OpenAirDocs.org

19960329022029I

Incident · Minor damage
Open the Markdown

FAA incident report · Cessna 150J · Harrison, AR · March 29, 1996

FAA Aviation Safety Information Portal

© OpenStreetMap
Date
March 29, 1996 · 17:00 local
Place
Harrison, AR
Airport
Boone County
Phase of flight
Level Off Touchdown
Operating rules
General operating rules (Part 91)
Damage
Minor damage
Aircraft
N61078
Reported as
Cessna 150J
People aboard
2
Fatal injuries
0
Pilot’s flight hours
1,715 total300 in this make and model113 in the last 90 days
N61078Registered now · Cessna 150JS/N 15070783 · Built 1969Airframe modelCessna 150JEngine modelContinental 0-200 seriesReciprocating

From the FAA’s Accident/Incident Data System (AIDS), through its Aviation Safety Information Portal, as reported. The NTSB investigates accidents separately, and its record of an accident is the fuller one. The aircraft is matched to the registry by N-number and event date, checked against the reported make and model; the registry’s history has gaps, so older matches can be wrong. Compare the reported make and model.

What happened

The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.

Narrative: on March 29, 1996, at approximately 1700 CST, a Cessna 150, N61078, registered to marie wilson, was conducting a training flight at the Harrison, Arkansas airport (hro). After a hard landing, the nose gear separated from the airplane causing minor damage to the aircraft. The instructor and student were not injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time, and no flight plan was filed. The flight also had originated at hro. This investigation and report are closed.

As the FAA filed it

NARRATIVE: ON MARCH 29, 1996, AT APPROXIMATELY 1700 CST, A CESSNA 150, N61078, REGISTERED TO MARIE WILSON, WAS CONDUCTING A TRAINING FLIGHT AT THE HARRISON, ARKANSAS AIRPORT (HRO). AFTER A HARD LANDING, THE NOSE GEAR SEPARATED FROM THE AIRPLANE CAUSING MINOR DAMAGE TO THE AIRCRAFT. THE INSTRUCTOR AND STUDENT WERE NOT INJURED. VISUAL METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS PREVAILED AT THE TIME, AND NO FLIGHT PLAN WAS FILED. THE FLIGHT ALSO HAD ORIGINATED AT HRO. THIS INVESTIGATION AND REPORT ARE CLOSED.