Premium research interface

The modern interface for aviation safety intelligence.

Search investigations, review source evidence, monitor watched reports, and trace long-term patterns from one calm, data-first workspace.

63k+
Reports indexed
1940-2026
Coverage
Recent
Last data refresh
Featured Report

Loading…

Loading featured report…

Loading…
Open Report

Safety trends by operating rule

Track fatal and non-fatal accident patterns across Part 91, Part 135, and Part 121 operations.

Loading trend charts…

Browse the aviation graph

Move quickly by aircraft, airport, operator, and time with indexes built for research, not wandering.

Last Data Update

By Decade

By Month

Aircraft Manufacturer

More manufacturers

Airports

More airports

Operators

More operators

About

Aviation safety reports, made easier to study

NTSB Reports is an independent research and search tool for public aviation accident and incident records. It brings NTSB aviation reports, structured fields, docket files, extracted figures, photos, videos, and update history into one searchable interface.

The goal is practical safety education: make it faster to find relevant investigations, compare similar events, review factual records, and understand the evidence behind probable-cause and preliminary reports.

The investigative work and source records belong to the National Transportation Safety Board and the published investigation record. This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the NTSB.

FAQs

NTSB Report

March 6, 2026 · Cessna 182M · N71518

Flagstaff, AZ

Overview

Report Status
Probable Cause
Event Type
Accident
Date
March 6, 2026
Injury Outcomes
2 injuries (2 minor injuries)
Location
Flagstaff, AZ
Aircraft
Cessna 182M (1969)
Tail Number
N71518
Operator
Northern Arizona 182 Flying Guys
Injuries
Minor
Aircraft Damage
Substantial
NTSB Number
WPR26LA122

The pilot of the Cessna 182 reported that he had been cleared by air traffic control (ATC) to taxi to the runway for departure. During taxi down the airport’s only taxiway to the runway, the airplane encountered a jet blast from a parked CRJ 700. The airplane flipped over and came to rest inverted, resulting in substantial damage to both wings and empennage. The pilot reported that there were no preimpact mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. The operator of the CRJ 700 reported that the airplane had just undergone repairs and their mechanics were functional testing the engines at takeoff power. The mechanics did not move the airplane away from the passenger terminal and did not notify ATC of their intent to perform the engine run. After the mechanics had brought both engines to takeoff power, the Cessna 182 taxied behind the CRJ 700 and encountered the jet blast. The Airport Planning Manual for the CRJ 700 identifies zones and distances that should be considered dangerous during engine operation. With maximum thrust set on one engine, the airplane can produce 60 mph jet blast 290 ft away from the engine. The estimated distance between the Cessna 182 and CRJ 700 was 240 ft at the time of the accident. According to the operator of the CRJ 700, the mechanics were required to contact ATC before beginning ground engine runs. The airport manager stated that there were no policies or procedures indicating what areas of the airport were designated for high power engine runs.

NTSB Probable Cause

Maintenance personnel’s decision to conduct an engine run at takeoff power in front of an active taxiway, and their failure to notify ATC, which resulted in the accident pilot’s loss of control during taxi due to an encounter with a jet blast.

Full Narrative

The pilot of the Cessna 182 reported that he had been cleared by air traffic control (ATC) to taxi to the runway for departure. During taxi down the airport’s only taxiway to the runway, the airplane encountered a jet blast from a parked CRJ 700. The airplane flipped over and came to rest inverted, resulting in substantial damage to both wings and empennage. The pilot reported that there were no preimpact mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. The operator of the CRJ 700 reported that the airplane had just undergone repairs and their mechanics were functional testing the engines at takeoff power. The mechanics did not move the airplane away from the passenger terminal and did not notify ATC of their intent to perform the engine run. After the mechanics had brought both engines to takeoff power, the Cessna 182 taxied behind the CRJ 700 and encountered the jet blast. The Airport Planning Manual for the CRJ 700 identifies zones and distances that should be considered dangerous during engine operation. With maximum thrust set on one engine, the airplane can produce 60 mph jet blast 290 ft away from the engine. The estimated distance between the Cessna 182 and CRJ 700 was 240 ft at the time of the accident. According to the operator of the CRJ 700, the mechanics were required to contact ATC before beginning ground engine runs. The airport manager stated that there were no policies or procedures indicating what areas of the airport were designated for high power engine runs.

Flight

Event TypeAccident
Event Time08:40 MST
Nearest AirportFlagstaff Pulliam Airport (0nm)
Flight Plan FiledNone
Flight Plan ActivatedNo
Aircraft FireNo
Aircraft ExplosionNo

Aircraft

AircraftCessna 182M
Tail NumberN71518
Aircraft CategoryAir
DamageSubstantial
OperatorNorthern Arizona 182 Flying Guys
Operating RulePart 91
Engines1
Engine TypeReciprocating
Engine DetailsContinental · O-470 · Reciprocating
Seats4

People & Injuries

Injury Summary2 injuries (2 minor injuries)
Fatal0
Serious0
Minor2
Uninjured0
Total2
Crew 1Minor
Crew 2Age 48 · Basc · Minor

Conditions

ConditionsVMC
LightDaylight
WindCalm
Visibility10 sm
CeilingNone
Temperature / Dew Point28 F / 10 F
Altimeter29.95 inHg
Observation Time08:00
Weather SourceWFAC

Appendix: Source Data