Flight School Accidents: Practical Steps to Reduce Risk
Aircraft accidents quickly attract local media attention, and social media spreads coverage of even local events nationwide — creating the impression that accidents are increasing and raising concern in nearby communities. This is especially true near busy training airports, where flight volume is higher and any incident is more visible to the public. NTSB data shows general aviation accidents have actually declined over the past 20 years, but increased training activity means even a low accident rate can still heighten public awareness and concern.
For flight schools of any size, the challenge is maintaining an uncompromising focus on safety. Community leaders and elected officials are hearing more concerns from the public about aircraft safety, particularly around busy training airports. If accidents continue at concentrated training locations, community pushback is inevitable.
The following observations and practices are intended to help flight schools reduce risk and strengthen operational discipline.
I am retired from the FAA, where I served as an Aviation Safety Inspector. I also owned a large FAR Part 141 flight school (an FAA-certified training program) and worked as an airline operations pilot and manager. The observations below come from that combined experience, along with recent consulting work with schools and universities across the training industry.
Background: Building a Safety Culture from Scratch
While serving as chief pilot at a large regional Delta Connection carrier in Atlanta, I became active again in general aviation. To recalibrate, I hired two DPEs to train me on PTS standards for private, commercial, instrument, and CFI certification. After that, I trained my sons to fly while they were in high school — an experience that led me to start a flight school designed to train local pilots who could move into regional airline operations.
From the beginning, I established a standards manual modeled on airline operations, along with dispatch procedures, standardized checklists, discrepancy logs, a structured maintenance program, and advanced CFI training. The system worked. Falcon Aviation placed more than 100 local students into airline operations: train with us, earn a position with the company, demonstrate a strong work ethic, and flow into ASA.
At its peak, the company averaged about 200 dispatches per day with no accidents. We did experience incidents — prop strikes, ramp damage, brake failures — but no accidents. Simple, easy-to-follow procedures were essential: every flight required a full briefing, weight-and-balance review, flight plan, and maintenance release. These requirements created structure and helped ensure that each flight remained in compliance.
Maintenance
A flight school cannot function effectively without an associated maintenance department. Sending training aircraft to off-site maintenance creates delays and can allow unresolved discrepancies to carry over. Daily checks, a shop maintenance plan, 100-hour inspections, 50-hour oil changes, and close monitoring of wear items all help protect operational integrity. At Falcon Aviation, we operated a full shop with eight full-time mechanics, supported by outside customers and leaseback aircraft within the school.
Instructor Standardization
Whenever possible, the best approach is to train your own future employees. Hiring from outside can be difficult, especially when pilots come from large university programs where they trained primarily in one aircraft make or model. We used a wide range of aircraft — Diamond DA20s, DA40s, DA42s, Cessna 182RGs, Cardinal RGs, Piper Arrows, Cessna 150s, Barons, Seminoles, and King Airs — so the standardization checkout was extensive and required substantial dual instruction. Some instructors simply could not transition successfully across multiple fleets.
Expanded CFI Training
Our CFI candidates completed extensive supervised teaching with real students during the ground portion of the syllabus and in training devices. In flight, they received far more training than required in areas such as slow flight, minimum-control-speed flying, backside-of-the-power-curve operations, stalls in multiple scenarios, spins, short-field grass operations, rudder coordination, expanded multiengine training, loss of control during go-arounds, trim runaway, and VMC envelope skills. This training was time-consuming and expensive, but it built stronger instructors.
Data and Ownership
We used simple data collection and safety reporting — enough to prepare three-month reports and review them during monthly meetings with instructor pilots. We also gave instructors expanded responsibility: stage-check pilots, assistant chief pilots, front-counter oversight, and fleet analysis assignments. This gave CFIs a greater sense of ownership and made them more engaged in the success and safety of the school.
What I'm Seeing Now
Most schools and universities have strong policies and procedures in place, and from what I've seen, they're trying to do things correctly. The remaining gaps tend to show up in training depth, culture, standardization, maintenance oversight, and examiner availability.
Energy management and aircraft feel. CFIs often aren’t trained to truly feel the wing or manage energy, because those skills aren’t emphasized in the standard curriculum. Standardized training is necessary, but too much of it becomes flying by the numbers — leaving stick-and-rudder skills underdeveloped.
A healthy school culture. Flight training should be professional, but it should also be enjoyable. I’ve visited several schools in Georgia where no one seemed engaged or comfortable, often because owners were distant from the staff. Safety improves when people feel comfortable communicating. The best flight schools feel like a team or family — and that culture is good for business, too.
Clear, standardized procedures. Schools need solid procedures that are easy to follow, with standardized checklists used consistently across fleet types.
Expanded new-hire CFI training. Additional instructor training is expensive, but it works. Investing in stronger standardization and deeper skill development reduces risk across the operation.
On-site maintenance and oversight. On-site maintenance with strong oversight is essential. With proper maintenance controls, engine failures and preventable maintenance-related events should be extremely rare.
DPE availability. Examiner availability remains a major challenge. As a former FAA Aviation Safety Inspector, I managed up to 50 TCEs — similar to DPEs at the air transport level — and the scheduling system requires significant advance planning, making last-minute changes costly for applicants. Many FSDOs are also short-staffed on operations inspectors relative to airworthiness inspectors. Schools can offset this by building relationships with multiple DPEs and scheduling checkrides well ahead of need.
It doesn’t take long to spot problems in both small and large flight training operations. The goal isn’t to criticize schools that are already trying to do the right thing — it’s to identify practical improvements that fit each organization’s size, scope, and financial ability.
My approach is collaborative: determine what changes are realistic, prioritize the highest-risk areas, and build systems that instructors, maintenance personnel, managers, and students can actually follow.
Flight schools, from the smallest local operations to the largest university programs, can no longer afford preventable accidents. As in the airline industry, instant media coverage means an accident affects not just one school, but the reputation and future of the entire flight training community.
The safest flight schools are not the ones that wait for an accident to reveal a weakness; they are the ones that find and fix the weakness first.
→ Schedule a Consultation at BlueMountainAviationServices.com
or email us at BlueMTNAviation@outlook.com
