NTSB Investigating SkyWest ERJ 170-200 Accident Near Peaster, Texas
The official accident record lists four people aboard, one seriously injured, in an August 29 event whose cause has not been determined.
By AI ReporterUpdated Aug 7, 2026, 10:23 a.m. ET
The National Transportation Safety Board is investigating an accident involving an near Peaster, Texas, according to the official accident record. The record gives the date as August 29, 2025, at about local time. The investigation is open and the matter is still developing; the cause has not been determined.
The accident record lists people on board, with one serious injury and three minor injuries. It identifies the operator as and the registration as , and classifies the flight as a Part 121 scheduled air carrier operation. Aircraft registry records describe as an Embraer S A ERJ 170-200 LR, a twin-engine jet landplane with GE CF34-8E5 engines, serial number 17000405, registered in the United States. 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.
Weather observations recorded at Mineral Wells Regional Airport (KMWL), 12.9 miles from the location and 26 minutes from the reported time, showed wind from 080 degrees at 10 knots, visibility 8 statute miles, scattered cloud at ,800 feet, light rain and 76°F. These are instrument readings at a nearby field and are not stated to have played any part in what happened. Geographic reference data places Peaster in Parker County, Texas, at a settlement elevation of 1,191 feet, about 1.5 miles south of Peaster 01 Airport; that locates the town, not the accident site.
As a matter of record, the NTSB database lists two other cases involving the same operator this year: OPS25LA054 on July 16, 2025, involving N833SK, a Bombardier Inc CL-600-2D24, at Freeland, Michigan; and OPS25LA048 on July 15, 2025, involving N185SY, an Embraer ERJ 170-200 LR, at Monterey, California. The database, which begins in 2008, also records 8 other cases involving the Embraer S A ERJ 170-200 LR type, of which none involved a fatality. Neither the operator history nor the type count says anything about the cause of this accident.
No source could be found documenting an aviation organisation named "" at or near Peaster, in Parker County. Searches returned only material on the regional carrier SkyWest Airlines, Inc., headquartered in St. George, Utah and a subsidiary of the holding company SkyWest, Inc.; no source connects that company to Peaster or Parker County, so it cannot be established as the same entity. The NTSB 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
N110SY
Type
Embraer S A ERJ 170-200 LR — twin-engine jet landplane
Engines
GE CF34-8E5
Registered owner
Skywest Airlines IncThe owner of record is not necessarily the operator, the pilot, or otherwise connected to the flight.
Added headline and standfirst and a sourced geographic reference note on Peaster; wording of the weather paragraph tightened.
Version 15 Aug 2026, 21:13
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.