Beechcraft 58 N78KL

Summary

On 8 June 2022 at about 16:00 local time, a Beechcraft 58 registered N78KL, operated by NEA Industrial LLC, was involved in an incident near Evansville, Indiana, United States. 5 people were on board and nobody was injured. The aircraft was slightly damaged. The NTSB has published a probable cause for this accident; it is quoted in full below.

Date

8 June 2022 at 16:00

Classification

Incident

Location

Evansville, Indiana, United States

Coordinates

38.0454, -87.5341

Aircraft

Beechcraft 58

Registration

N78KL

Category

Airplane

Year built

1990

Engines

2

Operator

NEA Industrial LLC

Operating rule

Part 91: General Aviation

Purpose of flight

Personal

Phase of flight

Not recorded

Route

Paragould → Dayton

Aircraft damage

Minor

Weather

VMC

Light

Day

NTSB number

CEN22LA250

Nobody was injured.

The failure of the propeller blade due to high-cycle fatigue that originated from damage that occurred at an unknown time. Contributing to the accident was the failure to identify the damage before the accident flight.

Quoted verbatim from the NTSB record. This site does not paraphrase or interpret it.

Read the full NTSB narrative

The airplane was about 1 hour into the cross-country flight when the pilot heard a “boom” noise. The airframe began vibrating, and the airplane yawed to the left. The pilot contacted approach control and stated that he needed to land the airplane immediately. The pilot was directed to divert, and he landed the airplane without incident. After exiting the airplane, the pilot noticed that one of the aluminum propeller blades on the left engine had separated about midspan, resulting in minor damage. The “boom” that the pilot heard was likely the blade separating in flight. Examination of the fracture surface revealed signatures consistent with high-cycle fatigue failure. The fatigue origin area was coincident with an area of damage that was covered with a thick black paint. The paint had a slightly different composition than the thinner layer of black paint on the rest of the blade. No evidence indicated any repair in the area of the damage and investigators were unable to determine when the damage was painted. Although the investigation could not determine, based on the available evidence for this incident, when the damage that led to the fracture occurred, or when the damage was painted, it is likely the damaged area was present at the airplane’s most recent 100-hour inspection, which occurred 28 hours before the incident. The presence of the black paint could have made it difficult to detect the damage during the mechanic’s visual inspection of the blade surface during the airplane’s most recent 100-hour inspection. Had the damage been detected during the 100-hr inspection it should have triggered maintenance of the propeller blade. The damage was also hidden but detectable during the preflight inspection conducted by the pilot before the accident flight. Had the damage been detected by the pilot, it should have triggered further examination and maintenance of the propeller blade.

Quoted verbatim from the NTSB record.