Regulations & Safety
NTSB Preliminary Report on Endeavor Air Ground Collision at LaGuardia
NTSB releases preliminary findings on Endeavor Air’s ground collision at LaGuardia Airport, highlighting communication and human factors.
NTSB Releases Preliminary Findings on LaGuardia Ground Collision
In the world of commercial aviation, safety is the paramount objective, built upon layers of procedure, technology, and human performance. When incidents occur, they are scrutinized to reinforce and improve this system. On October 1, 2025, an event at New York’s LaGuardia Airport (LGA) put this process into motion when two Endeavor Air aircraft, operating as Delta Connection, collided on the ground. The incident, while resulting in only one minor injury, triggered a full-scale investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
The collision involved Endeavor Air flight 5155, a Bombardier CRJ-900 preparing for departure to Roanoke, and Endeavor Air flight 5047, another CRJ-900 that had just arrived from Charlotte. The event occurred at a low speed at the intersection of taxiways M and A. While ground incidents are not uncommon, a collision between two Commercial-Aircraft resulting in substantial damage warrants a thorough and transparent investigation. The NTSB’s role is not to assign blame but to meticulously uncover the factual sequence of events and determine a probable cause to prevent future occurrences.
The agency recently released its preliminary report, offering the first official, fact-based look into the circumstances surrounding the collision. This report is a critical first step, compiling data from flight recorders, air traffic control communications, airport surveillance, and crew interviews. It provides a timeline and a factual basis for the ongoing investigation, allowing us to break down the known elements of the incident while the NTSB continues its comprehensive analysis.
A Factual Breakdown of the Collision
The NTSB’s preliminary report provides a clear, moment-by-moment account of the events leading up to the collision. By examining air traffic control (ATC) transcripts and data from the aircraft, we can reconstruct the timeline and understand the instructions given to each flight crew. The clarity of these communications is a focal point of the investigation.
Air Traffic Control Communications and Crew Actions
According to the report, at 9:54:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time, the ground controller at LaGuardia instructed the crew of flight 5047 (the arriving aircraft) to taxi to their gate via taxiway B to taxiway M. The flight crew correctly read back these instructions, indicating a clear understanding of their cleared path. This part of the sequence appears routine and without any ambiguity.
Just over a minute later, at 9:55:37 PM, the same ground controller issued taxi instructions to flight 5155 (the departing aircraft). The clearance was to taxi to runway 13 via taxiways A to E and to hold short of runway 4. Critically, the instruction included the directive to “give way to another Endeavor Air airplane at taxiway M.” At 9:55:41 PM, the crew of flight 5155 read back the controller’s instructions. The collision occurred approximately one minute later, at 9:56:40 PM.
The investigation’s focus sharpens on the period between the readback and the impact. Airports surveillance video captured the event, showing flight 5047 turning onto taxiway M and coming to an abrupt stop as it neared the intersection with taxiway A. Approximately two seconds later, the right wing of the eastbound flight 5155 struck the nose of the stationary flight 5047.
Two Different Perspectives
Interviews with the flight crews provide crucial, albeit differing, perspectives. The crew of the arriving flight, 5047, stated their taxi was normal. The captain reported seeing the other aircraft approaching from his left and brought his plane to a stop. A few seconds later, their aircraft was struck. Their account aligns with the sequence of events captured by airport surveillance footage.
The account from the flight deck of the departing flight, 5155, is more complex. The first officer told investigators he recalled hearing the full taxi clearance and did not find it confusing. However, the captain’s recollection was different. He recalled the instruction to taxi and hold short of runway 4 but stated he did not recall hearing the specific instruction to “give way” to the other aircraft at taxiway M.
The captain [of flight 5155] stated he was focused on calculating performance numbers for landing at the destination airport. He saw flight 5047 to the right, attempted to veer left, and applied the brakes immediately before the collision.
This discrepancy in recollection is a central point in the preliminary report. Human factors, including cockpit workload and situational awareness, will likely be a significant area of focus as the NTSB continues its analysis. The data from the Cockpit Voice Recorders (CVR) and Flight Data Recorders (FDR) from both aircraft were successfully recovered and will be instrumental in building a complete picture of the actions and conversations inside each cockpit.
The Aftermath and Investigation
In the immediate aftermath of the collision, the priority was the safety of the 93 passengers and crew members across both aircraft. Emergency protocols were activated, and while the incident was low-speed, the damage to the multi-million dollar aircraft was significant. The subsequent investigation now involves a methodical process of evidence collection and analysis by the NTSB and other involved parties.
Assessing the Damage and Human Impact
The NTSB classified the damage to both aircraft as “substantial.” Flight 5155, with registration N902XJ, sustained heavy damage to its right wing. The report specifies that the outboard slat, the aileron, and the wing tip separated from the aircraft. Flight 5047, registration N480PX, incurred major damage to its nose and the captain’s windshield, which was directly impacted by the other plane’s wing.
Fortunately, the human cost was minimal. A single flight attendant aboard flight 5155 reported a minor injury and was transported to a hospital for evaluation. No other injuries were reported among any of the passengers or crew. Passengers from both flights were deplaned on the taxiway and transported by bus back to the terminal, a standard procedure to ensure safety after such an event.
The weather at the time of the incident was not a factor. The meteorological report for LaGuardia indicated clear skies and visibility of 10 statute miles, ensuring that visual conditions were optimal for ground operations.
The Investigative Path Forward
The NTSB’s investigation is a collaborative effort. The agency is leading the inquiry, with participation from several other organizations, including the FAA, the aircraft operator Endeavor Air, the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), and the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA). This multi-party approach ensures that expertise from all facets of the operation,piloting, air traffic control, and airline procedures,is brought to bear on the investigation.
The preliminary report is just the first public document in a process that can take 12 to 24 months to complete. Investigators will continue to synchronize the data from the flight recorders with ATC transcripts and surveillance video. They will conduct further interviews and analyze airline training protocols, airport signage, and any other factors that could have contributed to the incident.
The ultimate goal is to produce a final report that not only identifies a probable cause but also issues safety recommendations aimed at preventing a recurrence. These recommendations can influence everything from pilot training and ATC phraseology to airport taxiway design. Every incident is treated as a learning opportunity to further strengthen the safety of the national airspace system.
Preliminary Findings and Future Implications
The NTSB’s preliminary report on the LaGuardia ground collision successfully establishes a baseline of facts. It confirms that a clear instruction to “give way” was issued by air traffic control and read back by the departing flight’s crew. It also documents the captain’s lack of recollection of this critical command, highlighting a potential breakdown in situational awareness. The report meticulously details the physical damage and confirms the fortunate absence of serious injuries.
As the investigation moves forward, the focus will shift from “what happened” to “why it happened.” The final analysis will delve deeper into human factors, cockpit resource management, and operational pressures. The findings could have broad implications, potentially leading to new recommendations for training on high-workload phases of flight, even during ground operations. For now, the report stands as a testament to a transparent and methodical investigative process designed to ensure that every flight is a safe one.
FAQ
Question: What caused the collision between the two Endeavor Air planes at LaGuardia?
Answer: The NTSB has not yet determined a probable cause. The preliminary report is a statement of facts collected so far. It notes that air traffic control instructed the departing aircraft (flight 5155) to “give way” to the arriving aircraft (flight 5047), but a collision still occurred. The full investigation is ongoing.
Question: Was anyone seriously injured in the incident?
Answer: No. According to the NTSB, one flight attendant sustained minor injuries. There were no reported injuries to any of the passengers or other crew members on either aircraft.
Question: What happens next in the NTSB’s investigation?
Answer: The NTSB will continue to analyze all evidence, including the cockpit voice and flight data recorders, surveillance video, and interviews. This process typically takes 12 to 24 months. A final report will eventually be published, which will include an official probable cause and may contain safety recommendations to prevent similar incidents.
Sources
Photo Credit: NTSB
Regulations & Safety
NTSB Releases Flight Data on China Eastern Flight 5735 Crash
NTSB FOIA release reveals manual engine shutdown and control inputs in China Eastern Airlines Flight 5735 crash; CAAC final report pending.
This article is based on original AirPro News reporting and analysis of newly released public FOIA documents from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
On April 29, 2026, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released critical technical data regarding the fatal March 2022 crash of China Eastern Airlines Flight 5735 (MU5735). The release, prompted by a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by a Chinese citizen in January 2026, provides the first public, data-backed insight into the final moments of the Boeing 737-800 aircraft.
According to the newly public Flight Data Recorder (FDR) download report, originally compiled in July 2022, the aircraft experienced a deliberate manual shutdown of both engines at cruising altitude. This was immediately followed by severe manual flight control inputs that forced the plane into a fatal dive. This data release occurs against a backdrop of delayed official reports from the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC), which is leading the Investigation under international protocols.
We have reviewed the released documents, which were published on the NTSB’s official FOIA reading room on May 1, 2026, and subsequently mirrored on Wikipedia and GitHub. The findings offer essential technical context to an aviation tragedy that claimed the lives of all 132 passengers and crew members on board, marking it as the deadliest aviation accident in China since 1994.
Technical Findings from the FDR Data
Sequence of Events at 29,000 Feet
The NTSB’s July 2022 “Combined Download Report” details the final 90 seconds of recorded flight parameters. The data reveals a sequence of deliberate actions rather than a mechanical failure. According to the NTSB FOIA release, the incident began at a cruising altitude of 29,100 feet.
“while cruising at 29,000 ft., the fuel switches on both engines moved from the run position to the cutoff position.”
, NTSB Combined Download Report, July 2022
The FDR data plots show that this action occurred simultaneously or within one second of each other. Moving these switches to the cutoff position is a highly specific, multi-step physical action. It requires a pilot to lift and pull the switches over a mechanical detent, making an accidental deployment highly improbable.
Power Loss and Flight Control Inputs
The immediate result of the fuel cutoff was a rapid drop in engine core speed (N2) and a total loss of thrust. Following this power loss, the NTSB data indicates that the autopilot was disengaged.
Approximately three seconds later, the FDR recorded that the control yoke was pushed forward violently. This manual input initiated a steep, nose-down pitch. The data also shows continuous left-roll inputs, resulting in an inverted barrel roll maneuver, while the rudder remained in a neutral position.
The FDR ceased recording at approximately 26,000 feet, about 23 seconds after the fuel switches were cut. The NTSB report notes that the FDR relies on engine-driven generators and lacks a backup battery. Consequently, it powered down when the engines spooled down, leaving the final plunge to the ground unrecorded by this specific device.
The Investigation and Official Stances
The Role of the CAAC and NTSB
Under International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Annex 13 guidelines, the CAAC is the lead investigative authority for the MU5735 crash, which occurred on March 21, 2022, in Teng County, Guangxi. The NTSB serves as a technical advisor representing the state of the aircraft’s Manufacturers, Boeing.
The CAAC has yet to release a final investigation report. While ICAO guidelines expect a final report or an annual interim statement, the CAAC has deviated from this standard. In response to an open government information request on May 19, 2025, the CAAC explained its withholding of the report.
Releasing an annual interim report might “endanger national security and societal stability.”
, CAAC response to an open government information request, May 2025
Previously, in statements released in 2022 and 2024, the CAAC confirmed that no mechanical, structural, or systemic faults were found with the Boeing 737-800 aircraft.
Cockpit Voice Recorder Status
Unlike the FDR, the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) is equipped with a backup battery and captured the entire event until impact. The NTSB FOIA response indicates that the CVR audio was successfully downloaded in excellent quality and handed over entirely to the CAAC. The NTSB did not retain any audio files, and the contents remain classified by Chinese authorities.
AirPro News analysis
The release of this FDR data highlights a significant transparency gap between the U.S. FOIA process and the CAAC’s ongoing withholding of the final report. U.S. federal law (49 U.S.C. § 1114(f)) mandates the release of certain technical data after specific criteria or timeframes are met, which ultimately forced the publication of these raw technical plots despite the CAAC’s reluctance to publish an interim update.
While the data strongly indicates deliberate manual inputs, specifically the fuel cutoff and the subsequent yoke push, we must avoid definitively diagnosing the motive. Without access to the CVR audio, which remains under the exclusive control of the CAAC, assigning psychological intent or confirming theories of hijacking or pilot suicide remains speculative. The empirical evidence confirms the mechanical steps of how the aircraft entered its fatal dive, but the underlying reason remains officially unanswered.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
What is a fuel control switch?
A fuel control switch manages the flow of fuel to the aircraft’s engines. Moving it to the “cutoff” position mid-flight stops fuel flow, shutting down the engine. It requires a specific, deliberate physical action to bypass a safety detent, preventing accidental activation.
Why did the Flight Data Recorder stop at 26,000 feet?
The FDR on the Boeing 737-800 relies on engine-driven electrical generators. When the engines were shut down and spooled down, the generators stopped providing power. Because the FDR lacks a backup battery, it powered off before the aircraft reached the ground.
Where can the public view these NTSB documents?
The documents are available in the NTSB’s official FOIA reading room under Document DCA22WA102. They have also been archived on Wikimedia Commons and translated on various GitHub repositories.
Sources:
Photo Credit: Xinhua
Regulations & Safety
NTSB Reports on United Airlines Engine Fire and Evacuation at Houston IAH
NTSB final report details United Airlines Flight 1382 engine fire during takeoff at Houston IAH and safe evacuation despite slide malfunction.
This article is based on an official press release and final investigation report from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has officially released its final report detailing the investigation into a February 2025 emergency evacuation involving a United Airlines Airbus A319. The incident, which occurred at George Bush Intercontinental Airport (IAH) in Houston, Texas, involved a suspected right-engine failure and subsequent fire during the aircraft’s takeoff roll.
According to the NTSB’s findings, United Airlines Flight 1382 was accelerating for departure to LaGuardia Airport on February 2, 2025, when the flight crew executed a high-speed rejected takeoff. The swift actions of the crew, combined with passenger awareness, led to a successful emergency evacuation on the runway. Fortunately, the NTSB confirms that no injuries were reported among the 112 individuals on board, which included 107 passengers and five crew members.
We have reviewed the comprehensive data extracted from the aircraft’s Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and Flight Data Recorder (FDR). The final report (Occurrence Number: DCA25LA114) sheds light on the critical timeline of the engine failure, the communication breakdown between the cabin and flight deck, and a notable malfunction of an emergency evacuation slide that forced the crew to adapt their evacuation strategy on the fly.
Timeline of the Emergency Evacuation
Crew and Passenger Coordination
The NTSB report provides a precise timeline of the events that unfolded on the morning of February 2. At approximately 8:16 AM local time, the Airbus A319-131 (Registration: N837UA) was accelerating down Runway 15R. The flight crew rejected the takeoff at a ground speed of approximately 115 knots after suspecting a failure of the right-hand V2522 engine.
Data extracted from the Honeywell HFR5-V CVR reveals that the flight deck was initially unaware of the external fire. At 08:15:43, following the aborted takeoff, a flight attendant instructed passengers via the public address system to remain seated. However, just six seconds later, the flight crew’s rejected takeoff checklist was interrupted. A flight attendant contacted the flight deck to report that passengers had observed a fire in the right engine.
By 08:16:20, the flight crew initiated the engine fire checklist. The situation in the cabin, however, was escalating rapidly. At 08:18:06, a forward cabin flight attendant reported light smoke in the rear of the aircraft, noting that passengers in the aft cabin had already begun to self-evacuate. This was confirmed at 08:18:42 when the aft flight attendant reported visible smoke outside the right side of the aircraft.
Equipment Malfunctions and Safety Findings
The Failure of the 2L Evacuation Slide
A significant safety finding highlighted in the NTSB’s final report is the malfunction of primary emergency equipment during the evacuation process. As passengers and crew scrambled to exit the aircraft, the aft flight attendant attempted to deploy the evacuation slide at the aft-left door (designated as 2L).
According to the NTSB investigation, the emergency slide at the 2L door was found to be “damaged,” forcing the crew to redirect passengers.
Because the 2L slide was unusable, the flight crew had to quickly pivot and funnel the evacuating passengers to the aft-right door (2R). Despite this severe bottleneck in the evacuation route, the NTSB reports that all 112 occupants successfully exited the aircraft via the functioning slides and were safely bused to the terminal.
Instrument Indication Discrepancies
Another crucial takeaway from the NTSB investigation is the lack of immediate instrument feedback provided to the pilots. The report notes that the flight crew initially stated they did not have engine fire indications on their flight deck instruments. This discrepancy underscores the vital role that cabin crew and passenger observations played in alerting the pilots to the severity of the engine fire, ultimately prompting the execution of the engine fire checklist.
AirPro News analysis
The findings from United Airlines Flight 1382 arrive during a period of heightened public and regulatory scrutiny regarding commercial aviation safety. The early months of 2025 have been marked by several high-profile incidents, including a tragic mid-air collision in Washington D.C. in January. While the Houston incident resulted in zero injuries, it highlights ongoing industry challenges regarding aging aircraft infrastructure.
The aircraft involved in this incident was manufactured in 2001, making it 24 years old at the time of the evacuation. The NTSB has historically maintained a strict focus on the reliability of evacuation slides. The failure of the 2L slide on this aging Airbus A319 may prompt the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to issue further Airworthiness Directives (ADs) concerning the inspection and maintenance lifecycles of emergency slides on older airframes. Furthermore, this event keeps United Airlines’ operational safety at IAH in the spotlight, following a previous runway excursion involving United Flight 2477 at the same hub in March 2024.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
- What caused the evacuation of United Airlines Flight 1382? The evacuation was triggered by a suspected failure and subsequent fire in the aircraft’s right-hand engine (V2522) during the takeoff roll at George Bush Intercontinental Airport.
- Were there any injuries reported? No. According to the NTSB final report, all 107 passengers and 5 crew members evacuated safely with no reported injuries.
- Did all emergency equipment function properly? No. The NTSB investigation revealed that the emergency evacuation slide at the aft-left door (2L) was damaged and failed to function, requiring the crew to redirect passengers to the aft-right door (2R).
- Did the pilots know the engine was on fire immediately? The NTSB report indicates that the flight crew did not initially have engine fire indications on their instruments; they were alerted to the fire by a flight attendant who relayed passenger observations.
Sources
Photo Credit: NTSB
Regulations & Safety
Cessna 421C Crash Near Wimberley Texas Kills Five Adults
A twin-engine Cessna 421C crashed near Wimberley, Texas, killing five. FAA and NTSB are investigating the sudden descent and impact.
This article summarizes reporting by CBS Austin and Will LeHardy, supplemented by public flight data and Investigation reports.
Late Thursday night, April 30, 2026, a twin-engine Cessna 421C crashed in a wooded area near Wimberley, Texas, resulting in the deaths of all five adults on board. According to reporting by CBS Austin, emergency responders were dispatched to the scene shortly after 11:00 PM following reports of a downed aircraft.
The aircraft was en route from the Amarillo area to New Braunfels when it experienced a sudden and steep descent. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) have launched a full investigation into the fatal accident to determine the sequence of events that led to the crash.
Hays County officials confirmed the loss of life, noting that the victims’ identities are being withheld until their families can be notified. The incident has deeply affected the local Texas Hill Country community, though authorities confirmed that no ground casualties were reported in the residential-adjacent area.
Flight Details and Final Moments
The aircraft involved was a Cessna 421C, a twin-engine plane bearing the tail number N291AN. FAA registration data indicates the aircraft’s airworthiness dates back to January 1977, and it is currently owned by KB Flies LLC, an entity based in Amarillo, Texas.
Flight tracking data shows the plane departed from River Falls Airport, a private airfield southeast of Amarillo, at 9:11 PM. It was scheduled to arrive at New Braunfels National Airport at 11:19 PM. However, as the aircraft approached the Wimberley area, its flight path altered drastically.
A Sudden Descent
According to public flight telemetry, the plane took a sharp turn to the northwest near Ledgerock Road. During this maneuver, the aircraft plunged from an altitude of 13,600 feet to approximately 7,000 feet before it ceased transmitting data.
A second Cessna 421, which departed River Falls Airport within two minutes of the crashed plane and was heading to the same destination, landed safely. Air Traffic Control (ATC) audio suggests the pilots of the two aircraft were in communication prior to the incident, though it remains officially unconfirmed if they were traveling as a coordinated flight.
Crash Impact and Witness Accounts
The aircraft crashed in a wooded area near the 200 block of Round Rock Road on the southwest side of Wimberley. Hays County Judge Ruben Becerra stated that preliminary evidence shows the plane was traveling at a high rate of speed upon impact, and he confirmed there is no indication of a mid-air collision. The NTSB noted the aircraft was subsequently destroyed by a post-impact fire.
ATC recordings capture the growing concern as the plane vanished from radar. The pilot of the second aircraft informed controllers that he had lost contact with the doomed plane.
“He started to move erratically and now his track is disappeared from the scope,” an air traffic controller responded, according to ATC audio.
Local Residents React
Residents in the Wimberley area reported terrifying moments as the plane went down. Cecil Keith, a nearby resident, recalled hearing what sounded like an engine backfiring, described as “pow, pow, pow”, as the aircraft flew over his home, noting that something was clearly wrong.
“I just heard a loud crash. I felt everything vibrate. Everything was up in flames,” nearby resident Stacey Rohr stated.
Ongoing Investigation
The FAA and NTSB are actively investigating the circumstances surrounding the crash. NTSB spokesperson Peter Knudson confirmed that an investigator was dispatched to the site to document the wreckage before it is moved to a secure facility for detailed evaluation.
A preliminary report is expected within 30 days, which will outline the initial factual findings. However, a comprehensive final report detailing the probable cause of the crash could take between one and two years to complete.
AirPro News analysis
While the exact cause of the crash remains undetermined, the presence of a second aircraft traveling the same route provides investigators with a crucial real-time witness. The sudden drop in altitude and erratic movements noted by ATC suggest a catastrophic mechanical failure or severe spatial disorientation, rather than a slow degradation of flight controls. Furthermore, while the National Weather Service noted mostly cloudy conditions with a thunderstorm approaching the area hours later, it is currently unclear if localized weather phenomena contributed to the sudden descent. We will continue to monitor the NTSB dockets for updates on the airframe’s maintenance history and the pilot’s flight experience.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
When and where did the crash occur?
The crash occurred late Thursday night, April 30, 2026, in a wooded area near Wimberley, Texas, approximately 40 miles southwest of Austin. Emergency crews were dispatched around 11:05 PM.
How many people were on board?
Five adults, including one pilot and four passengers, were on board. Tragically, there were no survivors. Their identities are being withheld pending family notification.
What type of plane was involved?
The aircraft was a twin-engine Cessna 421C, manufactured in 1977 and registered to KB Flies LLC, based in Amarillo, Texas.
Was weather a factor?
The National Weather Service reported mostly cloudy conditions in the area, but it is not yet known if weather played a role in the crash. The NTSB is investigating all potential factors, including weather, mechanical failure, and human error.
Sources: CBS Austin
Photo Credit: Austin Statesman
-
Regulations & Safety7 days agoFAA Mandates Inspections for Converted Boeing 747-400 Freighters Over Fire Risk
-
Airlines Strategy2 days agoSpirit Airlines to Shut Down After Bailout Deal Fails in 2026
-
Airlines Strategy6 days agoAmerican Airlines Raises 1.14 Billion for Fleet Modernization in 2026
-
MRO & Manufacturing3 days agoEuropean Commission Approves Airbus and Air France-KLM A350 Joint Venture
-
Regulations & Safety2 days agoCessna 421C Crash Near Wimberley Texas Kills Five Adults