Regulations & Safety
NTSB Releases Preliminary Report on San Diego Cessna Citation Crash
Cessna S550 crash near MYF airport under investigation: night IMC approach, equipment issues, and altitude deviations cited in NTSB preliminary findings.

On May 22, 2025, a Cessna Citation S550, registered as N666DS, crashed in a residential neighborhood near Montgomery-Gibbs Executive Airport (MYF) in San Diego, California, claiming the lives of the pilot and five passengers. Eight people on the ground sustained minor injuries. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has released a preliminary report (WPR25FA161) detailing the circumstances surrounding the accident, which occurred during a night approach under instrument meteorological conditions (IMC). This article provides a comprehensive overview of the incident based on the NTSB’s findings, which remain subject to change as the investigation progresses.
Flight Details and Timeline
The accident occurred at approximately 3:47 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time (PDT) during a Part 91 personal flight operated by DAVIATOR LLC. The Cessna S550, a twin-engine business jet, departed Teterboro Airport (TEB) in New Jersey on May 21 at around 8:09 p.m. PDT. The flight made a scheduled stop at Colonel James Jabara Airport (AAO) in Wichita, Kansas, where it was refueled with 548 gallons of Jet-A fuel. The aircraft departed Wichita at approximately 12:36 a.m. PDT on May 22, bound for MYF, a tower-controlled airport during daytime hours but uncontrolled at the time of the accident. The flight was conducted under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), and the pilot communicated with Southern California Terminal Radar Approach Control (SOCAL TRACON) as the aircraft approached San Diego. The pilot, who was based at MYF and held an exemption to fly the Cessna S550 single-pilot since December 15, 2024, requested the RNAV (GPS) instrument approach to Runway 28R. The pilot did not specify whether he intended to fly the localizer performance with vertical guidance (LPV) or lateral navigation (LNAV) approach.
Weather Challenges and Approach
As the aircraft descended toward MYF, the pilot was informed by the SOCAL TRACON controller that the Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS) at MYF was out of service. The pilot acknowledged this and requested weather information for MYF. The controller provided conditions from Marine Corps Air Station Miramar (NKX), located approximately 4 miles north of MYF, reporting calm winds, ½-mile visibility, and an indefinite 200-foot ceiling, indicative of challenging IMC conditions. The controller cleared the aircraft to the NESTY approach fix at 9,000 feet mean sea level (msl) and later instructed the pilot to cross NESTY at or above 3,800 feet msl for the RNAV approach to Runway 28R. The pilot discussed alternate airport options with the controller in case a missed approach was necessary but did not select an alternate during the flight.
Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) data revealed the aircraft’s descent and approach. At NESTY, the aircraft was at approximately 3,750 feet msl with a ground speed of 200 knots (191 knots calibrated airspeed, KCAS). By the final approach fix, PENYY, at 3:44:50 a.m., the aircraft was at 2,450 feet msl with a ground speed of 175 knots (167 KCAS). The pilot announced his position on MYF’s common traffic advisory frequency, stating he was 3 miles from the runway, and attempted to activate the pilot-controlled runway lighting by keying the microphone seven times. The aircraft crossed the PALOS waypoint, 2.9 nautical miles from the Runway 28R displaced threshold, at 1,190 feet msl, below the published minimum crossing altitude of 1,380 feet msl, with a ground speed of 120 knots (117 KCAS). The ADS-B data ceased at 3:46:47 a.m., when the aircraft was at 464 feet msl, approximately 60 feet above ground level (AGL).
The Crash and Its Aftermath
The first identified point of contact (FIPC) was with power transmission lines approximately 90–95 feet above the ground (about 500 feet msl), located 1.8 nautical miles from the Runway 28R displaced threshold. The impact severed portions of the left horizontal stabilizer, left elevator, and vertical stabilizer, which were found 200 feet downrange. The debris field extended 1,200 feet across brush-covered terrain and a residential neighborhood, on a magnetic heading of approximately 300 degrees. The main wreckage, consisting of the thermally damaged cabin, engines, and left wing, came to rest on a residential street 1.6 nautical miles from the runway threshold. The crash impacted one residential structure and damaged or destroyed 20 vehicles due to impact forces and a post-impact fire. Eight people on the ground sustained minor injuries. The wreckage was relocated to a secure facility for further examination.
Aircraft and Equipment
The Cessna S550, a Category B aircraft for instrument approach procedures, was not equipped with a flight data recorder (FDR) but had a cockpit voice recorder (CVR), which was recovered and sent to the NTSB Vehicle Recorders Laboratory for analysis. The left and right engine Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) units were also retained for data extraction. A Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) indicated that the Runway Alignment Indicator (RAI) lights at MYF had been out of service since March 28, 2022, due to delays in repairs pending an environmental study. However, all other runway lighting was operational at the time of the accident.
The RNAV (GPS) Runway 28R approach minimums for Category B aircraft included:
- an LPV decision altitude (DA) of 673 feet (250 feet AGL with ¾-mile visibility),
- an LNAV/VNAV DA of 750 feet (327 feet AGL),
- and an LNAV minimum descent altitude (MDA) of 840 feet (417 feet AGL).
Preliminary Observations and Ongoing Investigation
The NTSB’s preliminary report highlights several critical factors that may have contributed to the accident. The aircraft’s descent below the minimum crossing altitude at PALOS suggests a possible deviation from the approach profile. The low visibility and indefinite ceiling, combined with the inoperative ASOS and RAI lights, likely compounded the challenges of executing a night instrument approach at an uncontrolled airport. The pilot’s attempt to activate runway lighting indicates awareness of the need for visual cues, but the aircraft’s low altitude at the FIPC suggests it was significantly below the intended glide path.
The investigation, led by NTSB Investigator in Charge Daniel Baker, is ongoing. Additional participating persons include representatives from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Textron Aviation (the manufacturer of the Cessna S550), and Williams International (the engine manufacturer). The CVR and FADEC data are expected to provide further insight into the pilot’s actions and the aircraft’s performance during the approach. The NTSB has classified this as a Class 3 investigation, and a final report will be issued upon completion, which could take months or years.
Community Impact and Safety Implications
The crash’s impact on a residential neighborhood underscores the risks of low-altitude operations near populated areas. The destruction of a home and 20 vehicles, along with minor injuries to eight residents, has raised concerns about the safety of flight paths over urban environments. Montgomery-Gibbs Executive Airport, located in a densely populated area of San Diego, serves as a hub for general aviation, and this incident may prompt renewed scrutiny of its operations, particularly during nighttime and low-visibility conditions.
The preliminary report does not assign a cause, but the data suggest potential issues with approach execution, situational awareness, or environmental factors. The aviation community will closely monitor the investigation’s findings, which could lead to recommendations for improved training, equipment, or procedures for single-pilot operations in challenging conditions.
Conclusion
The tragic loss of six lives in the Cessna Citation S550 crash near San Diego is a sobering reminder of the complexities and risks of aviation, particularly in adverse weather and at night. The NTSB’s preliminary report provides a detailed account of the flight’s final moments, but many questions remain unanswered. As the investigation continues, the focus will be on understanding the factors that led to this accident and identifying measures to prevent similar tragedies in the future. For now, the San Diego community mourns the loss and grapples with the aftermath of an incident that has left an indelible mark.
Note: This article is based on preliminary information from NTSB report WPR25FA161, which is subject to change as the investigation progresses.
Sources
Photo Credit: The Hollywood Reporter
Regulations & Safety
FAA Investigates Southwest Airlines Ground Collision at PVD
Two Southwest Boeing 737s collided during pushback at Rhode Island T.F. Green Airport on June 11, 2026. FAA investigation opened.

This is a developing story. Information may change as official details are released.
This article summarizes reporting by WPRI, NBC 10, Daily Voice, and CBS News Baltimore.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has opened an investigation after two Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 aircraft collided during pushback at Rhode Island T.F. Green International Airport (PVD) late on June 11, 2026.
The ground collision resulted in no reported injuries but forced the cancellation of both flights and the grounding of the involved aircraft for mandatory safety inspections. According to reporting by the Daily Voice and NBC 10, the incident highlights ongoing operational challenges on airport ramps, occurring just weeks after a similar event involving the same carrier at another East Coast facility.
Details of the ground collision
At approximately 10:45 p.m. local time, Southwest Airlines Flight 3515, bound for Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA), was pushing back from its gate. During the maneuver, the aircraft’s wing made contact with the tail of Southwest Airlines Flight 3409, which was scheduled to depart for Chicago Midway International Airport (MDW).
Both aircraft returned to their respective gates following the contact, allowing passengers to deplane normally. Southwest Airlines confirmed that no injuries occurred among passengers or crew members. The carrier subsequently canceled both flights and reaccommodated the affected travelers.
“Southwest Airlines is aware of an incident involving two of our aircraft at Rhode Island T. F. Green International Airport. We are investigating further and will be thoroughly inspecting the two aircraft,”
the airline stated in remarks provided to local media, adding that safety remains its highest priority.
Local media outlets, including NBC 10, reported passenger accounts suggesting that Flight 3515 continued to move briefly after the initial impact. These accounts claim passengers verbally alerted the flight crew to the collision. Neither Southwest Airlines nor the FAA has officially verified these specific passenger narratives, and the official sequence of events remains under investigation.
Regulatory response and recent precedent
The FAA confirmed on June 12, 2026, that it is investigating the circumstances surrounding the collision. Ground operations during pushback rely heavily on coordination between flight crews and ground personnel, particularly in ramp areas where air traffic controllers do not maintain direct communication with the aircraft.
This event follows a comparable occurrence on May 4, 2026, at Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport (BWI). In that instance, two Southwest Airlines Boeing 737s clipped wings during pushback operations. The FAA investigated the BWI incident, noting the specific communication dynamics between ground crews and the flight deck in non-controlled ramp sectors.
AirPro News analysis
We note that while ground collisions during pushback rarely pose a severe threat to passenger safety, they represent a significant operational and financial burden for carriers. Ramp incidents require immediate grounding of the involved airframes, triggering mandatory structural inspections and potential repairs. The recurrence of pushback-related contact within a single airline’s network over a short period may prompt internal reviews of ground handling procedures, wingwalker positioning, and ramp communication protocols. Until the FAA concludes its investigation, the specific cause of the PVD collision remains undetermined.
Sources: WPRI
Photo Credit: Zachary Reis
Regulations & Safety
Turkish Airlines 777-300ER Wing Strike at Antalya Airport
A Turkish Airlines Boeing 777-300ER struck a radar antenna pole taxiing at Antalya Airport, prompting evacuation and a formal investigation.

This is a developing story. Information may change as official details are released.
This article summarizes reporting by Hürriyet.
A Turkish Airlines (TK) Boeing 777-300ER sustained damage and prompted a passenger evacuation after its right wing struck a ground radar antenna pole while taxiing at Antalya Airport (AYT) on June 11, 2026.
The incident, which occurred at approximately 20:00 local time following Flight TK2430 from Istanbul, resulted in minor injuries among the passengers. According to official statements reported by Hürriyet, the widebody aircraft was maneuvering toward its parking position on Apron-1 when the collision occurred, leading to an immediate evacuation on the tarmac.
Conflicting passenger and injury reports
Following the evacuation, official sources provided conflicting figures regarding the number of passengers on board and the extent of injuries. In a public statement, Turkish Airlines Senior Vice President of Communications Yahya Üstün confirmed the evacuation, stating that 267 passengers were safely removed from the aircraft. The airline reported that one passenger sustained minor injuries and was in good health.
Conversely, the Turkey Ministry of Transport released a separate statement indicating a higher passenger count. The ministry reported that the aircraft was carrying 284 adult passengers and four infants. Furthermore, the government authority stated that three passengers suffered minor injuries during the event. Both entities confirmed that the aircraft, registered as TC-LKD, was towed to a parking area after the necessary safety checks and passenger removal were completed.
Investigation into the ground collision
A technical investigation into the ground collision has been initiated by the Turkey Ministry of Transport and the General Directorate of State Airports Authority (DHMI). The official cause of the incident remains under investigation.
While the airline noted the aircraft was approaching its parking position, preliminary remarks from the Ministry of Transport suggested the Boeing 777-300ER made contact with the radar pole after entering an incorrect taxiway line. Final determinations regarding the aircraft routing, ground control instructions, and the sequence of events will be established by the investigating authorities.
AirPro News analysis
Ground collisions involving widebody aircraft like the Boeing 777-300ER often highlight the tight tolerances required when maneuvering large airframes around airport infrastructure. While we await the official investigation findings, safety reviews following such events typically examine airport taxiway markings, lighting, and the clarity of ground control communications. The discrepancy in passenger manifests between the operator and the regulator is a notable detail, though initial reporting conflicts frequently occur in the immediate aftermath of an evacuation before final reconciliations are completed.
Sources: X.com
Photo Credit: X
Regulations & Safety
NTSB Final Report: Southwest Flight 4273 Turbulence Encounter
NTSB cites ATC communication delays and sector overload in Southwest Airlines turbulence event over Gulf of Mexico.

This is original reporting and analysis by AirPro News.
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has released its final report on a severe turbulence encounter involving a Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-700, detailing how rapidly developing convective weather and air traffic control communication delays factored into an event that seriously injured two people.
The April 3, 2024, incident aboard Southwest Airlines Flight 4273 over the Gulf of Mexico highlights the operational risks when severe weather systems intersect with technical limitations at air traffic control facilities. According to the NTSB investigation, the aircraft was navigating complex weather en route from New Orleans to Orlando when the encounter occurred, resulting in serious injuries to one flight attendant and one passenger, alongside minor injuries to a second flight attendant.
Weather conditions and the turbulence encounter
Flight 4273, operated by a Boeing 737-700 (registration N567WN) with 140 passengers and five crew members on board, was traveling from Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport (MSY) to Orlando International Airport (MCO).
At 11:55 UTC, a Convective Significant Meteorological Information (SIGMET) advisory was issued for the region, warning of cloud tops exceeding 45,000 feet.
At approximately 08:20 Eastern Daylight Time, the aircraft encountered severe turbulence over the Gulf of Mexico. The NTSB confirmed the aircraft itself sustained no damage during the event and the flight crew was able to continue the flight.
Air traffic control workload and technical limitations
The NTSB report outlines compounding factors at the Jacksonville Air Route Traffic Control Center (JAX ARTCC) that affected the flight routing through the weather system.
During the incident, the specific JAX ARTCC sector was managing a traffic volume that exceeded its target capacity of 20 aircraft.
This high workload was exacerbated by a technical limitation involving the facility communication infrastructure. The primary VHF antenna at JAX ARTCC had been rendered inoperative following a fire in October 2023. As a result, controllers were utilizing a temporary satellite relay connection to communicate with aircraft in the sector.
The NTSB determined this satellite relay introduced a 600-millisecond round-trip transmission delay, complicating timely communication between controllers and flight crews navigating the dynamic weather environment.
AirPro News analysis
We note that the findings in this final report underscore a critical vulnerability in the National Airspace System. When primary communication infrastructure fails, the fallback systems must be robust enough to handle high-stress, time-critical scenarios like severe convective weather deviation. A 600-millisecond delay might seem negligible in routine operations, but in a saturated sector where controllers are issuing rapid heading changes to keep aircraft clear of building storm cells, that latency degrades situational awareness and increases the risk of weather encounters. The NTSB documentation of this technical shortfall will likely prompt further scrutiny of contingency communication systems at major en route centers.
Photo Credit: NTSB
-
Technology & Innovation2 days agoAirbus Vision Landing Application Enables AI Autoland
-
Route Development5 days agoDubai International Airport to Close in 2035 for Al Maktoum
-
Defense & Military7 days agoWhisper Aero Launches Collaborative Logistics Aircraft for US Military
-
Commercial Aviation5 days agoIATA 2026 Airline Profit Forecast Cut in Half by Fuel Costs
-
MRO & Manufacturing6 days agoGE Aerospace Q1 2026: LEAP Deliveries Up 60%, $170B Backlog
