The Associated Press reported on the incident at the time and again in June, but it received little notice nationwide. Now, fresh reporting from Wired last week helped breathe new life into the circumstances surrounding the crash, and it took on a life of its own on social media on Tuesday.

Such was the crescendo of fresh scrutiny that the NTSB was compelled to release a statement on Wednesday saying it is still “actively investigating the crash” and that investigators have “not yet determined the probable cause or any contributing factors to the accident.”

An NTSB spokesperson reiterated to the Washington Examiner that “the crash is still under investigation — and as the statement notes — no causes or contributing factors have been determined at this time,” but declined to answer additional questions.

What happened?

Trans Aero MedEvac runs the medical evacuation company and partners with Generation Jets for its flights.

The Beechcraft King Air C90 plane took off from Roswell Air Center around 11:52 p.m. local time on May 14. It was a clear night, but visibility was low due to a lack of moonlight and limited ground light due to the area’s sparse population.

Within three minutes, the pilots reached out to the Albuquerque Air Route Traffic Control Center to request an instrument flight rules clearance to Sierra Blanca airport. Flying under an instrument flight rules plan means pilots rely on the instruments and systems within the cockpit rather than looking out the windows, and air traffic control helps ensure they keep a safe distance from other aircraft.

Around eight minutes after takeoff, air traffic controllers informed the pilots that their aircraft was at 13,000 feet above mean sea level, about 1,000 feet higher than their assigned altitude. The pilots responded that they were correcting their altitude and noted that they had lost GPS capabilities. Air traffic controllers helped them get headed in the right direction to their intended destination.

At 12:05 a.m., the ARTCC supervisor contacted the military and asked them to stop the navigation jamming, four minutes after the controller asked the supervisor to make the request. ADS-B flight data had been recorded in two- to three-second intervals, but at 11:58 p.m., it began recording at about one-minute intervals. By 12:07 a.m., after the call, the ADS-B data collection returned to recording at two- to three-second intervals.

At 12:08 a.m., the pilots informed air traffic control that they had “a visual on Ruidoso” when they were about 31 miles northeast of the airport. As a result of that transmission, the air traffic controller cleared the flight for a visual approach and said they could cancel the IFR, which the pilots said they would do “in just a couple of minutes.”

The key distinction is that when pilots are flying on a visual approach, they use their line of sight to fly the aircraft and are themselves responsible for ensuring they do not endanger other aircraft. When an aircraft is flying under IFR clearance, the Federal Aviation Administration is responsible for making sure there is separation between it and others in the sky.

“For instrument flight rules, the FAA is responsible for providing separation from other air traffic, maintaining safe distances. During visual flight rules, the pilot is responsible for safe separation from air traffic, and the ground, using visual references,” retired Gen. Glen VanHerck, the former commander of U.S. Northern Command and the North American Aerospace Defense Command, told the Washington Examiner. “In this case, it is my understanding from public information, the pilot stated he had the airport environment in sight, or what’s commonly referenced as ‘visual.’ [Upon] being cleared a visual approach, which is an instrument flight rules clearance, the pilot assumes responsibility for maintaining safe separation, or using visual references.”

Two minutes later, the air traffic control supervisor informed the military that the airplane was on a visual approach and they could resume their jamming activities. Less than a minute after that transmission was made to the military, the ADS-B began collecting data again in about 1-minute intervals. With the decision to return to a visual approach, the pilots were directly responsible for getting the aircraft to Sierra Bianca airport. The problem is that they did not see the Capitan Mountains in their way.

The crash led to a post-impact fire, which turned into a forest fire.

The four people killed on board the Beechcraft King Air propeller plane were: the two pilots, Keelan Clark and Ali Kawsara, and two nurses, Sarah Clark and Jamie Novick.

“Our hearts remain with the families and loved ones navigating an unimaginable loss,” said Matt Goertz, Vice President of Trans Aero MedEvac. “Sarah and Jamie embodied what it means to care for others. Their commitment to their patients and their teammates will never be forgotten, and their impact will continue to live on within our organization and the communities they served.”

“This tragedy has deeply affected every member of the Generation Jets family,” said Monty Renfro, president and CEO of Generation Jets, a private aviation company. “Keelan and Ali’s professionalism and dedication will never be forgotten.”

Three additional nearby aircraft also lost GPS, and air traffic control had to assist them.

VanHerck said, “From the publicly available information, it appears to me that proper coordination occurred, and proper procedures were followed. I suspect the NTSB report will determine that the pilot lost situational awareness while transitioning to visual references, resulting in the accident.”

On the question of how difficult it is to fly without GPS, he added, “Well, we flew for 100 years without GPS. Orville and Wilbur [Wright] didn’t have it. Looking outside the airplane is not that hard to do, and there are other means of navigation besides GPS. Losing GPS navigation, including due to GPS jamming, should not cause loss of control of an aircraft.”

Bigger picture

This is not the first time domestic military activities have resulted in civilian aviation fatalities.

In January 2025, a commercial aircraft collided with an Army Black Hawk helicopter over the Potomac River near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, resulting in the deaths of 67 people. It was the deadliest U.S. aviation disaster since 2001. Investigators said the FAA failed for years to address known safety risks in the airspace around Reagan National Airport, which set the conditions for last year’s deadly midair collision.

More recently, in February 2026, the FAA imposed a 10-day flight restriction over El Paso International Airport and near the border, catching local and federal officials by surprise, only to reverse the decision hours later. Officials initially said a drone incursion by a Mexican cartel prompted the airspace closure, but it turns out Customs and Border Protection officers fired an anti-drone laser without coordinating with the FAA.

“The way it works, and it appears all worked correctly during the time frame of this incident, is when the military is going to utilize airspace, they publish that through the FAA in what is called a Notice to Airmen, for the world to see. The FAA opens and closes the airspace at the request of the military,” VanHerck said, adding, “civilian aircraft, flying in proximity to published GPS jamming for test and training purposes, experience GPS interference routinely.”

These incidents highlight the importance of clear lines of communication not only between the FAA and the Pentagon, but also the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and other state and local agencies.

FAA INVESTIGATING SAFETY VIOLATION INCIDENT INVOLVING MARINE ONE

None of these three incidents involved a U.S. adversary trying to sabotage U.S. aircraft, but the latest incident represents a growing concern about air threats, which can include anything from drones to GPS jamming, lasers, electronic warfare, and more. These are all areas in which the U.S. military is pursuing its own advancements, including defensive systems to counter adversaries’ growing capabilities.

The Pentagon directed the Washington Examiner to the 704th Test Group, which did not respond to a request for comment. West Sands Missile Range also did not respond to a request for comment.