Nascar Legend Greg Biffle, His Family & Friends Killed In Plane Crash

Greg Biffle, one of NASCAR’s 75 Greatest Drivers who became known in his later years for his humanitarian work, died along with three family members in a plane crash Thursday. He was 55. More here. Also killed were 3 friends. How horrible for the families of those lost, especially if they saw the video of the crash. The plane burst into flames and created a trail of fire as it skidded along the runway area. After such devastating losses, the holidays for those families will never be the same. May they all R.I.P. Article below the video.
https://www.nascar.com/news-media/2...mily-die-in-plane-crash-nascar-legend-was-55/

For anyone who doesn’t know, he (Greg Biffle) spent last fall using his own helicopter to help deliver supplies to hurricane victims in North Carolina and Tennessee. Terrible loss for the NASCAR community and all of those close to the Biffle family.

May everyone on that plane rest in peace.

OneEyedDiva said:

I was going to add that but thought perhaps they would have included that in the article. So thank you for doing it. How wonderful of him to have helped in that manner.

Click to expand...

You're welcome. Just two months ago he posted a long video commemorating the 1 year anniversary of the hurricane which shows a bunch of his helicopter footage.

While the NTSB's final report is still pending, the January 30, 2026, preliminary report strongly points to an electrical power issue that likely originated from the aircraft's generators.
According to the NTSB's documented findings:

• Generator Disconnection: During the flight, Greg Biffle (a passenger) specifically asked the pilot if power was flowing to the "alternator". (The Cessna Citation 550 actually uses engine-driven generators, not alternators).
  
• Resolution after the Inquiry: Seconds after Biffle asked this question, the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) audio quality—which had been severely degraded due to low voltage—suddenly improved, and the pilot stated they had identified the "problem".
  
• Checklist Failure: Aviation experts and investigators suggest that the crew may have failed to properly engage the generators after engine start, leaving the aircraft to run solely on battery power until it was nearly depleted.
  
• Impact of Electrical Loss: This likely caused the left-side instrument failures, the loss of GPS data, and the failure of the landing gear indicator lights, leading to a high-workload environment and eventual spatial disorientation in low-visibility weather.
  
• Engines were Functional: The NTSB confirmed there was no evidence of engine failure. Both engines were producing power at the time of impact, indicating the electrical issue was likely a configuration or system failure rather than a loss of engine power.

On a Cessna Citation 550, the pilot must ensure the generator switches are in the proper position for them to "come online" and provide power to the aircraft.

How the System Works

• Dual-Purpose Unit: The aircraft uses "starter-generators." During the start sequence, these units act as electric motors to spin the engines. Once the engine is running, they switch roles to act as generators.
• Manual Control: There are three switch positions: GEN, OFF, and RESET.
  
  • GEN: Allows the Generator Control Unit (GCU) to connect the generator to the main DC bus once engine speed is sufficient.
  • OFF: The generator remains disconnected and will not power the aircraft or charge the battery.
• Standard Procedure: While many pilots leave the switches in the GEN position, the Checklist requires verifying they are active after start. If the engines are started from an external power unit, the switches are specifically kept OFF to prevent the generators from fighting the external power source.

The NTSB Preliminary Report suggests the crew may have forgotten to ensure the generators were online:

• Battery Drain: If the generators were not engaged, the entire plane—including critical flight instruments and the radio—would have been running solely on the onboard battery.
  
• The "Problem" Solved: Just before the crash, Greg Biffle asked about the "alternator" power. Immediately after this inquiry, the Cockpit Voice Recorder audio quality (which had been failing due to low voltage) suddenly returned to normal. The pilot then stated they had found the "problem," which investigators believe was a manually disconnected or un-reset generator.

By the time they likely realized the error, the battery was nearly depleted, causing the cascading instrument failures and loss of situational awareness that led to the accident.

There is a safety feature—a bright Master Warning light and individual "Gen Off" lights. If both generators are off, the panel should have been glowing with warnings. In this crash, the crew likely missed or ignored these visual cues during their unstabilized approach.

Modern "glass cockpit" jets now have EICAS (Engine Indicating and Crew Alerting Systems) that provide loud, intrusive aural warnings ("Beep-Beep-Beep") if you try to take off with an improper configuration. Biffle's 44-year-old jet simply relied on the pilot's eyes to catch the warning lights.

May all those involved in this helicopter crash rest in peace.

How awful, may they all RIP

Unqualified Flight Crew
The primary pilot, Dennis Dutton, had a license limitation requiring a qualified second-in-command (SIC) to be present. His son, Jack Dutton, was in the co-pilot seat but was not qualified to serve as SIC for the Cessna Citation 550. While Greg Biffle was a licensed pilot, he was seated in the rear passenger area and was not flying the plane.

This is a requirement under federal aviation law, specifically Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
The Cessna Citation 550 is a transport-category jet that was originally type-certificated by the FAA to require a minimum flight crew of two pilots—a Pilot-in-Command (PIC) and a Second-in-Command (SIC).

The really sad thing about it is, had there been a qualified Second-in-Command, in all likelihood, that pilot would have flipped the switch to activate the generator as part of the startup routine. It would have been just another uneventful flight, and everyone who died in that crash would likely be alive today.

Before I make any comments, I want everyone to understand that I have very little experience flying small aircraft. I flew the Cessna 150 & 172 in flight school, which now seems to have been 100 years ago. However, no matter if we are flying a small plane or a big jumbo jet, "the fundamental principles" of flying are the same.

I have read the few incomplete and early NTSB reports and after studying their findings, it appears to me that a few things went wrong on this flight from unexperienced pilots to avionic failures. The report is still in its investigative role, so I think it may be premature for me to come to report any conclusion as to why the plane really went down.

It is my experience that when the NTSB does an investigation of an accident, they do it in sequence as if they were flying the plane and by using the step by step procedures that were used to get the plane airborne. During my career, I was consulted by the NTSB only a few times for my opinion on certain facets of a crash and the immediate issues with any failures of parts, etc.

For example; in 1991, a Boeing 737 crashed while the plane was attempting to land in Colorado Springs. Initially, the NTSB could not come to any reasonable conclusion for the accident. As time passed, another Boeing 737 also crashed in a similar fashion with no determination being made. It was a stroke of luck that a third B-737 had the same issue, but God was watching over that plane as the pilot was able to pull out of his sharp descent and was able to communicate with the NTSB investigators as to what he experienced. From there, the investigators had an idea as where they needed to look for an answer.

One thing about the NTSB is that they will stay with a case until it is resolved, whether it takes days, weeks, months, or years. I was consulted with as a B-737 pilot if I had experienced anything like that and of course, I hadn't.

After several different tests and a few millions of dollars, it was determined that these crashes were caused by a failure of the main rudder power control unit servo valve*. I believe it stuck open or wouldn't open. Not sure which. This valve operates the rudders, which we will just say they are located on the tail, along with a few other important parts to make the plane go up and down. (I am using layman terms.)

Getting back to Biffle's plane. I think I am safe in saying that to start with, the wrong pilots were operating the plane. From what I read, the two engines were not responding the same, the pilots were attempting to fly using IFR and then VFR and back to IFR. On top of that, there were some issues with the instruments, which leads me to believe that the two men attempting to fly the plane had a lot going on all at the same time and if the pilots were lacking experience, they add to the problems.

(When one engine operates at a higher velocity than the other engine, the plane will most likely tend to push the plane from that side causing the plane to fly stronger to one side than the other. This is not good, but usually this problem alone does not cause a crash. Passenger jets are designed to fly with only one engine.)

Another real issue is that the plane's altitude wasn't very high, so time was limited to fix the issues at hand before the plane hits the ground. I am going to continue to follow the investigation, but I am relatively sure that the lack of experience will enter into the final determination.

*BTW, the valve that malfunctioned on the B-737's was manufactured by Parker Hannifin. (Sorry for the long post.)