N927NA Martin WB-57F Canberra Belly-Landing in Houston, Texas
On Tuesday, January 27, 2026, at approximately 10:19 AM local time (17:19 UTC), a rare and iconic NASA research aircraft—the Martin WB-57F Canberra (registration N927NA)—was involved in an aviation incident during a routine flight at Houston-Ellington Field (EFD/KEFD) in Houston, Texas. The aircraft, tail number NASA 927, performed a gear-up landing on Runway 17R, sliding down the runway on its belly and sparking as it came to a stop.
Fortunately, no injuries were reported, either to the flight crew or to anyone on the ground. Still, the incident has sent ripples through the aviation and research communities, not only because of the dramatic nature of the landing but because of the aircraft itself. With only three WB-57F aircraft remaining, and a very limited number in active service, the long-term future of this airframe remains uncertain.
” This isn’t a normal accident investigation,” says Joseph LoRusso, Director of Aviation at Ramos Law, “and it’s safe to say there’s a lot going on.”
A Rare Aircraft with a Critical Mission
The WB-57F is a highly specialized, high-altitude research aircraft originally designed as a military bomber and later adapted by NASA for atmospheric and scientific missions. These aircraft routinely operate in the 60,000-foot range, gathering data that few platforms in the world can match.
At the time of the incident, NASA 927 was operating out of its home base at Ellington Field. While NASA has not publicly confirmed the purpose of the flight, the available information strongly suggests the aircraft was conducting a pilot proficiency flight: a routine operation designed to keep both pilots and aircraft prepared for upcoming missions.
Timeline of the Incident
Based on air traffic control recordings, ADS-B data and video evidence, here’s what we know so far:
- NASA 927 departed Ellington Field at approximately 9:20 AM local time
- The aircraft flew for roughly one hour before returning to the airport
- During the recovery, the crew performed a high-key approach, a maneuver typically used to simulate an engine-out landing
- The aircraft then transitioned into a standard left traffic pattern for Runway 17R
- The pilot reported “gear down” and requested a touch-and-go
- Air traffic control cleared the aircraft accordingly
That transmission (confirming gear down indication for a touch-and-go) would be the last radio call from NASA 927 before the landing.
Video footage later circulated online shows the aircraft touching down without its landing gear extended, sliding along the runway on its fuselage before coming to rest. Emergency vehicles were not staged along the runway, which appears to indicate that neither the crew nor air traffic control was aware of a landing gear issue prior to touchdown.
“As of now the big sad part is that we’re not sure whether or not [N927NA] is going to come back into flying status,” says LoRusso, “it’s far too early to tell. Of course it’s one of three airplanes, so a very very rare aircraft to go down”
Why the Gear-Up Landing Raises Important Questions
One of the most critical elements of this incident is the touch-and-go request. If the crew had been aware of a confirmed landing gear malfunction, such as missing cockpit indications or abnormal system feedback, they likely would have requested a low pass, visual confirmation from the tower or a planned belly landing with emergency equipment standing by.
Instead, the sequence of events strongly indicates the crew believed the gear was extended and functional.
Complicating matters further, the aircraft overtook a slower training aircraft in the pattern shortly before landing. According to ADS-B data, this pass occurred during the base leg, a high-workload phase of flight for a fast-moving jet. While it’s too early to draw conclusions, investigators will almost certainly examine whether cockpit workload, task saturation or distraction played any role.
Military-Style Phraseology and Human Factors
The pilot’s call of “gear down” is consistent with military aviation phraseology, which is commonly used by NASA pilots, many of whom are former military aviators. “That phraseology is almost automatic for these pilots,” says LoRusso, “and because of that it’s hard to say whether that was an automatic reflex… or whether or not the pilot actually checked and saw gear down and performed action to put gear down or whether the pilot at the time checked gear down, saw gear down… saw green three and didn’t know there was a mechanical issue.”
While this callout is standard in those operations, it raises an important question for investigators:
Was the phrase spoken as a verified checklist confirmation, or as an automatic habit pattern?
Determining whether the landing gear was commanded down, partially deployed or never extended at all will be a central focus of the investigation.
A Different Kind of Investigation: Public Use Aircraft
Unlike most civil aviation accidents, this incident involves a public use aircraft, which places it outside the standard FAA regulatory framework. “The aircraft only needs to be accountable to the agency, not the FAA,” says LoRusso. “A lot of people think public use means a license to do anything. That simply isn’t true.”
NASA aircraft operate under 41 CFR Part 102-33, a comprehensive set of federal regulations that governs public use aviation. Under this system:
- NASA aircraft are not subject to FAA airworthiness certification, but they still follow internal airworthiness and safety management systems.
- Maintenance, operational standards and safety programs are managed internally by the agency
- NASA, not the FAA, owns the aircraft and the accident scene
- The NTSB may or may not take the lead in the investigation
In some cases, the NTSB acts only as a liaison or conducts a parallel investigation. It remains to be seen how this investigation will proceed in the coming days.
Legal Implications and Federal Tort Considerations
Although no one was injured, this incident also highlights important legal complexities unique to government-operated aircraft. If there had been injuries, either to the crew or to someone on the ground, any civil action would likely involve the Federal Tort Claims Act, which governs lawsuits against the federal government.
These cases follow different procedures, timelines and immunity considerations than traditional aviation litigation, adding yet another layer of complexity to public use aircraft accidents.
Experts in Aviation
What Comes Next
At this early stage, many questions remain unanswered:
Was there a mechanical failure in the landing gear system?
Were cockpit indications misleading or incomplete?
Did workload or traffic sequencing play a role?
Will NASA return aircraft 927 to flying status or is this the end of its operational life?
What is clear is that this incident represents far more than a “simple” gear-up landing. It sits at the intersection of human factors, aircraft systems, public use regulations and aviation safety culture.
For the aviation community, and especially for those who admire NASA’s WB-57 program, it’s a sobering reminder of how quickly routine operations can turn into rare and consequential events.
As more information becomes available, further analysis will help shed light on what happened and, more importantly, what lessons can be learned to prevent similar incidents in the future.
Note: All reported details are preliminary and based on witness reports or publicly available information. Official findings will be determined by the investigating authority, which may include NASA with NTSB participation.
N927NA Flight Details
Flight N927NA was a routine flight at Houston-Ellington Field (EFD/KEFD).
- Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2026
- Time: c. 17:19 UTC (10:19 AM Local)
- Type: Martin WB-57F Canberra
- Registration: N927NA
- Manufacturer Serial Number (MSN): M.266
- Aircraft Damage: Under Evaluation
- Fatalities: 0
- Phase of Flight: Landing
- Location: Houston-Ellington Field, TX (EFD/KEFD)
- Departure Airport: Houston-Ellington Field, TX (EFD/KEFD)
- Destination Airport: Houston-Ellington Field, TX (EFD/KEFD)
About Joseph LoRusso, JD
Joseph LoRusso is the Director of Aviation at Ramos Law and a nationally recognized aviation attorney with more than 20 years of hands-on flight experience. A former professional flight instructor and Airline Transport Pilot, Joseph brings a rare dual perspective to every case—combining deep technical aviation knowledge with strategic legal advocacy for pilots, operators and crash victims.
Joseph holds multiple type ratings, including Learjet, Citation, Phenom 300E and Gulfstream GV (SIC) and has flown complex missions as an atmospheric research pilot, including NASA’s 2018 CAMP2EX global campaign. Whether analyzing aircraft performance, regulatory compliance or crash causation, Joe approaches every case with precision, credibility and an unwavering commitment to achieving results for his clients.
Contact Ramos Law
Ramos Law’s Aviation Division focuses exclusively on aviation-related matters, including aircraft crashes, FAA enforcement actions, certificate issues and complex regulatory and operational cases. The practice is led by attorney Joseph LoRusso, a licensed pilot with real-world flight experience and deep knowledge of aviation regulations.
Our team understands the technical, operational and legal issues unique to aviation incidents. If you or your family has been affected by an aviation crash or regulatory matter, contact Ramos Law to speak with an aviation attorney who understands the industry.
Experts in Aviation Law
Aircraft Crashes
Pilot Certificate Defense
FAA Medical Denial
FAA DUI Reporting
Civil Penalties
NTSB Appeals
And More!
