Register

1 Dead, 2 Injured in Helicopter Crash Near Miami Executive

U.S. Coast Guard says one person killed and two other passengers transported to receive ‘higher level of care.’

Robinson R44 II helicopter
The FAA said the aircraft involved in the accident was a Robinson R44 helicopter. [Credit: Robinson Helicopter]

Updated Wednesday, November 4, at 4:07 p.m. EST.

One person was reported dead and two others injured after a helicopter crashed into Biscayne Bay near Miami Executive Airport (KTMB) in Florida on Wednesday morning.

The U.S. Coast Guard’s Southeast district, which is based in Miami, said in a post on X Wednesday afternoon that the Coast Guard and partner agencies responded to the crash around 11:30 a.m. EST. The post said one person was deceased and that two other passengers were transported by emergency medical services to receive a “higher level of care.”

The media relations division for Miami-Dade Fire Rescue (MDFR) told FLYING that personnel responded to reports of the crash at 11:26 a.m. It said the accident occurred near Bill Baggs Cape Florida State Park.

According to MDFR, first responders transported two adults to a designated landing zone, where MDFR Air Rescue then transported them to the main trauma center. It described the people as “trauma alert patients” but did not share other information on their condition.

The Miami-Dade Sheriff’s Office also issued a statement on the incident.

The FAA said Wednesday that the accident aircraft was a Robinson R44 helicopter that crashed in the water east of Miami Executive, confirming there were three people on board. The agency and National Transportation Safety Board will investigate, with the latter taking the lead, it said.

What We Know So Far

News helicopters from local broadcasters WSVN-TV and WTVJ-TV in South Florida captured footage of officials on land surrounding a yellow tarp, which they reported appears to be covering a body.

Video taken by WTVJ’s chopper shows what appears to be the accident helicopter upside down in the water, with its yellow skid floats on the surface.

According to audio captured by the ATC app, an air traffic controller at Miami Executive told a law enforcement helicopter that the accident helicopter did not depart from the airport. At 11:42 a.m., the pilot of the law enforcement helicopter said they had located the downed rotorcraft. It remained underwater as of Wednesday afternoon.

“Currently, right now, the float’s upside down,” the pilot said at 11:43 a.m. “I think they retrieved the pilot already. They’re trying to establish a [landing zone] for air rescue.”

Miami-Dade Sheriff Rosie Cordero-Stutz said during a news conference Wednesday afternoon that the R44 was chartered and filming boats on the water.

Per WTVJ, the MDFR said the two people taken to the hospital are men. Cordero-Stutz said both are in critical but stable condition.

The fire rescue agency Wednesday morning issued an alert about inclement weather affecting parts of Miami-Dade County.

This is a developing story and will be updated as more information becomes available.

Jack Daleo

Jack is a staff writer covering advanced air mobility, including everything from drones to unmanned aircraft systems to space travel—and a whole lot more. He spent close to two years reporting on drone delivery for FreightWaves, covering the biggest news and developments in the space and connecting with industry executives and experts. Jack is also a basketball aficionado, a frequent traveler and a lover of all things logistics.

FAA Faces Audit of Helicopter Tour Oversight

Transportation Department’s Office of Inspector General cites the April 2025 crash of a sightseeing helicopter in the Hudson River.

Bell 206 helicopter
OIG cites the April 2025 crash of a Bell 206 helicopter, similar to the one above, in its announcement of the audit. [Credit: Shutterstock]

The U.S. Transportation’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) plans to audit the FAA’s safety oversight of aerial helicopter tours this month.

According to an announcement Tuesday, the audit will focus in part on the FAA’s awareness of a “loophole” that permits certain helicopter flights to be operated under standards less stringent than those intended for Part 136 operations. The work will be conducted at the agency’s headquarters as well as certain Flight Standards District Offices (FSDOs), which are responsible for overseeing the multimillion-dollar commercial helicopter air tour industry.

“There have been longstanding concerns regarding the industry’s safety and whether the current regulatory framework provides adequate safeguards,” the OIG said in the announcement.

According to a memo from Marshall Jackson, the DOT’s assistant inspector general for aviation audits, there have been at least 58 helicopter crashes involving tourist helicopters across the U.S. since 2008, 11 of them fatal. In particular, the memo singles out the April 10, 2025 crash of a Bell 206 LongRanger IV into the Hudson River, killing all six people on board.

Representatives Rob Menendez (D-N.J.), Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), Ed Case (D-Hawaii), Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.), Jill Tokuda (D-Hawaii), and Nydia Velazquez (D-N.Y.) requested the audit on October 16, 2025.

FAA Previously Urged to Close Helicopter Loophole

The National Transportation Safety Board’s accident report on a 2018 helicopter crash into New York City’s East River, which killed the doorless Airbus AS350’s five passengers, determined that some helicopter operators use a loophole that permits aerial photography flights under Part 91 safety rules for private, recreational pilots. These rules are less stringent than those for Part 136 commercial air tour operators.

During the 2018 accident, a piece of a passenger restraint system became tangled in the helicopter’s cockpit fuel shutoff valve, flaming out the engine and forcing the helicopter down.  The FAA in the following days issued an emergency order prohibiting the use of supplemental passenger restraint systems that cannot be released quickly in an emergency.

In December 2019, the NTSB, in addition to calling for a total halt of doors-off helicopter flights that place passengers in supplemental restraints, urged the FAA to close the loophole permitting aerial photography flights under Part 91.

“It is unclear to what extent FAA is aware of operators exploiting this loophole or other exemptions that allow commercial helicopter sightseeing tours to operate under less stringent requirements than intended,” Jackson wrote in the memo.

The memo also cites the FAA’s November 2025 Commercial Air Tour Aviation Rulemaking Committee Final Report. The 109-page report found that the agency’s regulations for commercial air tour operators leave “major operational and procedural requirements scattered across multiple rules” and create “overlapping and sometimes contradictory requirements.”

The April 2025 Crash

The OIG specifically cites the April 2025 Bell 206 crash in relation to concerns about safeguards on the commercial helicopter industry.

A few days after the accident, the FAA grounded the helicopter’s operator, New York Helicopter Inc., which provides aerial tours of the New York and New Jersey areas under Part 135. The company’s license remains suspended.

According to the NTSB’s preliminary report on the crash, witnesses reported seeing the aircraft’s tail boom and main rotor system separate from the fuselage. In July, the agency released a docket that revealed the discovery of the remains of several geese on the accident helicopter, indicating a possible bird strike.

The NTSB has not yet issued a final report or probable cause for the accident.

Jack Daleo

Jack is a staff writer covering advanced air mobility, including everything from drones to unmanned aircraft systems to space travel—and a whole lot more. He spent close to two years reporting on drone delivery for FreightWaves, covering the biggest news and developments in the space and connecting with industry executives and experts. Jack is also a basketball aficionado, a frequent traveler and a lover of all things logistics.

Epic Flight Academy Awards $135K in Aviation Scholarships to High School Students

Sixteen prospective pilots and mechanics receive financial backing to begin training next year.

Epic Flight Academy, founded in 1999, is the largest Part 141 flight school in the U.S. [Credit: Epic Flight Academy]
Epic Flight Academy, founded in 1999, is the largest Part 141 flight school in the U.S. [Credit: Epic Flight Academy]

Sixteen high school students heading to Epic Flight Academy next year received a boost from the school’s aviation scholarship program, which awarded a total of $135,000 to prospective pilots and aircraft mechanics.

The King Air Nation Foundation also contributed a $5,000 pilot scholarship.

“The judges were impressed with the quality of submissions, which came from 20 states,” said Phyllis Cunniffe, Epic Flight Academy’s student and staff advocate, who organized the team of judges. “More than 100 students applied, so the team put in a lot of work, which we appreciate.”

Epic Flight Academy was founded in 1999 and is the largest Part 141 school in the United States with campuses all over the country. Epic offers both pilot and maintenance technician training.

Aircraft maintenance scholarships worth $20,000 were awarded to Jayanne Fejeran of Erlanger, Kentucky, and Kole Legrand of Orlando, Florida.

Caden McIntosh of Loxahatchee, Florida, and Nate Williams of Vevay, Indiana, both picked up a $10,000 aircraft mechanic scholarship.

Pilot scholarships for $5,000 were awarded to Andrew Borgert (Henderson, Nevada); Brayden Hayes (Arlington, Texas); Christian Manara (Woodbridge, Virginia); Christopher Clarke (Roslyn, New York); Matthew Hanley (Park City, Utah); Nathan Mosquera (Wellington, Florida); Quincy Schneider, (Winesburg, Ohio); Rachit Anand (Cumming, Georgia); Taj Hester, (Aurora, Colorado); and Tristan Williams (Coconut Creek, Florida).

Mason Mitchell of Murray, Utah, received the $5,000 King Air Nation pilot  scholarship.

Epic Flight Academy 2026 scholarship winners [Credit: EFA]
Epic Flight Academy 2026 scholarship winners [Credit: EFA]

One flight scholarship is bestowed in memory of Judy Rice, a former Epic flight instructor, author, and record-setter who inspired many when she flew around the world.

“Epic students adored ‘Captain Judy,’ as they called her,” said Cunniffe. “She generously shared her time and knowledge even after classes ended, and she inspired so many. We love giving this scholarship in her memory.”

This year’s winner of the Captain Judy Rice scholarship worth $20,000 is Mateo Latorre of Acworth, Georgia.

In addition to the scholarships, each winner received a plaque and a copy of Rice’s memoir, Around the World with Captain Judy Rice: A Pilot’s Memoir. 

The students will begin their training at Epic in 2027.

Meg Godlewski

Meg Godlewski has been an aviation journalist for more than 24 years and a CFI for more than 20 years. If she is not flying or teaching aviation, she is writing about it. Meg is a founding member of the Pilot Proficiency Center at EAA AirVenture and excels at the application of simulation technology to flatten the learning curve. Follow Meg on Twitter @2Lewski.

This 1990 Piper PA-46 Malibu Mirage Is an Updated, Travel-Ready ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick

Pressurized, air-conditioned cabin with six seats offers passengers first-class, airline-style comfort.

1990 Piper PA-46 Malibu Mirage [Credit: Aerista]
1990 Piper PA-46 Malibu Mirage [Credit: Aerista]

Each day, the team at Aircraft For Sale picks an airplane that catches our attention because it is unique, represents a good deal, or has other interesting qualities. You can read Aircraft For Sale: Today’s Top Pick at FLYINGMag.com daily.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1990 Piper PA-46 Malibu Mirage.

For pilots who regularly travel with family members, business associates, or other passengers, the attraction of a turbocharged engine and pressurized cabin can be very strong. The ability to climb quickly into the flight levels without having to breathe supplemental oxygen through masks or cannulas allows occupants to enjoy the flight with maximum comfort.

The Malibu’s spacious cabin features club seating. [Credit: Aerista] 

Piper developed the Malibu Mirage specifically to fly efficiently through the thin air near its 25,000-foot service ceiling. Its long, high-aspect-ratio wing is designed to perform best at altitudes higher than those reached by typical, naturally aspirated piston single aircraft. A roomy, cabin-class interior allows passengers to stretch out and move around easily during long flights—more like an airliner than a compact car with wings.

The aircraft for sale today is a handsome, well-equipped, and thoughtfully updated traveling machine. With Garmin avionics and factory air conditioning, it is ready to tackle a wide range of missions but is especially well suited for long cross-country trips.

The Malibu’s combination of great looks and speed has kept it on my fantasy-flying list for decades. It is a serious airplane for pilots who want to cruise reliably above 200 ktas.

I often imagine how an airplane like this would shorten some of my favorite trips. It would easily trim a couple of hours off my Commander 114B’s transit time between New Hampshire and Oshkosh.    

Passengers will love the Malibu Mirage’s airstair door. [Credit: Aerista]

This 1990 Malibu Mirage has 4,397 hours on the airframe, 1,435 hours since factory rebuild on its 350 hp Lycoming TIO-540 engine, and 865 hours since new on its Hartzell three-blade composite propeller. Basic empty weight is 3,040 pounds.

The engine features the Malibu Aerospace M1 cooling kit, an aftermarket modification of the engine cowling and baffles that improves airflow and lowers cylinder head and oil temperatures. The aircraft is also equipped with Malibu Aerospace wheel fairings and long-range fuel tanks.

A forward baggage compartment is among the Malibu’s many thoughtful features. [Credit: Aerista]

The panel features a Garmin G500 PFD/MFD display, GTN 750 GPS/nav/com, GNC 255A nav/com, GTX 345 transponder with ADS-B In and Out, PS Engineering PMA 450A audio panel, King KFC 150 autopilot, new autopilot pitch and roll servos installed in 2023, GDL 69 satellite weather receiver, King weather radar, Shadin MiniFlo fuel computer, and Garmin Flight Stream 510.

The Malibu’s panel has been modernized with Garmin avionics. [Credit: Aerista]

Additional equipment includes factory air conditioning, deicing boots, heated windshield, emergency oxygen system, standby flight instruments, and LED exterior lighting.

Piston pilots wishing to take a major step up to turbocharged power and a pressurized, six-place cabin should consider this 1990 Piper PA-46 Malibu Mirage, which is available for $474,900 on AircraftForSale.

If you’re interested in financing, you can do so with FLYING Finance. Use our airplane loan calculator to calculate your estimated monthly payments. Or, to speak with an aviation finance specialist, visit flyingfinance.com.

Jonathan Welsh

Jonathan Welsh is Lead Editor of Aviation Consumer and a private pilot who worked as a reporter, editor and columnist with the Wall Street Journal for 21 years, mostly covering the auto industry. His passion for aviation began in childhood with balsa-wood gliders his aunt would buy for him at the corner store. Follow Jonathan on Twitter @JonathanWelsh4

How Do You Prevent Water in Your Aircraft Fuel Tanks?

Simple preflight techniques and seal checks can keep the engine running smoothly.

Aircraft being refueled [Credit: Meg Godlewski]
Aircraft being refueled [Credit: Meg Godlewski]

Question: A guy at my airport just told me a story about losing power on takeoff in his airplane because there was water in the fuel. We’ve had a lot of rain lately, and his airplane is kept outside. He didn’t get hurt because he had enough runway ahead of him. After the fact, he sumped his tanks again and found water in the fuel. He was surprised, because he sumped the tanks as part of the preflight inspection but didn’t find any water.  I keep my airplane outside too, and I’m wondering if there is a surefire way to make sure there’s no water in your tanks other than spending the big bucks for a hangar?

Answer: Wow, glad the loss of power was a nonevent. That’s good training in action.

The best way to keep water out of the fuel tanks is the barrier method. Check the seals on the fuel tanks and make sure they are intact and not degrading and that the fuel caps are on securely.

Water is heavier than 100LL and will sink to the lowest point of the tank, which also happens to be where the sump points are located. 

A trick I learned from an instructor who was also an A&P/IA was to gently shake the wings before beginning the preflight inspection because that gets the water or other contaminants moving to the lowest point in the fuel tank. Just nudge the wing until you can hear the fuel sloshing around. 

He made a point of checking the fuel at the end of the inspection to give the water—or anything else that shouldn’t be in there—time to migrate. He also taught me to sump after the aircraft had been refueled just in case contaminants were introduced during the process.

After a rain or snow event, sump more than twice. If you find water, keep sumping until you get two clean samples. 

Many instructors make a point of adding a splash of water to the fuel sump container so their learners can see what contaminated fuel looks like. It sinks to the bottom of the container, and depending on how much dye is in the fuel, can turn pink to magenta. 

Here are some bonus tips for preventing fuel mistakes:

  • Don’t be in a hurry when you need fuel. Make sure you order the correct type and verify the receipt.
  • Always use an appropriately calibrated fuel pipette to physically check the fuel after the aircraft has been filled. Don’t rely on the fuel gauges to give you a reading.
  • Learn to fuel your own airplane, as it is part of many private pilot curriculum. While you may be in a part of the country where pilots are not permitted to refuel their own aircraft (Oregon comes to mind), or it may be against FBO policy, at least you’ll know what the correct procedure is and be able to spot potential problems before they manifest. 

Ask us anything you’ve ever wanted to know about aviation. Our experts in general aviation, flight training, aircraft, avionics, and more may attempt to answer in a future article. Email your questions here.

Meg Godlewski

Meg Godlewski has been an aviation journalist for more than 24 years and a CFI for more than 20 years. If she is not flying or teaching aviation, she is writing about it. Meg is a founding member of the Pilot Proficiency Center at EAA AirVenture and excels at the application of simulation technology to flatten the learning curve. Follow Meg on Twitter @2Lewski.

The Day That Silenced Our Skies

Twenty-five years after 9/11, an airline pilot reflects on the unimaginable tragedy.

Rendering of the former Twin Towers in New York City [Credit: Adobe Stock]
Rendering of the former Twin Towers in New York City [Credit: Adobe Stock]

it wasn’t quite four weeks after September 11, 2001, when my wife and I chose to visit Ground Zero. Still in uniform after returning from a trip, I approached a beat cop standing on one corner. He was guarding a perimeter of the devastation. I nodded and gestured toward the rubble, firmly holding my wife’s hand.

The cop asked, “Did you fly the kind of airplane that hit the towers?”

With a slight lump in my throat, I replied, “Actually, I flew that airplane.” 

This Article First Appeared in FLYING Magazine

If you're not already a subscriber, what are you waiting for? Subscribe today to get the issue as soon as it is released in either Print or Digital formats.

Subscribe Now

Both the 767 that struck the North Tower and the 757 that crashed into the Pentagon were entries in my logbook. The cop offered a solemn nod and waved us past an opening in the fence. 

“Just be careful. The site is still a mess,” he said.

Despite having watched the continuous loop of media footage like the rest of the world, what remained of two iconic structures that were symbols of American culture was incomprehensible. We stared at the scene in silence. Excavators and backhoes were lurching backward and forward in a seemingly endless task of moving debris. Nearly 3,000 people perished where we stood.

On the day of the attacks, I was awoken earlier than my alarm. Directly outside our Los Angeles layover hotel, a group of picketers were noisily assembling in the dark morning hour. Grumbling at the disturbance, I rolled my travel bag out of my room and into the elevator.

A TV hanging from the ceiling in the corner of the empty lobby bar was displaying distant video of an airplane smashing into a World Trade Center tower. The caption seemed to imply it was a small airplane. My phone rang. A friend was calling for a consultation. Surely, it was an idiot that had made a critical mistake while sightseeing his Cessna 172 down the Hudson River? My friend wasn’t so sure.

Our hotel van to LAX had a satellite TV mounted into a bulkhead. By the time we were halfway to the airport, the South Tower had been hit. It wasn’t until the report of the Pentagon strike that reality began to creep in. When we pulled up to the curb at the terminal, we were fairly certain that our departure home to JFK was not going to happen. I asked the driver to remain parked while pressing the speed dial for crew tracking. 

I stepped onto the sidewalk. The male voice that answered was cracking. He had no additional details other than the fact two crews from our airline were gone. We shared a moment of strained silence. It seemed best that the first officer and I returned to the hotel. The voice agreed.

Before climbing back into the van, a captain colleague flying a later trip home to JFK rolled up next to us with a full complement of flight attendants from another hotel. I conveyed my prior conversation with crew tracking. Knowing that my colleague had a limited capacity for empathy, we parted company with me saying, “Take care of your crew.”

The front desk welcomed us back with an abundance of sympathy and understanding. Approximately 30 crewmembers, mostly flight attendants from our airline, were sharing the same circumstance. The hotel set up a room with complimentary beverages and snacks strictly for our use. Even though the entire world had just stepped through a doorway into a troubling future, the hotel staff focused on us. Humanity was alive and well.

Having been trained in Critical Incident Stress Management (CISM), I took it upon myself to rally our troops for a meeting in the newly designated crew room. A call to union leadership advised me not to engage in peer support for liability concerns. I dismissed the advice and turned to my first officer for assistance. He was a kind, gentle man. I gave him an ultra-abbreviated lesson in CISM. He was a natural. We still contact each other on every 9/11 anniversary. 

Throughout our extended layover, I remained in communication with our dispatch, volunteering to fly the first trip out of LAX to New York once U.S. airspace opened. On Day 5 my copilot and I were assigned a red-eye flight to Newark, New Jersey. Oversaturated with TV special reports, we were more than ready to be home.

As we shuffled into the cockpit of our B-757, somehow it seemed different. Perhaps it was the focus on new security procedures. Or perhaps it was the realization that the airplane had been used as a weapon of mass destruction rather than a tool that united families, friends, and businesspeople. Trepidation had now crept into our workspace. Our LA-based flight attendants offered wary smiles as they walked down the jet bridge. I gave them the opportunity to refuse the trip, but none did.

Descending via the arrival into Newark, the menacing finger of gray smoke became visible, stretching from the southern tip of Manhattan to Sandy Point. The view was a gut punch. Media coverage didn’t do the reality justice. The copilot and I paused for a moment. Nothing needed to be said. We resumed our before-landing tasks in a deliberate effort to avoid the distraction outside the cockpit windows.

Our touchdown on Runway 4L was without fanfare. Airport activity was minimal, either because of the early morning hour or the events that unfolded days earlier. Agents and ground personnel seemed to be in a trance. Blank expressions were interrupted by the occasional weary smile. The outgoing crew nodded to us when we exited into the gate area from the jet bridge. I told the captain, “Good airplane,” a report that the B-757 had no mechanical issues. That was the extent of our conversation.

Having originated our trip from JFK, a van drove us from Newark across the Hudson River back to our cars. The view of Manhattan while traveling over the Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge provided a quiet moment for reflection. We solemnly shook our heads.

While my copilot was engaged in conversation with another first officer riding with us on the van, I took a moment to call my wife. Unexpectedly, the words, “I’m almost home,” were difficult to say. My wife had been on the phone with a cordless headset nearly nonstop for days. Family and friends just wanted to know it wasn’t me in those airplanes.

After a firm handshake and a brotherly hug with my copilot, we were both on the road to our respective homes. As I parked in the driveway, I scanned my house. It appeared better than it had in years. My wife met me at the front door. She was more beautiful than I remembered.

This September marks 25 years since the day that silenced our skies. Aviation and the world have been changed forever. I still can’t shake the feeling that we failed to protect our passengers and the people on the ground as the last line of defense. Many of my colleagues will argue that prior protocol regarding a hijack situation was to cooperate, where now it is our responsibility to resist, even with lethal weapons. 

But the lives lost on 9/11 are gone forever. We should never forget. 


This column first appeared in the September Issue 974 of the FLYING print edition.

Les Abend

Les Abend is a retired, 34-year veteran of American Airlines, attempting to readjust his passion for flying airplanes in the lower flight levels—without the assistance of a copilot.

NTSB Recovers Parts of Crashed Learjet’s Elevator

Agency says recovered components are evidence that ‘at least some’ pieces of the aircraft separated before it impacted the ground.

NTSB member Tom Chapman holds a news briefing on Tuesday to provide an update on the agency's investigation of Sunday's fatal Learjet crash. [Credit: NTSB]

The National Transportation Safety Board said Tuesday that investigators recovered the “majority” of the left elevator of the Learjet 60 that fatally crashed in Palm Beach County, Florida. NTSB member Tom Chapman believes the recovered components are evidence that “at least some” parts of the aircraft separated before it impacted the ground.

Chapman said the elevator was located in three pieces between 1.3 and 3.8 miles away from the airplane’s impact site, indicating that it is “implausible that it would have been a result of the impact. It would have separated before the impact.”

Elevators are the movable parts of an aircraft’s horizontal stabilizer, located on the tail, that control pitch. The elevator is actuated by high-strength steel cables threaded through pulleys inside the fuselage, requiring a great deal of force to detach them.

Automobile dash cam images captured moments before the Learjet impacted the ground appear to show that the jet’s horizontal stabilizer was partially or fully missing.

Chapman said that considering the aircraft’s vertical rate of descent, reported by FlightRadar24 as exceeding 32,000 fpm, it is unclear if the elevator “would have been effective” in helping the crew control pitch even if it were attached. He added that it is unclear whether the loss of the elevator “may have contributed to the crash itself, or whether the forces on the aircraft caused that to separate.”

Chapman also said that new dash cam footage and eyewitness accounts will “help us better understand the condition of the aircraft and the circumstances of the crash.”

The NTSB has asked people who find parts of the jet not to touch or move them.

What We Still Don’t Know

On Monday, the Learjet’s captain, copilot, and seven passengers—all of whom died in the accident—were identified. The NTSB also said Monday that one person on the ground suffered a leg injury, but no other injuries or fatalities near the crash site have been reported.

Among the agency’s most important tasks in the coming days will be recovering other parts of the jet, which Chapman said were broken into tiny pieces due to the force of the impact. He said investigators continue to document and collect evidence but are not sure exactly what they have recovered due to the extent of the damage.

“It’s a difficult scene, no question about it,” Chapman said.

Investigators are working to remove water from the Learjet’s impact crater in order to examine the area in and around it. On Monday, local authorities removed a utility pole from the site. Chapman said he expects personnel to find critical components within the crater that will provide sufficient evidence to further the investigation.

One item investigators will seek to recover is the jet’s cockpit voice recorder (CVR). Chapman said Monday that early indications are that a CVR was installed on the airplane, but it was unclear if it was still on board at the time of the accident. The NTSB will seek to determine whether it was, but water filling the crater may make recovery difficult.

“That’s something we’re going to be concerned about,” Chapman said Monday.

The NTSB in August released the docket for its investigation into the early 2025 crash of a Learjet 55 in Philadelphia, which killed the aircraft’s six occupants and two people on the ground.

In that incident, the aircraft’s impact similarly created a large crater. Investigators managed to recover the jet’s CVR but determined it was not working at the time of the accident, preventing them from obtaining audio. There is still no final report or probable cause for the incident.

The NTSB will not issue a probable cause determination while on scene investigating Sunday’s accident.

Impact of Weather

Chapman on Tuesday reiterated that “weather is certainly a key focus of the investigation.”

On Monday, he could not confirm whether the Learjet flew through an active thunderstorm, but convective SIGMETs were active across Florida before the accident. A convective SIGMET warns pilots of thunderstorms with intense downdrafts, wind shear, and severe icing.

The NTSB will likely aim to determine whether the jet’s onboard weather radar was functioning correctly, giving the crew visibility of local conditions.

According to air traffic control (ATC) audio, at 12:31 p.m. EST on Sunday, about 20 minutes before the crash, a controller at Miami Center told the crew there was moderate precipitation at their 11 o’clock and 5 miles away, scattered 150 miles to the southeast. They told the crew they could deviate left and right and to proceed direct to the FEMID waypoint, near Naples on Florida’s southwestern coast, when able. The aircraft was in level flight at 41,000 feet.

About one minute later, the crew requested to fly direct to the Freeport ZFP VOR waypoint,  which is north of the FEMID waypoint on the other side of the state. ATC initially cleared the jet to the fix, but shortly after, the controller warned the crew of moderate to extreme precipitation along that route and said the “turn to Freeport looks pretty bad.”

Around 12:35 p.m., the crew said they would fly direct to FEMID before proceeding to Freeport, which would have placed their route slightly further south than flying direct. About one minute later, ATC directed the crew to descend and maintain 35,000 feet.

Around 12:40 p.m., after the Learjet had passed FEMID, ATC approved deviations left or right of course but told the crew to fly direct to Freeport when able. According to ADS-B tracking data, around this time, the aircraft made a slight left turn that placed their heading north of Freeport, in the direction of Palm Beach and toward thunderstorms in the area tracked by local weather radar.

Approximately four minutes before the crash, the flight crew reported that they were turning direct to Freeport and encountering clear ice, which they described as manageable. Clear ice tends to be particularly heavy and tenacious and can create abnormal shapes when building up on the wings, destroying lift. Ice accumulation happens quickly and, in addition to adding weight, can affect smooth airflow over the wing.

The Learjet 60 has three systems for deicing, but it is unclear whether they were operational before the accident.

The NTSB said that Tuesday was its last on-site briefing and that it would post updates to its website and X account.

Jack Daleo

Jack is a staff writer covering advanced air mobility, including everything from drones to unmanned aircraft systems to space travel—and a whole lot more. He spent close to two years reporting on drone delivery for FreightWaves, covering the biggest news and developments in the space and connecting with industry executives and experts. Jack is also a basketball aficionado, a frequent traveler and a lover of all things logistics.

Captain, Passengers of Crashed Learjet Identified

Media reports name pilot and seven travelers killed in Sunday’s horrific aircraft accident in Florida.

All nine occupants of the Learjet 60 that crashed Sunday, two crew and seven passengers, were killed in the accident. [Credit: Shutterstock]
All nine occupants of the Learjet 60 that crashed Sunday, two crew and seven passengers, were killed in the accident. [Credit: Shutterstock]

The captain of a Learjet 60 and seven passengers who died after the airplane entered a nosedive and crashed in Palm Beach County, Florida, on Sunday have been identified.

The National Transportation Safety Board during its initial news briefing Monday declined to answer questions about the victims’ identities, which have not been shared by federal or local officials as of Tuesday afternoon.

The NTSB plans to hold a second news briefing Tuesday at 3 p.m. EST.

Flight Crew

The New York Times reported that the captain of the accident aircraft was Jeff Gregory, according to his former employer. WTXF-TV in Philadelphia reported that Gregory worked for private jet operator East Coast Jets of Allentown, Pennsylvania, in 2016 and ’17.

“Our prayers go out to Jeff’s family, his fellow crew member, the passengers, and everyone affected by this heartbreaking tragedy,” East Coast Jets said in a statement to WTXF-TV.

According to FAA records, Gregory lived in Gilbertsville, Pennsylvania. He held a commercial certificate for single- and multi-engine aircraft and had been a flight instructor since 2025. He received his Airline Transport Pilot certificate in October 2021. Gregory held a type rating for the Learjet 60, legacy members of the Learjet family (LR-JET), and Hawker HS125-800/800XP/800XPi series jets (HS-125).

The LR-JET type rating was subject to pilot-in-command (PIC) limitations. These typically relate to experience level—the certificate holder must have a specific amount of experience in the aircraft make and model, usually referred to as hours, before the limitations are lifted.

The jet’s copilot was identified to the New York Post on Monday as Nathalia Filgueiras, 20, by her mother and stepfather. In an interview with the Times, Camila Corteleti, Filgueiras’ mother, said her daughter worked for charter operator Upper Jets and had more than 1,300 hours of flight time.

The NTSB confirmed that Upper Jets was operating the flight, which was heading from Austin-Bergstrom International Airport (KAUS) in Texas to North Eleuthera Airport (MYEH) in the Bahamas, under Part 135.

According to FAA records, Filgueiras held commercial pilot certification for both single- and multi-engine land, along with an instrument rating. Her last commercial certificate was issued March 19, and she held a type rating in the Learjet 60, which included a PIC limitation.

The NTSB said Monday that it did not yet know whether Filgueiras, who could be heard communicating with air traffic control (ATC) in audio captured before the crash occurred, was the pilot flying or pilot monitoring. However, considering that she was the pilot communicating with ATC, it is likely that Filgueiras was the pilot monitoring and Gregory was the pilot flying. 

The Learjet is a two-pilot aircraft, and while one pilot flies as PIC, the other pilot handles radio communications and other tasks assigned by the PIC.

Passengers

The Learjet’s seven passengers were identified by their families Monday in a statement posted to Facebook. They were husband and wife Adam Robinson and Helen Sharp; their young children Emma and Charlie Robinson; Anita Maria Cetina, a nanny for the two children; and another couple, Rachael Reed and Charmi Fehr.

The families described Robinson and Sharp as “devoted parents” and their children as the “light of their lives.” The Times reported that Robinson was the founder and chief executive of several technology companies, and Sharp worked in public relations.

“Their warmth, generosity and gift for making people feel welcome touched so many lives,” the families wrote. “Their loss will be felt deeply by all those who loved them and who they loved in return.”

The families described Cetina as “truly part of the family” and said she cared for the Robinson children “with tenderness and devotion.”

“She showed us a legacy of unconditional love and devotion,” they wrote.

The statement characterized Reed and Fehr as people “full of joy and adventure” and who “loved their people fiercely, fully and without hesitation.”

“They are deeply loved, and we will miss them endlessly,” the families wrote.

The families added that they are “deeply grateful to the first responders, investigators, and the Palm Beach County community for their care, and to everyone who has reached out with love.” They also sent condolences to the families of Gregory and Filgueiras and asked for privacy as they grieved the loss of their loved ones.

Jack Daleo

Jack is a staff writer covering advanced air mobility, including everything from drones to unmanned aircraft systems to space travel—and a whole lot more. He spent close to two years reporting on drone delivery for FreightWaves, covering the biggest news and developments in the space and connecting with industry executives and experts. Jack is also a basketball aficionado, a frequent traveler and a lover of all things logistics.

NASA Plans New X-Plane, But It’s ‘Not the One You’re Thinking of’

Administrator Jared Isaacman said the space agency plans to reveal a new project at its upcoming Max Power expo and airshow.

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman appears at Senate hearing in 2025
NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman appears before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation in 2025. [Credit: NASA/Bill Ingalls]

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman has revealed that the space agency intends to unveil a new X-plane project at its upcoming Max Power expo and airshow, scheduled for Friday through Sunday.

“We will announce a new X-plane…and it is not the one you’re thinking of,” Isaacman said during an episode of NASASpaceFlight’s The Flame Trench podcast that streamed on YouTube Friday.

The administrator’s remarks would seem to be a reference to NASA’s tease in September of a new X-plane inspired by the SR-71 Blackbird—or perhaps even a revival of the retired supersonic military jet.

The SR-71 Blackbird Mystery

Speaking at the All-In Summit in Los Angeles in September, Isaacman delivered remarks about rebuilding the space agency’s X-plane program. A silhouette of an aircraft that appeared to share some of the SR-71’s distinctive features was displayed behind him.

Isaacman and NASA have been coy about the possibility of a Blackbird revival or follow-on, and such an undertaking would likely be costly. But Aviation Week later reported that NASA months earlier took an SR-71A—tail number 844, the last operational SR-71 retired in 1999—off display at its Armstrong Flight Research Center in California. The magazine also reported that NASA has looked to recruit former Blackbird engineers in hopes of returning the venerable jet to flight.

Asked if the “missing” SR-71A had been powered on yet, Isaacman on the podcast said, “We’re just cleaning it, man.”

“It was so dusty out there in the desert, and it just felt like it needed a cleaning,” he added.

There are a few operational supersonic aircraft, such as NASA’s X-59—which broke the sound barrier in June—and the pair of F-15 Eagles that the space agency uses as X-59 chase planes. Though Isaacman’s comments Friday indicate that the planned X-plane reveal will not involve the relocated SR-71, renewed interest in supersonic technology has surfaced across both the military and commercial sectors.

Expanding the X-Plane Portfolio

In December, during his second day on the job, Isaacman said that he would “love to see an expanded X-plane portfolio” at NASA. On Thursday, he posted on social media that “we are rebuilding NASA’s X-plane portfolio, restoring flight-test capabilities, and putting Armstrong in position to keep pushing the boundaries of what is possible in the air.”

The administrator Friday vowed that he would “deliver on the promise” and that “there will be more X-planes.” He emphasized that NASA aims to “rebuild its flight test capabilities,” as well as its “muscle memory” for “doing things ourselves, fixing things that break ourselves” rather than outsourcing those responsibilities to private contractors. He also said he wants to swell the space agency’s workforce to meet those goals.

For example, Isaacman said that ramping up flight cadence of the X-59, which had flown only once prior to his confirmation as administrator in December, has been one of his early priorities for the agency. The aircraft has since flown 40 times.

“This is going to be our plane,” he said of the demonstrator, which features modifications intended to reduce the sound of sonic booms to quieter “sonic thumps.”

Isaacman added that “Lockheed [Martin] and Skunk Works built it and got us to this point in time, but we’re going to take it on” and launch a “great new beginning for our flight test program.”

Isaacman said the X-59, which headed to Florida last week and will be on display at Max Power, will soon return to Edwards, California, to “finish out some of its envelope expansion work, and then it’s just going to start flying over cities.”

He said NASA intends to take delivery of the airplane following the airshow, seemingly referring to the X-59’s acoustic validation phase at Edwards Air Force Base (KEDW), planned for later this year, to analyze the airplane’s noise profile. All testing to date has taken place at Armstrong.

Besides the X-59, there are only a couple of operational X-planes.

General Dynamics’ NF-16D VISTA (Variable Stability In-flight Simulator Test Aircraft), a modified F-16D used by the U.S. Air Force as an experimental aircraft since 1992, was redesignated as the X-62A in 2021. It is now used by the branch’s Test Pilot School at Edwards.

The other, Boeing’s X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle (OTV), is an uncrewed, reusable, robotic spaceplane. It most recently launched in August 2025 and has been in low-Earth orbit for more than 430 days. The mission is classified, but previous X-37B flights have been known to deploy satellites. The longest, OTV-6, spent more than 900 days in orbit.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (DARPA) X-65 CRANE (Control of Revolutionary Aircraft with Novel Effectors) is still being developed. Built by Aurora Flight Sciences, it is designed to replace moving flight control surfaces with bursts of air in a demonstration of active flow control. The X-65 is advancing toward a planned first flight in 2027.

Another X-plane project, the X-66 Transonic Truss-Braced Wing demonstrator, was paused by NASA and Boeing in April 2025. It is unclear when or if the X-66 will fly.

Jack Daleo

Jack is a staff writer covering advanced air mobility, including everything from drones to unmanned aircraft systems to space travel—and a whole lot more. He spent close to two years reporting on drone delivery for FreightWaves, covering the biggest news and developments in the space and connecting with industry executives and experts. Jack is also a basketball aficionado, a frequent traveler and a lover of all things logistics.

This 1978 Grumman American AA-5B Tiger Is an Innovative, Efficient ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick

Compact honeycomb structure helps the four-seater squeeze performance from its economical Lycoming engine.

1978 Grumman American AA-5B Tiger [Credit: Scott MacDonald Aircraft Sales]
1978 Grumman American AA-5B Tiger [Credit: Scott MacDonald Aircraft Sales]

Each day, the team at Aircraft For Sale picks an airplane that catches our attention because it is unique, represents a good deal, or has other interesting qualities. You can read Aircraft For Sale: Today’s Top Pick at FLYINGMag.com daily.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1978 Grumman American AA-5B Tiger.

The Grumman American AA family of light, single-engine, all-aluminum aircraft are known for innovative bonded-skin construction (instead of traditional rivets), sliding canopies, and responsive handling. Originally designed by Jim Bede as the BD-1 kit, the line transitioned through American Aviation, Grumman American, Gulfstream American, and later manufacturers.

 The Grumman Tiger’s sliding canopy is a feature owners love. [Credit: Scott MacDonald Aircraft Sales]
 The Grumman Tiger’s sliding canopy is a feature owners love. [Credit: Scott MacDonald Aircraft Sales]

The Tiger traces its ancestry across a succession of companies to the  BD-1, a two-seat, 65 hp kit aircraft designed by Bede, an aeronautical engineer who wanted to give pilots a low-cost path into the air.

Bede was also a classic, controversial aviation industry character. He designed a series of aircraft that most famously included the BD-5J, a tiny, single-seat jet that appeared in airshows and in the 1983 James Bond film Octopussy.

A company called American Aviation made changes to the BD-1 design to develop the AA-1 Yankee, a two-seat trainer and personal aircraft. Grumman acquired a controlling interest in the company to form Grumman American, which stretched the Yankee into four-place designs including the Traveler and Cheetah. 

The Grumman American models were known for delivering impressive performance with modest power and at lower prices than similarly equipped rivals. The 150 hp, Lycoming O-320-powered AA-5 Traveler, for example,  was faster and more responsive than a Cessna 172 or Piper Cherokee with the same engine.

The aircraft for sale today is the ultimate development of the Grumman American series. The Tiger has a 180 hp Lycoming O-360, which is a whole lot of muscle for the small light airplane. The Tiger is known to cruise at about 140 ktas at 75 percent power and has a top speed of about 148 ktas—fast enough to keep up with some retractable models and while outrunning others.

This Tiger’s cross-country capability is enhanced by its high-visibility sliding canopy, an updated interior, and modern panel. Newer paint boosts its ramp appeal. The sharp-looking four-seater with fixed gear and a fixed-pitch propeller offers its owner the performance of a complex aircraft without the complexity.

 This AA-5B Tiger has a custom panel with desirable updates. [Credit: Scott MacDonald Aircraft Sales]
 This AA-5B Tiger has a custom panel with desirable updates. [Credit: Scott MacDonald Aircraft Sales]

This 1978 Grumman American Tiger has 3,043 hours on the airframe, 896 hours since overhaul on its 180 hp Lycoming O-360-A4K engine, and 840 hours since overhaul on its Sensenich two-blade propeller. The aircraft’s paint and interior were redone in 2002.

The Tiger’s updated panel includes an Aspen EFD 1000 PFD, Garmin GTN 750 GPS/nav/com, SL 30 VHF nav/com, GTX 345 transponder with ADS-B In and Out, SL 15 audio panel, and S-TEC 30 autopilot.  

Pilots looking for the winged version of a compact sports car with nimble, tactile handling and impressive performance from modest fuel burn should consider this 1978 Grumman American AA-5 Tiger, which is available for $185,000 on AircraftForSale.

If you’re interested in financing, you can do so with FLYING Finance. Use our airplane loan calculator to calculate your estimated monthly payments. Or, to speak with an aviation finance specialist, visit flyingfinance.com.

Jonathan Welsh

Jonathan Welsh is Lead Editor of Aviation Consumer and a private pilot who worked as a reporter, editor and columnist with the Wall Street Journal for 21 years, mostly covering the auto industry. His passion for aviation began in childhood with balsa-wood gliders his aunt would buy for him at the corner store. Follow Jonathan on Twitter @JonathanWelsh4
Pilot in aircraft
Sign-up for newsletters & special offers!

Get the latest stories & special offers delivered directly to your inbox.

SUBSCRIBE