Cessna 172H N3238L

Summary

On 12 February 2023 at about 23:28 local time, a Cessna 172H registered N3238L was involved in an accident near Crosby, Texas, United States. 2 people were on board and one was seriously injured, one had minor injuries. The aircraft was substantially damaged. The NTSB has published a probable cause for this accident; it is quoted in full below.

Date

12 February 2023 at 23:28

Classification

Accident

Location

Crosby, Texas, United States

Nearest airport

Dunham Fld (1XS1)

Coordinates

29.9379, -95.0414

Aircraft

Cessna 172H

Registration

N3238L

Category

Airplane

Year built

1967

Engines

1

Operator

Not recorded

Operating rule

Part 91: General Aviation

Purpose of flight

Personal

Phase of flight

Not recorded

Route

Unknown → Houston

Aircraft damage

Substantial

Weather

VMC

Light

Day

NTSB number

CEN23LA108

1 person was seriously injured.

The pilot’s delayed soft-field takeoff procedure, which prevented the pilot from achieving adequate airspeed and a proper climb rate resulting in a collision with a moving train.

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

Read the full NTSB narrative

The pilot was performing a soft-field takeoff from a 2,700 ft soft, dry grass runway. According to the pilot, during the takeoff roll the soft terrain seemed to impede his airspeed, so he decided to perform a soft-field takeoff in ground effect. About half the distance down the airstrip, the pilot considered aborting the takeoff because he was concerned the airplane was not gaining enough airspeed to climb and avoid a moving train that was on the railroad track. He ultimately did not abort the takeoff, as he thought he would not be able to stop in time to avoid a collision with the train. As the airplane neared the moving train, the pilot pulled up the control yoke to initiate a climb; however, the airplane’s right main landing gear contacted the moving train. The airplane nosed down, impacted terrain, and came to rest inverted. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the fuselage and wings. A pilot-rated witness stated that it did not appear the airplane reached proper airspeed during the takeoff. Postaccident examination revealed no evidence of mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. Based on the airplane’s weight and the ambient conditions, the manufacturer’s predicted takeoff distance to clear a 50 ft obstacle was about 1,200 ft. It is likely the pilot’s delayed decision to perform a soft-field takeoff procedure resulted in the airplane not adequately accelerating to a proper airspeed and climb rate.

Quoted verbatim from the NTSB record.