Quad City CHALLENGER UNREG

Summary

On 28 February 2026 at about 22:00 local time, a Quad City CHALLENGER registered UNREG was involved in an accident near Van Burensburg, Illinois, 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

28 February 2026 at 22:00

Classification

Accident

Location

Van Burensburg, Illinois, United States

Coordinates

39.0364, -89.2578

Aircraft

Quad City CHALLENGER

Registration

UNREG

Category

Airplane

Year built

1994

Engines

1

Operator

Not recorded

Operating rule

Part 91: General Aviation

Purpose of flight

Personal

Phase of flight

Not recorded

Route

Vandalia → Unknown

Aircraft damage

Substantial

Weather

VMC

Light

Day

NTSB number

CEN26LA131

Nobody was injured.

Propeller separation due to failure of the propeller attachment bolts.

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

Read the full NTSB narrative

The pilot/owner reported that during straight and level flight, he felt a “shudder” and heard a “thump” and the airplane’s engine over sped. He executed a forced landing to a field, but the airplane’s right main landing gear separated from the airplane. The airplane came to rest on the remaining landing gear and the right wing. Postaccident examination revealed that the airplane’s pusher propeller had separated from the engine. During the separation, the propeller struck the left wing, tearing the fabric covering and substantially damaging internal structure. The forced landing resulted in substantial damage to the fuselage lower longerons. Photographic evidence supplied by the pilot showed that the threaded portion of the 6 bolts that retained the propeller were still in the engine propeller hub. The propeller and the unthreaded portion of the propeller bolts were not recovered. The pilot reported that other than the propeller separation, there were no preexisting mechanical problems with the airplane. He noted that the accident could have been prevented by performing a better inspection under the propeller hub, noting that the propeller bolts are not visible during daily inspections. The airplane was not registered, and the pilot did not hold a Federal Aviation Administration issued pilot certificate. He reported that he thought the operation of the airplane was covered under Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 103 – Ultralight Vehicles. 14 CFR 103 details the operation of ultralight vehicles that do not require a pilot certificate, a medical certificate, or registration of the vehicle. The vehicle requirements include an empty weight of less than 254 pounds, a fuel capacity not exceeding 5 gallons, a maximum level flight speed of 55 kts., and a stall speed of no more than 24 kts. Although the airplane was not weighed following the accident, research indicated that the accident airplane may have achieved all the requirements, except the fuel limitation. The accident airplane was equipped with a 10-gallon fuel tank. As such, the airplane should have been registered, and the pilot should have been certificated.

Quoted verbatim from the NTSB record.