants whose seats did not stroke at all, which likely contributed to the severity of the injuries of some of the occupants. A previous hard landing accident involving the same model helicopter and seats resulted in similar seat performance and occupant injuries. Those injuries were attributed to improper tightening and positioning of the seat restraints, which allowed the occupant’s positions in the seat to vary and affect the performance of the seats. Investigators could not determine if the occupant’s seat restraints were properly tightened and positioned in this accident. Performance studies of the accident determined the helicopter and the seats were subject to high lateral forces at impact as the helicopter rotated and the seat manufacturer stated the inconsistent performance of the seats was likely due to the lateral forces encountered; however neither the EASA or CFR certification standards specified lateral force testing. No anomalies were noted with the seats or energy-absorption devices during postaccident examination that would have contributed to their inconsistent performance. Therefore, the seat’s energy-absorbing devices likely performed inconsistently due to the lateral rotational forces encountered during the accident which were not required to be accounted for during the certification process.

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. Loss of control in flight during taxi
  2. Cabin safety event during prior to flight
  3. Loss of tail rotor effectiveness during taxi defining event

The NTSB's findings

  • Aircraft › Aircraft systems › Equipment/furnishings › Passenger compartment equip › Unknown/Not determined other cases naming the cabin, seats and restraints
  • Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability › Performance/control parameters › Directional control › Not attained/maintained
  • Not determined › Not determined › (general) › (general) › Unknown/Not determined

Pilot

  • Certificate: commercial pilot
  • Ratings: instrument: helicopter; rotorcraft: helicopter
  • Flight time: 1,324 hours in all; 23 in this make and model; 23 in the last 30 days; 1,182 as pilot in command
  • Last flight review: December 19, 2022
  • Medical certificate: Class 2 (without waivers/limitations)
  • Seat: left
  • Injury: serious injuries

Passenger

  • Seat: ctr
  • Injury: serious injuries

Passenger

  • Seat: unk
  • Injury: serious injuries

Passenger

  • Seat: left
  • Injury: serious injuries

Passenger

  • Seat: ctr
  • Injury: serious injuries

Passenger

  • Seat: ctr
  • Injury: minor injuries

Passenger

  • Seat: rgt
  • Injury: serious injuries

The aircraft

  • Airframe total time: 8,652.5 hours
  • Last inspection: annual inspection, October 26, 2022; 271 hours since
  • Seats: 8
  • Landing gear: fixed
  • Engine: Turbomeca Arriel 2D (turboshaft); 6,389 hours total
  • Operator: Papillon Airways, Inc

The flight

  • Departed from: Grand Canyon NV

Weather at the time

  • Light: daylight
  • Wind: from 170° at 11 knots, gusting 20
  • Visibility: 10 statute miles
  • Sky: a few clouds
  • Temperature: 28°F (-2°C), dew point 0°F (-18°C)
  • Altimeter: 27.48 inHg
  • Observation at 4:35 pm from KBVU

Weather report (METAR): KBVU 280035Z AUTO 17011G20KT 10SM BKN090 17/M02 A2977 RMK AO2

Injuries

FatalSeriousMinorNone
Flight crew1
Passengers51

Photographs from the investigation 6 pictures from the NTSB's docket, as the NTSB released them

The NTSB's photographs with the NTSB's captions, at screen size. Open a picture to see it full size or to report one that should not be shown.

Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report

26 documents, released by the NTSB on January 2, 2025. View them here, or download them; the NTSB redacts some personal details before release, and this site shows the NTSB's own titles rather than its file names.

#DocumentWhat it is
1 Pilot/operator Aircraft Accident Report, NTSB Form 6120.1 PDF, 13 pages View Download
2 Pilot Email Statement PDF, 2 pages View Download
3 Video File - Airport Security video View Download
4 Witness Statements PDF, 6 pages View Download
5 Accident Pilot Interview Transcript PDF, 32 pages View Download
6 Director of Operations Interview Transcript PDF, 32 pages View Download
7 Chief Pilot Interview Transcript PDF, 48 pages View Download
8 Line Pilot Interview Transcripts PDF, 86 pages View Download
9 Pilot Training Records PDF, 37 pages View Download
10 Maverick Helicopters Do Statement PDF, 1 page View Download
11 Record of Conversation- Papillion Director of Operations _ Pilot Hiring PDF, 1 page View Download
12 Airworthiness Group Chairman's Factual Report PDF, 19 pages View Download
13 Safran Engines Examination Report PDF, 25 pages View Download
14 Survival Factors PDF, 32 pages View Download
15 Survival Factors Attachment 1 - Injury List PDF, 2 pages View Download
16 Survival Factors Factual Attachment 2 - Passenger Interviews PDF, 6 pages View Download
17 Survival Factors Factual Report Attachment 3 - Timeline PDF, 2 pages View Download
18 Mfr - Seat Certification Standards PDF, 3 pages View Download
19 Memo for Record - Safran Seats ICAO Review Comments PDF, 2 pages View Download
20 Memo for Record - Additional Information from Airbus Helicopters and Safran Seats PDF, 1 page View Download
21 Photos PDF, 7 pages · our copy View Download
22 Video Study PDF, 11 pages View Download
23 Airbus Safety and Information Notices PDF, 12 pages View Download
24 Release of Wreckage PDF, 2 pages View Download
25 Statement of Party Representatives to NTSB Investigation PDF, 1 page View Download
26 Video Files Factual Report PDF, 5 pages View Download

The same docket at the NTSB · documents without a copy here are fetched from the NTSB when you open them.

Connections how this case links to the rest of the register

Aircraft
Place

The whole map of how records connect · these connections as data: /graph/accident/WPR23LA078.json.

The bigger picture in Aviation Analytics: accidents over time since 1982, by model, by phase of flight and conditions, by place and on the map.

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 does not name anyone involved, its policy at this time. A preliminary report can change; the final report usually follows one to two years later, and the page is refreshed when it does.