2 fatalities

27 Sep 2021: BEECH S35 (N354M) — Mission Aviation — Billings, MT

Billings, MT, United States

On 27 Sep 2021, a BEECH S35 (registration N354M) operated by Mission Aviation was involved in an aviation accident near Billings, MT. 2 people were killed. Investigators recorded the probable cause as: The pilot’s improper flare, which led to a hard landing, subsequent loss of control, and collision with trees. This summary draws on records from NTSB; 12 related events involving the same aircraft type or operator are linked below.

SourcesNTSBPrimary reportUpdated 1778583330Data APIEditorial standards

On September 26, 2021, a Beech S35 (N354M) was destroyed after a landing attempt at a private airstrip near Billings, Montana. The pilot was seriously injured; two passengers sustained fatal injuries.

History of Flight

On September 26, 2021, at about 1922 mountain daylight time, a Beech S35 airplane, registration N354M, was destroyed when it was involved in an accident near Billings, Montana. The pilot sustained serious injuries, and the two passengers sustained fatal injuries. The flight was conducted under Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 as a personal cross-country flight from Colorado to a private airstrip in Montana.

According to the pilot, as the airplane neared the intended destination, he expressed concern to a pilot-rated passenger about the dusk conditions and the absence of runway lights at the airstrip. The passenger reassured him about the landing. Entering the airport traffic pattern, the pilot felt “okay” and completed the checklist. During the landing, one passenger perceived a problem and instructed the pilot to “add power.” The airplane then turned left, impacted trees, and a postimpact fire ensued.

The pilot reported being unaware of what happened during touchdown or why the airplane turned toward the trees. He attributed the left turn to “floating the landing somehow” and stated everything was normal until the left turn. He added that “something made the left wing hit the ground first, instead of the wheels.”

Witnesses near the accident site reported observing the airplane on final approach from the northeast. One witness stated the airplane appeared “slightly high and slightly fast” and “floated down the runway” before a “hard” touchdown. Another witness noted that the left wing appeared to have stalled and that the airplane landed hard on the left main landing gear first. A further witness described the airplane beginning to “wobble” and then depart the left side of the runway, followed by an increase in engine power. The airplane accelerated through a field in a nose-high attitude, described as a “duck waddle,” with engine power remaining on while the left wingtip dragged across the ground about halfway through an attempted go-around.

Aircraft and Airport Information

The airplane was equipped with a single control yoke. The left side included rudder pedals and brakes; the right side had only rudder pedals.

Wreckage and Impact Examination

The airplane came to rest within a tree line about 450 ft north of the runway and 1,938 ft northeast of the approach end. All major structural components were located within about 40 ft of the main wreckage.

Runway examination revealed the first identified point of contact was a tire mark consistent with the left main landing gear, located 882 ft from the approach end. A mark consistent with the right main landing gear was found 924 ft from the approach end. A solid black track from both marks progressed leftward, exiting the runway surface at 1,078 ft from the approach end. A ground scar consistent with the left wing measured about 60 ft in length, located 1,500 ft from the approach end and 91 ft left of the runway edge. Additional ground scars consistent with the main landing gear were observed about 68 ft beyond the left wing scar, arcing north toward the main wreckage.

The fuselage was significantly damaged by the postimpact fire from the firewall to just behind the baggage area. Flight control continuity was established from the ailerons to the control column, and elevator control continuity was established from the forward spar to the control surfaces. Examination of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of any preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation.

Contributing factors

Incorrect use/operationLateral/bank control — Not attained/maintainedPilot