Originally published at: Father-Son Pilots Identified in Deadly Statesville Crash
The two pilots were among seven people killed aboard retired NASCAR driver Greg Biffle’s Cessna Citation.
There’s a lot of speculation regarding that crash. Supposedly the pilot wasn’t certified? to fly the aircraft, and that said airplane requires a co-pilot / backup crew member. Which wasn’t on board. According to what I’ve seen on YouTube so far…
speculation/total lake of understanding. Biffle was qualified in the Citation II No one knows who was seated where. Citation I and II are available in single pilot configuration. The Captain must pass a single pilot check ride to operate single pilot..It will be a long time before we find out who was seated where . Perhaps we will never know. There has already been some conflicting information from the NTSB. The most interesting information can be found on the ADS B flight path. Immediately following the initial turn around a 1000’ loss of altitude in 19 seconds. On what had to be an attempted visual approach to the ILS runway in rapidly deteriorating weather the final ADSB hit was completing the base to final turn at 100’ AGL. Over a mile from runway at a very slow speed.
Unverified information that Biffle got his multi engine rating in March 2025 and was not type rated in the Citation and the Captain was not single pilot rated in the Citation. That would mean that Biffle should have been in the copilot seat. Remember this was a private operation, different than for hire or airline.
According to the FAA Airman Database, the father, Dennis Dutton, had a Type Rating for the Cessna Citation 500 series of aircraft, but his Rating required a second-in-command pilot for his Type Rating to be valid.
The only Jack Dutton in the FAA Airman Database possessed only a Private Pilot Certificate with Airplane Single Engine Land and Instrument Airplane Ratings and NO TYPE RATINGS, so he could not legally serve as the required Second-In-Command pilot for this flight.
Again according to the FAA Airmen database, while Greg Biffle did possess a Private Pilot Certificate with Airplane Single Engine Land, Airplane Multi-Engine Land, and Rotorcraft-Helicopter Ratings, he DID NOT possess either an Instrument Rating or ANY Type Ratings whatsoever, so he could not have legally served as the Second-In-Command for this flight either.
So, according to the alleged occupants of the aircraft and the FAA Airman Database, this flight was definitely operated illegally. Of course, there are very specific reasons that legally flying this aircraft requires two competent Pilots who are both knowledgeable about and current in the aircraft’s operation. However, the illegality of the flight alone did not cause this accident.
Perhaps the father was supervising either his son or Greg while they were handling the controls. Perhaps there was some emergency that resulted in the unstable flight path and crash after departure. It seems highly probable that we will never know for certain what happened unless the cockpit voice recorder provides an explanation.
Biffle’s listing on the FAA pilot database just says PP-ASMEL-RH, with no type ratings, so he could not legally have been PIC unless his CE500 rating was only recently added and hadn’t made the database yet (which can take a few months). He could have been SIC if he had a 61.55 SIC endorsement for that type, but that might show up only in his pilot logbook. Dutton holds a CE500 type with SIC required. So, Dutton could have been PIC and Biffle the SIC. And either could have been in the left seat – no FAA requirement in such aircraft for the PIC to occupy the left seat.
Late edit: I missed that Biffle lacked an instrument rating so he couldn’t have been SIC, either. And Dennis Rollan Dutton’s CE500 type rating is “SIC required”, with (apparently) nobody in the jet qualified to be SIC. Beginning to look ugly.
All of this speculation is just that. That fact is, the plane crashed and that is due to decisions made by both the owner and the pilot flying. As an aircraft owner you are required to maintain, operate and crew the aircraft according to the regulations and aircraft requirements. There is no way Biffle or Duttons son was qualified to be in that aircrafts right seat. And due to Duttons restrictions of operating the aircraft only with a trained certified pilot he wasn’t either. The final results prove that. But it was Biffles responsibility to crew it with qualified pilots. That is very questionable at this point. He may have felt comfortable with a ATP rated retired airline captain but flying a GA turbine aircraft is an entirely different ball game. All of those years flying transport category aircraft brings little to this type of operation. The Cessna 550 at gross weight with an engine out is a handful for those who fly them every day. Bottom line. It was Biffles aircraft. He didn’t do his due diligence with who operated it and the maintenance is now questionable as it appears an engine failure was involved. Sadly he and his family paid the ultimate price. In aviation, there is nothing worse than complacency. And that can start the day you purchase an aircraft you can’t afford to operate safely.
Even ‘RetiredTn’ is guesticulating, in saying “due to decisions made by both the owner and the pilot flying.”, a claim that the Cessna 550 with an engine out is more difficult to hade than a ‘transport category aircraft’ - I’d like to watch both in a very good simulator, and saying he has ‘facts’.
Wiipedia claims " The Citation II (Model 550) was developed to provide the same docile low-speed handling and good short-field performance as the preceding Citation I. May or may not be true.
And that single pilot version is called Citation II/SP.
Clearly, the flight crew did not meet FAA requirements, but that’s not what directly caused the crash. Photos of a missing right nose baggage door and damage to fan blades on the right engine suggest engine failure and possible damage to flight controls.
The CE-500 rating held by the most experienced pilot on board covers a wide range of aircraft from the original CE-500 to the CE-560 Encore+. I have that rating and trained pilots under Part 135 to fly a variety of Citations. There are substantial differences in those aircraft models.
One very important difference is the single engine landing procedure. On later models, the single engine approach checklist calls for full flaps. On earlier models, the same checklist calls for approach flaps until landing is assured, because they do not have enough power to fly a normal approach with full flaps on one engine. On those older models (like Biffles airplane) we trained to only use full flaps on short final on a short runway. On a longer runway, we landed with approach flaps.
We can see from photos the gear was down when it hit the approach lights, but I have not seen anything showing flap position. If they extended full flaps, that may explain the low airspeed on final and hitting trees short of the runway. That is exactly what would happen on a heavily loaded C-550 on a single engine approach with full flaps.
That airplane is a handful on one engine, especially at max gross weight. Thousands of hours of experience in other aircraft would not help as much as specific knowledge and experience in a simulator in this make and model.
It will be interesting to learn if Dennis Dutton was trained in this specific model, or if his CE-500 training was in a different model.
Yes, I like all others are guessing or assuming. But my point is owning and operating any high performance aircraft requires professional level management. These are not the sort of aircraft that can be flown and tucked away wet in a hangar. This aircraft was 40 years old. The questions that are surfacing and the way the incident was handled does not indicate anything close to a professional level. Unfortunately much of the general public views this as a “rich man’s” toy and this is typical of all general aviation turbojet operations. It is not.
The endorsement would not only show up in his logbook but also the logbook and paperwork from the instructor or examiner that issued the endorsement. There would be a paper trail. I can’t see how a pilot could hold any sort of type rating or endorsement to perform as a second in command of a turbojet aircraft without an instrument rating. Folks are really grabbing at straws trying to come up with some sort of legal way this flight was flown. Not that it makes any real difference at this point. None of us mean to disparage any of these fine people. But aviation is very unforgiving and the entire point of discussing these events is hopefully to learn. Not find excuses.
Regardless of who had what ratings, and who was in which seat, there has been no mention of the airplane having a special certification to be operated by a single pilot. When I got my single pilot rating in a CE-500 back in 1979, in addition to the pilot having a single pilot rating in the airplane, if you were actually operating it as a single pilot, the airplane also had to have certain equipment, recertified on an annual? basis, etc, etc.
Biffle’s plane might have had all the required equipment to be operated by a single pilot. But did his plane have a specific certificate allowing it to be operated by a single pilot?
All in all, a true tragedy for all involved.
1 Like
Now we wait 2 years for DNA to be released to see who was in which seat.
There is pretty strong evidence the Jack Dutton was in the right seat. My statement that Greg was qualified was based on very early statements from normally reliable sources. At this point the erroneous information greatly outweighs the good information. Examples: the airline Capt expert stats that the airplane only reached 2000’ MSL while the ADSB info shows close to 4000’
The CE550 rating situation is confusing. The straight 550 requires 2 pilots but there MAY BE exceptions to that. The single pilot Citation II is a CE551 otherwise known as Citation 550/SP
In my opinion the bottom line is:
Decision to operate without two FULLYQUALIFIED pilots which means approved training.
Personally induced pressure to “beat some weather” resulting in a VFR departure with a IFR fllight plan in the system, followed by an engine failure that caused a rushed return in rapidly worsening weather, followed by an attempt to make a visual approach in weather that may have been low IMC. The final straw was configuring the airplane to full flaps much too early. Full flaps are not recommended except for short runways. The airplane was almost certainly way over max landing weight so now way more than approach flaps should have been used.
I am 40 years removed from corporate jets but unless things have changed copilot in a private operation requires only private, multi, instrument. Commercial if receiving compensation Greg and Jack were apparently each lacking one of those qualifications. This should have been a non event, declaring an emergency and landing at a larger airport with a control tower and emergence equipment.
‘RetiredTn’
You are still assuming.
After a lot of research but still searching: Biffle met SIC requirements but for VFR only. Exactly what VFR means in this situation has long been a subject of debate.
One of the curious issues I have found is two very different procedures for single engine landing One says not to use full flaps unless the runway is short. The other says full flaps at 100’ AGL.
I also must counter the opinion that Biffle’s “lack of management” was a factor. Purely conjecture but what if Biffle delegated all aspects including oversight of maintenence to the Captain.
As a former manager of a two airplane flight department I managed all aspects except insurance and financial.
This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.