# NTSB WPR09FA234: Upton Bakeng Duce, N86YP, Ramona, CA, May 9, 2009

- Type: NTSB accident investigation
- Classification: Accident · Fatal · Field investigation · Final report
- Date: May 9, 2009, 14:35 local (21:35 UTC)
- Place: Ramona, CA
- Coordinates: 32.988609, -116.781944
- Nearby events: https://openairdocs.org/map.md?lat=32.9886&lon=-116.7819&mi=10
- Phase of flight: [Maneuvering](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-phases/450) (OpenAirDocs' grouping)
- Defining event: [Maneuvering: Aircraft structural failure](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/337)
- Highest injury: Fatal
- Injuries: 2 fatal
- Status: Completed, report May 30, 2013
- Report: Approved by Office Director
- NTSB office: Western Pacific Region
- Parties: Federal Aviation Administration
- NTSB case key (mKey): 73799
- NTSB case page: https://web.ntsb.gov/investigations/?ntsbnumber=WPR09FA234
- NTSB report (PDF, downloads): https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/73799/pdf
- NTSB docket: https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=73799
- Page: https://openairdocs.org/ntsb/WPR09FA234

## Probable cause

An in-flight separation of the right wing, which resulted from the pilot's performance of a maneuver that produced aerodynamic loads that exceeded the wing spar’s degraded strength. The wing spar strength degradation was due to the builder's failure to comply with Federal Aviation Administration recommended guidelines to select and incorporate wood in the spar with a grain pattern aligned with the longitudinal axis of the spar.

## Findings

NTSB's coded findings; those marked are part of the probable cause.

- [Manufacture/production](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/04013000): Organizational issues › Development · Manufacturer (probable cause); cases with it: [Upton Samuel L BAKENG DUCE, 1 case](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/04013000/cases.md?model=05650M7), [All aircraft, 17 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/04013000/cases.md)
- [Wing structure: spar (on wing)](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/01035711): Aircraft › Aircraft structures · Damaged/degraded (probable cause); cases with it: [Upton Samuel L BAKENG DUCE, 1 case](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/01035711/cases.md?model=05650M7), [All aircraft, 43 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/01035711/cases.md)
- [Wing structure: spar (on wing)](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/01035711): Aircraft › Aircraft structures · Failure (probable cause); cases with it: [Upton Samuel L BAKENG DUCE, 1 case](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/01035711/cases.md?model=05650M7), [All aircraft, 43 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/01035711/cases.md)
- [Performance/control parameters: dynamic load](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/01062032): Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability · Capability exceeded (probable cause); cases with it: [Upton Samuel L BAKENG DUCE, 1 case](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/01062032/cases.md?model=05650M7), [All aircraft, 10 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-findings/01062032/cases.md)

## Sequence of events

The events NTSB coded, in order, by phase of flight. The defining event best describes what happened.

- [Prior to flight: Miscellaneous/other](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/900); cases with it: [Upton Samuel L BAKENG DUCE, 1 case](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/900/sequence.md?model=05650M7), [All aircraft, 1,556 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/900/sequence.md)
- [Maneuvering: Aircraft structural failure](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/337) (defining event); cases with it: [Upton Samuel L BAKENG DUCE, 1 case](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/337/sequence.md?model=05650M7), [All aircraft, 290 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/337/sequence.md)
- [Maneuvering: Part(s) separation from AC](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/338); cases with it: [Upton Samuel L BAKENG DUCE, 1 case](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/338/sequence.md?model=05650M7), [All aircraft, 563 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/338/sequence.md)
- [Uncontrolled descent: Collision with terr/obj (non-CFIT) ](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/470); cases with it: [Upton Samuel L BAKENG DUCE, 1 case](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/470/sequence.md?model=05650M7), [All aircraft, 10,189 cases](https://openairdocs.org/ntsb-events/470/sequence.md)

## Analysis

The pilot and pilot-rated passenger departed for a personal flight in the borrowed experimental amateur-built airplane, which was equipped with dual flight controls. No determination could be made regarding which occupant was handling the controls during the flight. Recorded radar data indicated that 11 minutes into the flight, a series of maneuvers were performed. A witness stated that he observed the accident airplane spiral downward until it impacted the ground. He also reported observing a wing, which was separated from the main body of the airplane, fall to the ground nearby. Right wing spar fragments and the right aileron were found between 0.1 and 0.3 mile from the main wreckage, indicating that the right wing had separated in flight. Postaccident examination of fragments from the right wing’s broken wood wing spar revealed that the spar had been constructed with a wood grain orientation 12 degrees from the spar's longitudinal axis. This angle was inconsistent with published Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) guidance stating that grain deviation from the longitudinal axis of the spar should be no more than 3.8 degrees. The maximum grain deviation is limited because the relative strength and stiffness of an airplane’s wood wing spar is reduced when the grain structure within the spar is not oriented parallel to the longitudinal axis of the spar. With a 12-degree grain orientation, the spar’s load-carrying capability was compromised and reduced to between 30 to 70 percent of that of a spar with a 0-degree (parallel) grain orientation. It is likely that the wing spar failed when the pilot performed a maneuver that produced aerodynamic loads exceeding its degraded strength.

## Factual narrative

HISTORY OF FLIGHT On May 9, 2009, about 1435, an Upton Bakeng Duce, N86YP, experienced an in-flight breakup while maneuvering, followed by an uncontrolled descent into an open field, about 6.4 miles east-southeast of Ramona, California. The private pilot, who borrowed the airplane from its owner, occupied the rear seat of the experimental, single engine, airplane. The pilot, who occupied the front seat, held a commercial pilot certificate. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the structure, which was extensively fragmented. There was no fire. Both pilots were killed during the personal flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan had been filed. The flight was performed under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91, and it originated from the Ramona airport about 1424. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and National Transportation Safety Board personnel interviewed a total of nine persons who reported observing and/or hearing the accident. One of these witnesses reported to the Safety Board investigator that, from her vantage point on elevated terrain in a hilly area, she had observed two airplanes flying in close proximity to each other for at least several minutes prior to their colliding. According to this witness, one of the airplanes was flying slower than the other airplane. The faster moving airplane was predominantly white in color, and the slower moving airplane was predominantly colored red. (The accident airplane’s fuselage was red; its wings were white.) The witness further reported to the Safety Board investigator that she observed the airplanes maneuvering "dangerously" close to each other. The witness stated that during the time she observed these airplanes, the red airplane appeared to make relatively shallow bank turns as compared with the maneuvers that the white airplane performed. The airplanes appeared to have collided while the red airplane was flying in an easterly direction, and the unidentified airplane was climbing in a northerly direction. The witness reported that an instant following what appeared to have been the midair collision she yelled out “The white airplane hit the red airplane.” The witness additionally reported that, immediately following the collision, the red airplane rolled into a 90-degree bank, a span of wing appeared to break off, and the airplane spiraled downward until impacting the ground. Following the impact, she did not recall seeing the faster airplane again. Eight other witnesses made statements indicating that they heard a sputtering engine and looked upward. One of the witnesses stated that he observed the accident airplane spiral downward until it made a dull thud upon impacting the ground. He also reported observing a wing, which was separated from the main body of the airplane. Another of the witnesses stated he observed a large piece of the airplane that looked like a parallelogram fluttering as it fell. None of these witnessesreported observing a second airplane flying in the vicinity at the time of the crash. Radar Track Examination Safety Board and FAA air traffic control personnel examined recorded radar from all of the pertinent radar site locations that had coverage in the hilly terrain that surrounds the crash site and in the neighboring vicinity. Radar coverage of primary (non-transponder) equipped aircraft in the accident site area was problematic at elevations below 1,000 feet above ground level. Primary radar targets were found for an aircraft that departed the Ramona Airport area about 1425, and then tracked southeast toward the accident location. The last target was detected about 1435, approximately 1/4 mile from the crash site. The aircraft appears to have begun executing various course changes in the area of the accident site commencing about 1432. According to the Safety Board’s air traffic control investigator, the radar data appears to show only one aircraft in the vicinity. No altitude information was available for the aircraft. The witness statement regarding the presence of a second aircraft and a possible midair collision could not be substantiated by radar observations. PERSONNEL INFORMATION The 60-year-old pilot who occupied the airplane’s rear seat held a private pilot certificate with a single engine land airplane rating. He also held an airframe and powerplant mechanic certificate. In January, 2008, the pilot reported having 1,450 hours of flight time when he was issued a second-class aviation medical certificate with the limitation that he wear corrective lenses. The 50-year-old pilot who occupied the airplane’s front seat held a commercial pilot certificate with ratings for glider, single engine land airplane, and instrument airplane. He also held a certified flight instructor certificate for single engine land airplanes that expired in 1990. The pilot also held a control tower operator certificate. In December 2008, the pilot reported having 1,050 hours of flight time when he was issued a second-class aviation medical certificate with the limitation that he wear corrective lenses. AIRCRAFT INFORMATION In 1986, the FAA issued the airplane’s builder operating limitations for the airplane and an airworthiness certificate. In part, the limitations stated that operators of the airplane were prohibited from aerobatic flight, which is an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in attitude, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight. FAA records indicate that the experimental, amateur built, single-engine airplane was manufactured by Samuel L. Upton. The airplane model was called a Bakeng Duce, and it bore serial number 572. The airplane was equipped with a 140-horsepower, Lycoming O-290D engine that was installed in the airplane’s wood frame structure. The airplane was equipped with two seats, in a tandem configuration, and dual flight controls. The airplane could be flown from either seat. Accordingto the airplane’s owner, the pilot in the rear seat was the FAA certificated mechanic who performed a conditional (annual) inspection on the airplane on May 2, 2009, at a total airframe time of 480 hours. Although the airplane is equipped with dual flight controls, the rear seat’s instrument panel contains more instruments, including circuit breakers, than the front seat’s panel. METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION Witnesses located within less than 1 mile from the accident site reported that the sky condition was clear, and the wind was light and variable. The visibility was not restricted. Ramona Airport is located about 8 miles west of the accident site. At 1453, it reported having a clear sky with 10 miles visibility. WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION The main wreckage was located in an open, near level, field at the following global positioning system coordinates: 32 degrees 59.319 minutes north latitude by 116 degrees 46.969 minutes west longitude. The field elevation was about 1,840 feet mean sea level (msl). FAA and airplane recovery personnel reported finding fragmented airplane parts in the field, between 0.1 and 0.3 miles east-northeast of the main wreckage. The airplane’s owner reported that his Bakeng Duce was destroyed upon impacting the ground and fragmenting into numerous pieces. Photographs provided by the FAA indicated that the airplane came to rest on its right side. The entire empennage was attached to the fuselage. The cockpit was crushed and fragmented. The metal propeller and engine assembly were found together, adjacent to the firewall and main wreckage. Both wings were crushed, with multiple breaks observed in the forward and aft spars. The wings were broken from both their fuselage attachment points, and from their lift struts, which were bent. No evidence of fire or oil residue was observed on the empennage. Safety Board personnel examined the airplane wreckage following its recovery. The flight control continuity to the rudder and elevator assembly was confirmed from the aft fuselage to the respective control surfaces. The entire left wing spar was located, although it was broken in several locations. The left wing’s aileron was found attached to the wing. The control cable continuity to the left wing’s aileron was confirmed from the aileron to the fuselage. The right wing spar was found fragmented in numerous locations, mostly outboard of the location where the wing lift strut attaches to the wing. The right wing’s aileron was found separated from the wing. Reportedly, it had been located about 0.1 mile east of the main wreckage, in the vicinity of numerous wood fragments. An examination of the white colored left and right wing skin did not disclose any visible evidence of a colored paint transfer onto the skin. The painted skin exhibited numerous scratch marks and tears oriented in various directions. Not all pieces of skin were located. MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATION Autopsies were performed on the pilots by the Countyof San Diego, California, Office of the Medical Examiner. The reports indicate that the cause of death for both pilots was multiple blunt force injuries. The Medical Examiner and the FAA’s Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, performed forensic toxicology on specimens from the pilots. No evidence of ethanol or drugs of abuse were detected. TESTS AND RESEARCH Wood Spar Construction and Laboratory Examination Several of the fractured and separated right wing spar segments (outboard of the lift strut-to-wing attachment point) were submitted to the Safety Board for analysis by the Office of Research and Engineering, Materials Laboratory, Washington, D.C. In pertinent part, the laboratory’s examination of fractured right wing spar components revealed that the fractures at the inboard and outboard ends of one fragmented forward spar piece occurred primarily as splits along the grain of the wood. The splitting fracture indicated that the grain of the wood was not aligned with the longitudinal axis of the spar. An examination of one sample indicated that the average angle of deviation between the wood grain and the spar axis was approximately 12 degrees. A 12-degree angle of deviation would correspond to a slope of more than 1 in 5. Laboratory personnel additionally noted that the misaligned wood grain was not apparent by viewing either the front or back surfaces of the spar. Wood strips had been attached to the top and bottom edges of sections of the spar, which precluded one’s ability to observe the misalignment. The effect of the misaligned grain orientation on the spar’s strength was evaluated. According to a United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Products Laboratory General Technical Report, a grain offset angle of 12 degrees predicts that the bending strength decreases to a value between 30 and 70 percent of the strength for a structure with grain aligned with its axis. The FAA’s publication (AC 43.13-1B) entitled “Acceptable Methods, Techniques, and Practices - Aircraft Inspection and Repair,” states that the maximum permissible grain deviation (slope of grain) is 1 in 15, or 3.8 degrees. The relative strength and stiffness of an airplane’s wood wing spar is reduced when the grain structure within the spar is not oriented in a longitudinal direction, relative to the longitudinal axis of the spar.

## Aircraft

- Registration: [N86YP](https://openairdocs.org/deregistered/N86YP-2018-01-17), registration cancelled 2018-01-17, S/N 572, built 1986 (OpenAirDocs)
- Reported make and model: Upton Bakeng Duce
- Registry model: [Upton Samuel L BAKENG DUCE](https://openairdocs.org/model/upton-samuel-l-bakeng-duce) (registry code 05650M7) (OpenAirDocs)
- Registry engine: [Lycoming 0-290 series](https://openairdocs.org/engine/lycoming-0-290-series) (registry code 41506, 4 cycle) (OpenAirDocs)
- Category: Airplane, amateur-built
- Serial number: 572
- Airframe hours: 480
- Engines: Lycoming O-290D 140 horsepower reciprocating
- Damage: Substantial damage
- Flight: Personal, Part 91
- Airworthiness certificate: Special, Experimental (Special)
- Last inspection: Annual, May 2, 2009
- Departed: RNM, Ramona, CA
- Destination: RNM, Ramona, CA
- Airport: RNM, Ramona

## Flight crew

As NTSB recorded them. NTSB leaves out names.

- Pilot; age 60; injuries: fatal; private; airplane ratings: single-engine land; instrument ratings: airplane; medical: class 2, with waivers/limitations; seat: rear; toxicology performed; flight hours: 1,450 total
- Pilot; age 50; injuries: fatal; commercial, flight instructor; airplane ratings: single-engine land; instrument ratings: airplane; medical: class 2, with waivers/limitations; seat: front; toxicology performed; flight hours: 1,050 total

## Weather

- Conditions: Visual (VMC), Day
- Wind: 280° at 11 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Lowest ceiling: none
- Temperature: 81 °F, dew point 55 °F
- Altimeter: 29.86 inHg
- Observed at: RNM, 7 nm away

## FAA reports on this event (1)

The FAA's own accident and incident reports, matched to the aircraft by N-number and date (OpenAirDocs).

- [Accident 20090509007219A](https://openairdocs.org/incident/20090509007219A), May 9, 2009: Amtr BAKENGDUCE, Ramona, CA, Destroyed, 2 fatal. (-23) Pilot and passenger (also a pilot: commerical, instrument, CFI) departed Ramona airport, CA (krnm) at approximately 1400 PDT for a local pleasure flight.…

## Docket (36 files)

The files NTSB released with the investigation on January 20, 2012, on NTSB's docket system: https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=73799. 62.4 MB in all.

- ATC 3 - SCT Radar Study (item 1, .PDF, 798 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40361723&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=ATC%203%20-%20SCT%20Radar%20Study-Master.PDF
- Materials Laboratory Factual Report 10-019, Pieces of the right wing (item 2, .PDF, 5 photos, 304 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40361710&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Materials%20Laboratory%20Factual%20Report%2010-019,%20Pieces%20of%20the%20right%20wing-Master.PDF
- Pilot/Operator Aircraft Accident Report, NTSB Form 6120.1 (item 3, .PDF, 457 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40313544&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Pilot%2FOperator%20Aircraft%20Accident%20Report,%20NTSB%20Form%206120.1-Redacted.PDF
- Statement of witness, Ball, with NTSB Photos (item 4, .PDF, 3.4 MB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358544&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Statement%20of%20witness,%20Ball,%20with%20NTSB%20Photos-Redacted.PDF
- Statements of Witnesses, by FAA (item 5, .PDF, 1.2 MB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358545&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Statements%20of%20Witnesses,%20by%20FAA-Redacted.PDF
- Statement of Witnesses, NTSB Record of Conversation (item 6, .PDF, 164 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40360940&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Statement%20of%20Witnesses,%20NTSB%20Record%20of%20Conversation-Redacted.PDF
- Statement_of_witness_Ball,_NTSB_movie (item 7, MOV, 44.5 MB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358577&FileExtension=mov&FileName=Statement_of_witness_Ball,_NTSB_movie-Master
- Accident Site & Witness Location (item 8, .PDF, 877 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358548&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=%20Accident%20Site%20%26%20Witness%20Location-Master.PDF
- Statement by FAA re Spar Dry Rot (item 9, .PDF, 764 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358551&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Statement%20by%20FAA%20re%20Spar%20Dry%20Rot-Master.PDF
- Record of Conversation - San Diego County Sheriff Dept (item 10, .PDF, 56 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358552&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Record%20of%20Conversation%20%20-%20San%20Diego%20County%20Sheriff%20Dept-Master.PDF
- ATC Transcript, by SERCO (item 11, .PDF, 106 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358554&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=ATC%20Transcript,%20by%20SERCO%20-Redacted.PDF
- Operating Limitations (item 12, .PDF, 105 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358556&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Operating%20Limitations-Redacted.PDF
- Email re Aircraft Modifications and Equipment (item 13, .PDF, 10 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358557&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Email%20re%20Aircraft%20Modifications%20and%20Equipment-Redacted.PDF
- Toxicological Reports, Claerbout (item 14, .PDF, 68 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358558&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Toxicological%20Reports,%20Claerbout-Master.PDF
- Toxicological Reports, Kloman (item 15, .PDF, 69 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358559&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Toxicological%20Reports,%20Kloman-Master.PDF
- Release of Aircraft Wreckage, NTSB Form 6120.15 (item 16, .PDF, 38 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358562&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Release%20of%20Aircraft%20Wreckage,%20NTSB%20Form%206120.15-Redacted.PDF
- Photo 1. Aileron, right wing. Photo by NTSB (item 17, .PDF, 599 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358636&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%201.%20Aileron,%20right%20wing.%20Photo%20by%20NTSB-Master.PDF
- Photo 2. Aileron, right, in field. Photo by FAA (item 18, .PDF, 511 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358637&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%202.%20Aileron,%20right,%20in%20field.%20Photo%20by%20FAA-Master.PDF
- Photo 3. Airplane, left side. Photo by Taylor (item 19, .PDF, 151 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358638&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%203.%20Airplane,%20left%20side.%20Photo%20by%20Taylor-Master.PDF
- Photo 4. Airplane, right side. Photo by Taylor (item 20, .PDF, 161 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358639&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%204.%20Airplane,%20right%20side.%20Photo%20by%20Taylor-Master.PDF
- Photo 5. Cockpit, front. Photo by Taylor (item 21, .PDF, 109 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358640&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%205.%20Cockpit,%20front.%20Photo%20by%20Taylor-Master.PDF
- Photo 6. Cockpit, rear seat. Photo by Taylor. (item 22, .PDF, 195 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358641&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%206.%20Cockpit,%20rear%20seat.%20Photo%20by%20Taylor.-Master.PDF
- Photo 7. Empennage, bottom. Photo by FAA (item 23, .PDF, 363 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358642&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%207.%20Empennage,%20bottom.%20Photo%20by%20FAA-Master.PDF
- Photo 8. Empennage, left side. Photo by Taylor (item 24, .PDF, 112 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358643&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%208.%20Empennage,%20left%20side.%20Photo%20by%20Taylor-Master.PDF
- Photo 9. Empennage, top. Photo by FAA (item 25, .PDF, 301 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358644&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%209.%20Empennage,%20top.%20Photo%20by%20FAA-Master.PDF
- Photo 10. Fuselage, left side. Photo by NTSB (item 26, .PDF, 801 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358645&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%2010.%20Fuselage,%20left%20side.%20Photo%20by%20NTSB-Master.PDF
- Photo 11. Fuselage, right side. Photo by NTSB (item 27, .PDF, 719 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358646&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%2011.%20%20Fuselage,%20right%20side.%20Photo%20by%20NTSB-Master.PDF
- Photo 12. Left wing lift strut. Photo by NTSB (item 28, .PDF, 623 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358647&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%2012.%20Left%20wing%20lift%20strut.%20Photo%20by%20NTSB-Master.PDF
- Photo 13. Left wing tip. Photo by NTSB (item 29, .PDF, 487 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358648&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%2013.%20%20Left%20wing%20tip.%20Photo%20by%20NTSB-Master.PDF
- Photo 14. Main wreckage, bottom. Photo by FAA (item 30, .PDF, 424 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358650&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%2014.%20%20Main%20wreckage,%20bottom.%20Photo%20by%20FAA-Master.PDF
- Photo 15. Main wreckage, left wing in foreground. Photo by FAA (item 31, .PDF, 314 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358651&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%2015.%20Main%20wreckage,%20left%20wing%20in%20foreground.%20Photo%20by%20FAA-Master.PDF
- Photo 16. Right wing & lift strut. Photo by NTSB (item 32, .PDF, 797 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358652&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%2016.%20Right%20wing%20%26%20lift%20strut.%20Photo%20by%20NTSB-Master.PDF
- Photo 17. Right wing & spar. Photo by NTSB. (item 33, .PDF, 585 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358653&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%2017.%20Right%20wing%20%26%20spar.%20Photo%20by%20NTSB.-Master.PDF
- Photo 18. Right wing, lift strut & broken spar. Photo by NTSB (item 34, .PDF, 694 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358654&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%2018.%20Right%20wing,%20lift%20strut%20%26%20broken%20spar.%20Photo%20by%20NTSB-Master.PDF
- Photo 19. Right wing. Photo by NTSB (item 35, .PDF, 667 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358655&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%2019.%20Right%20wing.%20Photo%20by%20NTSB-Master.PDF
- Photo 20. Propeller. Photo by NTSB (item 36, .PDF, 839 KB): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40358656&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Photo%2020.%20Propeller.%20Photo%20by%20NTSB-Master.PDF

From the NTSB's public API. Aircraft are matched to registry aircraft by N-number and event date, checked against the reported serial number, make and model; the registry's history has gaps, so older matches can be wrong. Compare the reported make and model.

---
OpenAirDocs.org is an independent research project of [Contrail Labs](https://contraillabs.com/). It is not affiliated with the FAA or the NTSB. Source documents are U.S. government works in the public domain.