Papillon Airways Helicopter Accidents: What the NTSB Records Show

Who Papillon Airways Is and What It Operates

Papillon Airways, Inc. is the entity named as the operator in the NTSB records behind this page. The NTSB's final report on accident WPR23LA078 lists the operator as "Papillon Airways, Inc" and says it does business as "Papillon, Grand Canyon Helicopters." That report also lists the operating certificates the operator held: "On-demand air taxi (135), Commercial air tour (136)."

Those numbers refer to parts of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, the federal aviation rules. Part 135 is the set of operating rules for on-demand air carriers, which are commercial operators that fly passengers for hire without a fixed airline schedule. The NTSB report describes the 2022 flight as "a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 135 air tour flight." The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is the federal agency that issues and oversees those certificates.

The aircraft named across the five NTSB records are all helicopters from one manufacturer family, as the records label them:

• an Airbus Helicopters EC 130 T2
• a Eurocopter EC130
• an Airbus AS350
• a Eurocopter EC 130 B4
• an American Eurocopter Corp AS350B3

According to the 2022 report, that flight was an air tour with six passengers, flown by the second of four company helicopters returning from Kingman, Arizona, to Boulder City Municipal Airport.

Why does the classification matter to you? A paid tour flown under Part 135 is held to commercial operating rules, not the rules for a private pilot flying friends. That affects which federal standards applied to the flight, which records exist and who may have had duties to passengers. If you were aboard a tour flight, the operator name on your ticket or booking confirmation, and whether it matches the operator in the NTSB record, is one detail worth noting. An attorney can help sort out which entity operated the flight and which rules applied. Our aviation accident lawyer overview explains those layers in general terms.

NTSB Accident Records Involving Papillon Airways

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is the independent federal agency that investigates civil aviation accidents in the United States. Its final report describes the agency as "charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation accident in the United States." A probable cause is the NTSB's official determination of the factor or factors that caused or contributed to an accident.

If you are trying to match your flight to an official file, the list below may help. It draws on the NTSB's accident dataset, newest first, and for each record notes whether the dataset carried the NTSB's probable-cause statement as of October 17, 2026.

WPR23LA078 is dated December 27, 2022, near Boulder City, Nevada, and involved an Airbus Helicopters EC 130 T2. The highest injury recorded is Serious, and the dataset carries a probable-cause statement. The NTSB's Aviation Investigation Final Report - Accident Number: WPR23LA078 records "6 Serious, 1 Minor" injuries and "Substantial" aircraft damage. It gives the defining event as "Loss of tail rotor effectiveness." The NTSB states the probable cause as:

"The pilot's failure to apply anti-torque pedal input in a sufficient, timely, and sustained manner while attempting to arrest a turn during a hover-taxi, which resulted in a loss of directional control. Contributing to the severity of the occupants' injuries was the inconsistent performance of the seats' energy-absorption devices, which was likely due to the rotational forces encountered during the accident which were not required to be accounted for during the seat certification process."

That is the NTSB's wording, not this page's. Our page on pilot error in plane crashes explains why an investigative label like this is not a court verdict.

The other four records name these aircraft and injury levels. For each, the dataset carries a probable-cause statement:

• WPR18MA087: Eurocopter EC130, highest injury recorded Fatal.
• GAA16CA450: Airbus AS350, highest injury recorded None.
• WPR14LA313: Eurocopter EC 130 B4, highest injury recorded None.
• WPR14FA195: American Eurocopter Corp AS350B3, highest injury recorded Fatal.

This page states no date, place or cause for these four. A "yes" in the dataset means the NTSB reached a probable-cause determination; it does not tell you what that determination says. The number of records listed here is this site's own tally, not an NTSB statistic. For a family connected to one of these events, the accident number is the key that links an experience to the full NTSB file, and an attorney can help review what that file contains and how it bears on a possible claim.

How the NTSB Investigates a Helicopter Accident

For a family waiting on answers, it helps to know what the NTSB is trying to find, and what it is not. 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." The same section says an investigation may result in a report or brief of the NTSB's conclusions, or other products such as factual records and safety recommendations.

An investigation usually reaches the public in stages. A preliminary report is an early, factual account issued while the investigation is still open; it is not a finding of cause. A final report is the completed product, and it states the probable cause. If you are following an open investigation, nothing published before the final report should be read as the agency's conclusion.

The 2022 report shows what investigators can draw on: engine data recorder values, airport security video, the pilot's interview, training records and an examination of the seats. It also notes, "The NTSB did not travel to the scene of this accident."

The NTSB is not a court. Section 831.4 says its 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." The final report repeats that the NTSB "does not assign fault or blame."

Congress added a rule that surprises many families. 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 NTSB's own report notes that a factual report "that may be admissible" is available in its docket. In practice, a civil claim cannot rest on the NTSB's conclusions; it depends on evidence gathered and proven separately. If you are weighing a claim, that means your own photos, records and witness names may matter more than the NTSB's finding. An attorney can help explain what the docket holds and what evidence has to be developed independently.

What the Law Requires of a Part 135 Air Tour Operator

If you flew on a paid tour, the operator was working under a federal certificate that carries federal operating standards. The 2022 report refers to those standards directly. It notes that a pilot's training records were measured "as defined by Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 135 standards," and it refers to a "Part 135 flight evaluation." In general terms, an operator of this type works within FAA rules on who may fly its aircraft, how pilots are trained and checked, and how its aircraft are kept airworthy and maintained.

This section describes what the law asks of any operator holding these certificates. It does not describe how Papillon Airways or any other operator actually runs its flights.

The federal rules help define the standard of care, meaning the level of caution the law expects of a commercial carrier toward its passengers. Whether a particular flight met that standard is a question of fact, answered by records, testimony and evidence. An accident alone does not prove that anyone broke a rule or acted carelessly.

Federal aviation law and state injury law are separate layers. Federal rules govern how flights are certified and operated. State law usually supplies the claims an injured person or a family may bring, and it sets their deadlines and damages rules. How the two fit together depends on the facts. If you are trying to understand what happened on a tour flight, an attorney can help sort out which federal rules applied, which records may show whether they were followed, and which state's law may govern.

If You Were Injured or Lost Someone on a Papillon Flight — What the Legal Framework Looks Like

When a sightseeing helicopter comes down, the people aboard and their families often face medical bills, missed work and unanswered questions at the same time. The law offers a few frameworks for these cases, and each asks a different question.

Negligence is the most common. It asks whether someone owed a duty of reasonable care, which is the obligation to act with appropriate caution toward others, and whether that duty was breached, meaning not met. Next comes causation, whether the breach actually caused the harm. Last are damages, the losses that resulted. All four must be proven, and whether they are depends on the facts.

Product liability is a claim that a defect in the aircraft or one of its components caused an injury. It turns on whether a defect existed and whether it caused the harm. A crash does not prove either one.

Wrongful death is a claim brought by surviving family members after a fatal accident. Our page on aviation wrongful death claims explains it in more detail. State law decides who may bring it and on what terms.

The rules differ from state to state, including limitation periods, which are the deadlines for filing a claim, how fault is shared among the people involved and which damages may be recovered. The law may allow categories such as medical expenses, lost earnings, and pain and suffering, along with wrongful-death damages for families. What is available depends on the governing state's law and the facts of the case.

If you were hurt, the records that usually matter include:

• NTSB records and the factual docket
• FAA airworthiness and maintenance records
• the operator's flight and maintenance logs
• medical records
• photos and video
• the names of witnesses

Questions Worth Asking Before You Speak With an Attorney About a Papillon Accident

What do people in this situation usually have in hand when they first talk with a lawyer? Often it is a handful of basic details: the flight date and route, the helicopter's tail number if they know it, the names of other passengers or witnesses, and any letters or forms from the operator or an insurer. In the 2022 record, for example, the NTSB report lists the registration as N835GC. Details like that tie a person's experience to the official file.

Timing matters for two reasons. First, limitation periods generally start running from the date of the injury or death. The exact rule, including when the clock starts and its exceptions, differs from state to state. Second, the NTSB investigation's status shapes what is available. While an investigation is open, there may be only a preliminary report. Once a final report issues, a probable cause and a factual docket may be public.

Families often have questions to raise in a first conversation. Which state's law may apply to a flight that crossed state lines? Is the NTSB investigation open or closed? What records exist, and who holds them? A consultation can cover these questions using the dates, reports and documents involved. If it would help to talk them through, you can request a case review.