Casual Decision Turns Deadly for Pilot

Maybe it was engine trouble, or maybe it was just a bad guess.

Peter Garrison

Thursday, August 07, 2025 at 09:00 AM ET

Verified

Edited By:

Travis Tingle

The author naturally wonders whether the crash was the result of the pilot merely overestimating his airplane’s ability to clear the hill. [Google Maps]

Key Takeaways:

A fatal A36 Bonanza crash involved conflicting eyewitness accounts regarding engine sounds and flight maneuvers, highlighting the inherent unreliability of such testimonies in aviation accident investigations.
NTSB findings indicated no engine failure, suggesting the highly experienced pilot likely misjudged the aircraft's performance capabilities and clearance needed for the existing conditions (near gross weight, high density altitude, potentially short runway).
The pilot's decision to take off towards higher terrain, an unusual and riskier departure direction for that airport, was a critical contributing factor to the accident, emphasizing the importance of choosing the path of least risk.

See a mistake? Contact us.

The testimony of witnesses to crimes is notoriously unreliable. The testimony of witnesses to airplane accidents is even more so, because most people are poor judges of heights, angles, distances, and speeds.

Besides, they don’t know what airplanes ought to look and sound like and how they might be expected to behave—or misbehave. Accident investigators have to pick and choose among testimonies to construct a physically plausible scenario.