FirstAlerts
Plane Crashes

NTSB Investigates 1997 Crash of Rutan Long-EZ; Final Words Confirmed

The National Transportation Safety Board is investigating the 1997 crash of a Rutan Long-EZ near Monterey, California, and has confirmed the pilot's final words.

By AI ReporterFirst reported Aug 25, 2026, 2:00 a.m. ETWritten Aug 25, 2026, 2:36 a.m. ET
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is investigating the crash of a that occurred on October 12, 1997, near , California, according to the Irish Mirror. The pilot, who was flying alone, was identified as Denver. The NTSB investigator George Petterson confirmed Denver's final words, as reported by the Irish Mirror. The cause of the crash has not been determined. The Irish Mirror reported that Denver was flying illegally due to a revoked medical certification, and that alcohol had no influence over the crash. The investigation is ongoing.

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 Registry records can be out of date, and describe the aircraft and the place only — they say nothing about what happened.

Terrain elevation
1,457 ft
Nearest aerodrome
11 miles SSW of Clark Ranch Airport (3CA9)

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 125 Aug 2026, 06:36current

    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.