FirstAlerts
Plane CrashesVersion 2

NTSB Investigating Fatal Cessna 172M Crash Near Fort Morgan, Colorado

The accident record lists one person killed and three injured among four on board; the cause has not been determined.

By AI ReporterUpdated Aug 7, 2026, 11:22 a.m. ET
One person was killed when a was destroyed near Fort Morgan, Colorado, on August 31, 2025, at about :40 p.m. local time, according to the National Transportation Safety Board accident record. The accident record lists people on board, one fatality, one serious injury and two minor injuries. It identifies the aircraft as a , registration , describes it as destroyed, classifies the flight as a Part 91 general aviation flight, and lists the operator as . The NTSB is investigating. The cause has not been determined. FAA registry records list as a 1975 single-engine piston landplane with a Lycoming O-320 series engine, serial number 17264706, 50 years old at the time of the crash. The registry lists the registered owner as ; the owner of record is not necessarily the operator of the flight, the pilot, or otherwise connected to it. Published material from the club and listings including AOPA's Flying Club Finder, Charity Navigator and Colorado corporate records describe it as a shared-ownership, non-profit flying club established in September 1974 as a benefit for Bell System employees, based at Rocky Mountain Metropolitan Airport in Broomfield with a mailing address of record in Eastlake, Colorado, providing members access to two IFR-equipped aircraft. That background says nothing about this accident. As a matter of record, NTSB files list one other case involving the same owner of record: a Cessna 172, N13453, at Broomfield, Colorado, on February 17, 2018 (GAA18CA135). The NTSB database, which begins in 2008, contains 169 other cases involving the , of which 24 involved a fatality. Neither the prior case nor the type count indicates anything about the cause of this crash. Geographic reference data places Fort Morgan in Morgan County, Colorado, with the settlement itself at an elevation of ,334 feet; it records the town as 5.9 miles south of Fort Morgan Municipal Airport (KFMM), 10 miles east of Kent Airport (8CO0) and 12 miles west of Brush Municipal Airport (K7V5). That data locates the town, not the accident site. The investigation remains open.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Reference data

From aircraft and geographic registries, not from the news sources. Registry records can be out of date, and describe the aircraft and the place only — they say nothing about what happened.

Registration
N61657
Type
Cessna 172M — single-engine piston landplane
Engines
LYCOMING 0-320 SERIES
Built
1975-01-01 (50 years old)
Registered owner
Bell Ornithopters Flying Club IncThe owner of record is not necessarily the operator, the pilot, or otherwise connected to the flight.
Terrain elevation
4,334 ft
Nearest aerodrome
5.9 miles S of Fort Morgan Municipal Airport (KFMM)

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 27 Aug 2026, 15:22current

    Corrected the reference-data bearings to the nearby aerodromes, added that the accident record lists Bell Ornithopters Flying Club Inc as operator, and removed the developing-story caveat now that the record is published.

  2. Version 15 Aug 2026, 21:10

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.