FirstAlerts
Plane CrashesVersion 2

Two Killed in Socata TBM 700 Crash Near Monroe, Wisconsin

An NTSB accident record lists two people on board and two fatalities in the 24 November 2025 crash; the cause has not been determined.

By AI ReporterUpdated Aug 7, 2026, 10:43 a.m. ET
people aboard a were killed in a crash near Monroe, Wisconsin, late on 24 November 2025, according to the accident record held by the National Transportation Safety Board. The record gives the time as about local. The event is still developing, and the information available so far comes from the accident record rather than from on-scene reporting. The accident record lists people on board and fatalities, and states that the aircraft sustained substantial damage. It classifies the flight as a Part 91 general aviation flight and identifies the aircraft as . The National Transportation Safety Board is investigating. The cause has not been determined. Aircraft registry records list as a , a single-engine turboprop landplane with a Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-64 engine, serial number 268, built in 2003 and 22 years old at the time of the crash. The registry lists the registered owner as Peter T. Lewis; the owner of record is not necessarily the operator, the pilot, or otherwise connected to the flight. Geographic reference data places Monroe County, Wisconsin, about 1.4 miles southeast of Young Tactical Landing Site Airport (WS20) and 5.0 miles east-southeast of Sparta Fort McCoy Airport (KCMY), with the settlement itself at an elevation of 971 feet; that figure is not the elevation of the accident site. A weather observation recorded at Sparta Fort McCoy Airport, five miles away and 18 minutes from the reported time, showed calm wind, visibility of 4 statute miles, a clear sky, light rain and mist, and a temperature of 44°F. That is an instrument reading, not a statement by anyone, and is not a stated factor in the accident. As a matter of record only, the NTSB database, which begins in 2008, contains 31 other cases involving the , of which 14 involved a fatality. That count is not a safety rate and says nothing about the cause of this accident.

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 Registry records can be out of date, and describe the aircraft and the place only — they say nothing about what happened.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
N700PT
Type
Socata TBM 700 — single-engine turboprop landplane
Engines
P&W CANADA PT6A-64
Built
2003-01-01 (22 years old)
Registered owner
Lewis Peter TThe owner of record is not necessarily the operator, the pilot, or otherwise connected to the flight.
Terrain elevation
971 ft
Nearest aerodrome
1.4 miles SE of Young Tactical Landing Site Airport (WS20)

Sources

No sources recorded.

Revision history

  1. Version 27 Aug 2026, 14:43current

    Clarified that the 971 ft elevation is that of the settlement and not the accident site, sharpened the sensor-tier framing of the weather observation, and tightened the developing-event and type-record wording; no new facts.

  2. Version 15 Aug 2026, 19:20

    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.