Cessna 182 Accidents: What the NTSB Records Show and What Comes Next

What Kind of Flight It Was, and Why That Matters to You

The Cessna 182 is a Cessna airplane, and NTSB reports identify it by make and by model series. In the reports discussed on this page, the NTSB lists the aircraft make as Cessna, the aircraft category as "Airplane," and model series that include the 182H, 182J, 182M, 182P and 182Q. The underlying NTSB dataset also includes records naming the 182A and 182C. Two of the airplanes in these records were older aircraft: the NTSB lists one as manufactured in 1965 and another in 1966, the latter powered, in the NTSB's words, by "a Continental IO-470, 230-hp engine."

How the airplane was being flown matters as much as which model it was. Every record on this page lists the flight as conducted under "Part 91: General aviation," which covers private flying; four list the purpose as "Personal" and one as "Positioning." Federal aviation rules set different requirements for other kinds of flights, such as a flight by a charter (Part 135) operator, meaning a company that carries passengers or cargo for hire, or a flight school.

If you were a passenger, the type of operation is one of the first facts that shapes the questions that follow. It affects which federal rules applied to the pilot, the operator and the people who maintained the airplane. Those federal duties are one layer. State tort and product-liability law, which decides most injury and death claims, is a second, separate layer. Neither layer says anything about any particular owner, operator or manufacturer having done something wrong.

A useful early step can be finding the flight type on the NTSB record, along with the model series and, where listed, the year of manufacture. Those details often frame the first questions an attorney asks.

What the NTSB Records Show About Recent Cessna 182 Accidents

The NTSB is the independent federal agency that, in its own words, is "charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation accident in the United States." The records below are its own reports, newest first, as they stood when read on October 17, 2026. They are a selection from the NTSB dataset made by this site, not an NTSB statistic.

• WPR26LA353: September 20, 2026, Warren, Idaho. The aircraft was a Cessna 182P on a personal Part 91 flight. The NTSB records two serious injuries, one crew member and one passenger, and substantial aircraft damage. The document is an Aviation Investigation Notification.
• ERA26FA269: July 12, 2026, Piseco, New York. The NTSB's Aviation Investigation Preliminary Report states that a Cessna 182J "was destroyed" and that "the pilot was fatally injured" on a Part 91 personal flight. The report adds: "This information is preliminary and subject to change."
• ANC26LA058: June 19, 2026, Beaver, Alaska. The aircraft was a Cessna 182Q on a Part 91 positioning flight. The NTSB records no injuries and substantial damage. The document is an Aviation Investigation Notification.
• ERA26LA250: June 11, 2026, Charlotte, Vermont. The aircraft was a Cessna 182M on a Part 91 personal flight. The NTSB records no injuries among three people aboard and substantial damage. The document is an Aviation Investigation Notification.
• CEN26LA214: May 28, 2026, Dickinson, North Dakota. The aircraft was a Cessna 182H. The NTSB records no injuries to two people aboard. Its Aviation Investigation Final Report, first published September 11, 2026, lists the defining event as a "Hard landing" and states the probable cause as "The pilot's failure to maintain aircraft control during landing in gusting wind conditions which resulted in a hard landing."

Only the last record carries a probable cause. For the other four, the NTSB has not stated one, and this page does not suggest what it might be. A notification or a preliminary report gives early facts. It is not a finding of why an accident happened.

For someone connected to one of these flights, this means the record may say very little yet, and silence on cause is not a conclusion either way. Noting the accident number and the document type makes it easier to check later whether a final report has been released.

How the NTSB Investigates an Aviation Accident

Under 49 C.F.R. § 831.4, the NTSB investigates "to determine the facts, conditions, and circumstances relating to an accident," then uses those results "to determine one or more probable causes" and to issue safety recommendations. A probable cause is the NTSB's own statement of why an accident happened. It appears in a final report.

An investigation moves in stages. A notification is the NTSB's early record of the event. A preliminary report sets out early facts, such as the aircraft, the flight and what witnesses or video showed, and it is labeled as subject to change. For the three notifications listed above, the NTSB states that it "is conducting a Class 4 investigation into this event. A preliminary report will not be issued but a final report will be released at the conclusion of the investigation." Each of those notices also says the NTSB did not travel to the scene.

The same regulation states that NTSB investigations "are fact-finding proceedings with no adverse parties" and "are not conducted for the purpose of determining the rights, liabilities, or blame of any person or entity." Federal law keeps that line firm. Under 49 U.S.C. § 1154(b), "No part of a report of the Board, related to an accident or an investigation of an accident, may be admitted into evidence or used in a civil action for damages resulting from a matter mentioned in the report." The North Dakota final report itself points out that a separate factual report "may be admissible."

For an injured person or a family, this means two tracks. The NTSB looks into safety. A civil case, if there is one, decides legal responsibility under its own rules and its own evidence. A deadline to bring a civil claim, called a limitation period, comes from state law, not the NTSB. A question worth raising with an attorney is how the two tracks fit together for a given accident, since waiting on the NTSB does not pause the state's clock.

Why the Investigation's Status Matters If You Were Hurt

Picture a family waiting on the Piseco record. The NTSB has a preliminary report, and its probable cause is not yet stated. That status tells the family something real: the agency's investigation is still open, and its conclusions are not in. It does not tell them who, if anyone, is legally responsible, because that question was never the NTSB's to answer.

Among the records above, only CEN26LA214 has reached a final report with a probable cause. An open investigation does not stop a civil case from moving forward, and the NTSB does not decide a civil case when it closes.

The tension lies in timing. A state's limitation period starts and runs on the terms its own statute sets, with whatever exceptions that statute gives. Those terms differ from state to state, and no single deadline applies everywhere. Meanwhile, what is publicly available changes as an investigation moves along. A notification may hold little more than the date, the place, the aircraft and the injuries. A final report and its docket hold more.

If you are weighing when to talk with someone about this, it can help to know which stage the record is at, which state the accident happened in, and where the people involved live. A conversation with our attorney can help sort out how the investigation's stage and the relevant state's rules fit together, and you can request a case evaluation when the time feels right.

Who May Be Responsible for What Happened on the Flight

Responsibility in a general aviation accident is a question about roles, not about any named company. Depending on the facts, the people and businesses whose legal duties may matter can include the pilot, the aircraft owner, the operator if it is someone other than the owner, a maintenance provider, and the manufacturer of the airplane or of a component. Each role carries different duties, and the federal rules for the type of flight shape what each one was required to do.

For you, the question underneath is usually simple: did someone fail at a job they were responsible for, or was something wrong with the airplane itself? The law asks the first question through negligence, which looks at whether someone owed a duty of care, breached it, and caused harm that led to damages. It asks the second through product liability, the body of law that looks at whether an aircraft or a component had a defect and whether that defect caused the harm. An accident, even a serious one, does not prove a defect or anyone's carelessness. A probable cause, where the NTSB states one, is a safety finding and not a court's ruling, as the page on pilot error findings explains.

What is at stake is who, if anyone, may answer for the harm, and that depends on facts a passenger or family often does not have: who owned the airplane, who flew it, who last maintained it. The operator listed on an NTSB notice begins to answer that, but only in part. The site's guide to small plane crashes describes how those roles differ by type of flight. Writing down what is known about each role, and what is not, gives a conversation with an attorney a clear starting point.

What a Person or Family May Recover, and Why the State Matters

If you were hurt, or a family member was, the losses that follow a crash are usually concrete: hospital bills, time away from work, and pain that does not end when the bills stop. State law decides which of those losses a court may allow. Categories often include medical expenses, lost earnings or earning capacity, and pain and suffering, but each state's statutes and court decisions decide which apply and how. Nothing about a category says whether any person has a claim or what one might be worth.

Wrongful death is a claim created by statute that allows certain family members or a representative to bring a case after a death caused by another's wrongful act. Each state writes its own statute, deciding who may bring the claim, which damages may be allowed and when the claim must be filed. For a family after a fatal crash like the one the NTSB recorded near Piseco, the state whose law applies can change nearly every one of those answers. The site's page on aviation wrongful death covers this further, including the federal law that reaches some deaths at sea.

Other rules also differ by state. Some states reduce a recovery by a person's share of fault, and others treat fault differently. Some cap certain damages, and others do not. Limitation periods vary as well. No state's rule, including California's, is the rule everywhere. The questions worth bringing to a conversation are concrete: where the flight began, where it ended, where it crashed, and where the injured person or family lives.

What Records Can Help Show What Happened

When you are trying to piece together what happened, records are what turn questions into answers. In an aviation accident case, those that typically matter include NTSB investigation records, FAA maintenance and airworthiness records, pilot certificate and medical certificate records, air traffic control communications and weather data. The NTSB reports above already contain some of this: the weather at a nearby observation station, the pilot's certificate and flight hours in the final report, and the date of the most recent flight review.

Under 49 C.F.R. § 831.13, the information the NTSB collects during an investigation includes "photographs, visual representations of factual data, physical evidence from the scene of the accident, interview statements, wreckage documentation, flight data and cockpit voice recorder information, and surveillance video." Parties taking part in an investigation must give that information to the NTSB promptly, unless the NTSB authorizes them to keep it. Physical evidence from the airplane itself can matter where a product-liability theory is in question.

What is at stake is whether the facts can be shown later, when memories fade and records move. On the personal side, the records that usually matter include medical records and bills, records of time missed from work, photos, and the names of witnesses. Families after a death often gather the same records along with the paperwork of the estate. Keeping these together, and noting which records others hold, can help an attorney see what exists and what may still need to be requested. A national framework of federal aviation law and state tort law, described on the aviation accident lawyer page, gives these records their legal meaning.