Maule M-7-260 N368FS

Summary

On 4 October 2025 at about 19:55 local time, a Maule M-7-260 registered N368FS was involved in an accident near Parkland, Florida, United States. One person was on board and nobody was injured. The aircraft was substantially damaged. The NTSB has published a probable cause for this accident; it is quoted in full below.

Date

4 October 2025 at 19:55

Classification

Accident

Location

Parkland, Florida, United States

Coordinates

26.3767, -80.3669

Aircraft

Maule M-7-260

Registration

N368FS

Category

Airplane

Year built

2006

Engines

1

Operator

Not recorded

Operating rule

Part 91: General Aviation

Purpose of flight

Personal

Phase of flight

Not recorded

Route

Fort Lauderdale → Unknown

Aircraft damage

Substantial

Weather

VMC

Light

Day

NTSB number

ERA26LA002

Nobody was injured.

The pilot’s failure to retract the amphibious airplane’s landing gear before conducting a forced landing on the water, which resulted in a nose over.

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

Read the full NTSB narrative

The pilot reported that he departed in his retractable gear amphibious airplane from a paved runway and made a climbing left turn to the northwest. He leveled off about 1,200 ft mean sea level (msl), departed the populated area, and then descended to 600 ft msl over a wetlands area. About 10 to 12 minutes after departure, the engine surged several times, and subsequently lost power. Unable to maintain altitude, the pilot elected to make a forced landing on the water. Upon touchdown, the airplane immediately nosed over, which resulted in substantial damage to the fuselage. ADS-B data revealed that the airplane flew parallel to an inland waterway at 500 ft msl, before making a left 180° turn to the southeast, while maintaining level flight. At the completion of the turn, the airplane began a gradual descent, while aligned on final approach to the water. A postaccident examination of the airplane revealed that the landing gear was extended. Following recovery, the engine was allowed to dry, the oil was changed, and a test run was conducted with no anomalies noted. The pilot stated that he did not retract the landing gear after departure and subsequently landed with the landing gear extended. The cause of the reported loss of engine power could not be determined; however, it is likely that, had the landing gear been retracted, a normal landing could have been accomplished safely.

Quoted verbatim from the NTSB record.