Class 3 investigations seek to identify safety issues that reveal underlying cause(s) of the accident.
Sources: National Transportation Safety Board
Article By: Levi Gwaltney for Las Cruces Digest
Last month, the Las Cruces Air and Space Expo was abruptly ended when a pilot died on the second day of the event. The pilot was identified as Charles Thomas “Chuck” Coleman who was based out of California. Coleman performed aerobatics flying an EA 300/L manufactured by Extra Flugzeugbau GmbH.
The EA 300 model is commonly used for acrobatic flying, and Coleman was not the first fatality reported for EA 300s this year. In May, a pilot was killed when the EA 300 he was flying crashed in transit from Arlington, Washington to an International Aerobatic Club (IAC) meeting in Ephrata, Washington. Another fatal crash occurred in Argentina in June.
The Aviation Safety Network has documented 139 notable occurrences and 69 fatalities associated with the EA 300 aircraft since its introduction in 1988.
In 2006, it was the same model EA 300 that crashed, ending an air show in Tucumcari, New Mexico. The pilot, Guy “Doc” Baldwin, was killed in the crash. The NTSB listed the cause of the Tucumcari accident as: “The pilot’s failure to maintain aircraft control during aerobatic flight, resulting in an inadvertent accelerated stall. Contributing factors include the low altitude for recovery from the loop and the high density altitude.”
The Preliminary Report for the Las Cruces Air and Space Expo crash does not speculate on the causes; however, we can expect possible causes to be listed once the final report is completed.
From the NTSB Preliminary Report:
“On October 20, 2024, about 1424 mountain daylight time, an Extra Flugzeugbau GmbH EA 300/L, N512DW, was destroyed when it was involved in an accident at the Law Cruces International Airport (LRU), Las Cruces, New Mexico. The pilot was fatally injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 air show flight.
The pilot was taking part in the Las Cruces Air and Space Expo and was nearing the end of his aerobatic routine. The pilot’s routine began at 1414 with a scheduled duration of 15 minutes.
Recorded video, captured by various spectators showed the accident airplane complete two forward tumble maneuvers oriented along the lateral pitch axis and enter a third tumble. About halfway through the third tumble, the airplane stopped the maneuver and was oriented in an inverted, almost level attitude. The airplane then pitched downward and entered an approximate 60° to 70° nose low upright attitude. Subsequently, the airplane began to roll to the right just before it impacted terrain.
Numerous witnesses described the airplane recovered successfully from two different forward tumbles before it impacted terrain.
The airplane came to rest in desert terrain about 200 ft northwest of runway 4/22 at LRU at an elevation of about 4,434 ft oriented on a heading of 130° magnetic. The initial point of impact was a ground impression consistent with the right wing tip. The right wing was separated and located adjacent to the initial ground impression. At the root of the right wing, a large crater about 6 ft in diameter and 1 ft deep was observed. The main wreckage was located about 20 ft beyond the larger impact crater. All the major structural components of the airplane were accounted for at the accident site.
The wreckage was recovered to a secure location for further examination.”
How Does the NTSB Classify Investigations?
The NTSB investigates all civil aviation accidents and select incidents to:
- Determine the facts, conditions, and circumstances relating to an accident;
- Determine one or more probable causes; and
- Issue safety recommendations to prevent or mitigate the effects of a similar accident. (See 49 CFR 831.4.)
We begin by assessing available facts to determine the appropriate investigative response. Following an initial assessment, our investigators determine the level of response and work with those who may be affected by, involved in, or have pertinent information about the accident or incident. An investigation will result in a report of the facts and the NTSB’s analysis and probable cause of the accident or incident. We may also produce other products designed to improve transportation safety such as safety recommendations, safety alerts, or other safety information.
The NTSB’s primary focus is to improve safety for the travelling public. We do not conduct investigations for the purpose of determining the rights, liabilities, or blame of any person or entity. The aim of all NTSB investigations is to prevent the recurrence of other accidents and incidents. We carefully consider the level of detail necessary for each investigation with the aim of concentrating resources on investigations that are most likely to enhance aviation safety while still fulfilling our mandate to investigate all civil aviation accidents. Because many accidents have similar causes and may not provide new safety information that would result in further action, investigating these in detail may not be justified given our limited resources. Thus, our investigators do not launch to the scene of every accident, conduct an in-depth investigation, or produce an extensive report for many accidents with known circumstances.
We have a classification system for investigation depth and final report for each event (accident or incident). The initial classification of an investigation is subject to change depending on the safety issues that are identified throughout the course of the investigation.
Investigation Classes and Description
| Investigation Class | Description |
| Class 1 Class 1 investigations are reserved for very significant accidents and are likely to involve substantial NTSB and external resources. They generally involve transport category aircraft and commercial operations. | A large team led by an Air Carrier and Space Investigations or General Aviation Investigations division senior investigator-in-charge who conducts the investigation. NTSB subject matter experts form and lead multiple investigative groups to identify and address safety issues. The investigative team will usually travel to and spend considerable time at the scene of the accident and conduct follow-on investigative activities. Investigation updates or interim reports may be released during the investigation. Following a final technical review of the gathered facts and analysis, a final comprehensive report will be made available to the public. The Board members may deliberate the findings, probable cause, and recommendations accompanying the report at a public “sunshine” meeting. |
| Class 2 Class 2 investigations generally have a broad scope and involve a significant effort collecting evidence across several investigative areas and a substantial investment of resources. These investigations may involve: > Very complex systems and/or processes, > Multiple organizations, or > Poor risk controls implemented by the operator, manufacturer, maintainer, and regulator. | A large team led by an Air Carrier and Space Investigations or General Aviation Investigations division senior investigator-in-charge who conducts the investigation.Following a technical review of the gathered facts and analysis, a final comprehensive report will be made available to the public following Board approval that identifies the probable cause(s) of the accident and factors that contributed to the outcome of the accident, if any. Findings from these investigations may be used to support recommendations, or the investigative team may work with industry stakeholders directly to resolve safety issues identified during the investigation. Accidents that involve recurring safety issues may be accompanied by a safety message that includes practical strategies to avoid future accidents. |
| Class 3 Class 3 investigations seek to identify safety issues that reveal underlying cause(s) of the accident. | The investigation is led by an investigator-in-charge, who may be assisted by other NTSB subject matter experts if the investigation requires an in-depth focus on a specific area. The investigative team may travel to the scene of the accident or to other follow-up activities, or the entirety of the investigation may be conducted remotely. Following a final technical review of the gathered facts and analysis of those facts, a final report will be made available to the public following Board approval that identifies the probable cause(s) of the accident and factors that contributed to the outcome of the accident, if any. Findings from these investigations may be used to support recommendations, or the investigative team may work with industry stakeholders directly to resolve safety issues identified during the investigation. Accidents that involve recurring safety issues may be accompanied by a safety message that includes practical strategies to avoid future accidents. |
| Class 4 Class 4 investigations seek to identify the cause of the accident. | An investigator-in-charge leads the investigation. In some cases, the investigator-in-charge may travel to the scene of the accident, but class 4 investigations are generally all conducted remotely.Class 4 investigations are limited in scope and of the shortest duration.A final report will be made available to the public that identifies probable cause(s) following Board approval and within 6 months. The report only examines the actions and conditions directly relating to the accident, and the documented sequence of events and probable cause reached is simple and straightforward. The investigator-in-charge may work with industry stakeholders to develop solutions to safety issues identified during the investigation. Investigations that involve well known circumstances may be accompanied by a safety message that includes practical strategies to avoid potential future recurrence. |
