Second ATC Recording Surfaces of Learjet That Crashed in Palm Beach County, Killing Nine, Raising New Questions About Aircraft’s Troubled Flight History

Previously recorded air traffic control communications involving the same Learjet 60 that crashed in Palm Beach County, killing nine people, have surfaced from a flight over New Jersey months before the disaster. The recording raises new questions about the aircraft’s operational history, its exposure to severe turbulence, and whether an earlier incident warrants closer examination by federal investigators.

A newly circulated air traffic control recording involving the Learjet 60 that crashed in South Florida on November 1, 2026, has introduced another potentially significant piece of evidence into the public discussion surrounding the deadly accident. The audio reportedly captures the same aircraft experiencing substantial altitude deviations while flying through turbulent conditions near New York and New Jersey in May 2026, approximately six months before its fatal flight.

The aircraft, identified by registration number N722BD, was the same Learjet 60 that went down in a residential area of Palm Beach County while traveling from Austin, Texas, to the Bahamas. All nine people aboard were killed, including the aircraft’s two pilots. The earlier recording is particularly noteworthy because investigators examining the November crash are also looking into the aircraft’s structural condition after pieces of its left elevator, a critical flight-control surface on the tail, were discovered miles from the main wreckage.

However, there is an important distinction between the two events: The May recording does not establish that the aircraft suffered structural damage, that any maintenance was neglected, or that the earlier turbulence contributed to the November crash. Those questions require technical evidence, maintenance documentation, and an official investigation.

What the Second Air Traffic Control Recording Reveals

The recording, reportedly captured in May 2026 in the congested airspace surrounding Teterboro and Newark, New Jersey, involves an aircraft identified as N722BD struggling to maintain its assigned altitude of approximately 4,000 feet. According to the account accompanying the audio, the aircraft experienced altitude fluctuations of approximately 400 to 700 feet while encountering turbulent conditions. The deviations were substantial enough that an air traffic controller questioned the severity of the turbulence the crew was experiencing.

When the controller reportedly asked whether the conditions amounted to severe turbulence rather than moderate chop, the flight crew answered affirmatively. The aircraft ultimately landed safely. There is no confirmed public evidence in the material currently available that the May flight resulted in an accident investigation, a documented structural defect, or a subsequent maintenance violation.

Nevertheless, the recording has attracted attention because it concerns the same individual aircraft, not simply another Learjet of the same model. For investigators, the registration number matters. Although pilots, passengers, routes, and operating conditions can change from flight to flight, an aircraft’s maintenance and inspection history follows the airframe. That makes the May encounter a potentially relevant event to examine as investigators reconstruct the aircraft’s operational history.

Were the Same Pilots Flying the Aircraft in May?

One of the most important unanswered questions concerns the identities of the pilots heard in the earlier recording. The November crash killed Captain Jeff Gregory, 55, and First Officer Nathalia Gadelha Filgueiras, 20. Filgueiras was a young South Florida aviator whose death has drawn considerable attention, particularly following an emotional public appearance by her family.

However, there is no publicly confirmed evidence establishing that Gregory or Filgueiras was operating N722BD during the May flight. The aircraft operated in the charter market, where crews may change between assignments. Its reported operator, Aurora Aviation, doing business as Upper Jet, could have assigned different pilots to the aircraft on different dates.

Although some aviation enthusiasts have speculated about the voices heard in the recordings, comparing voices is not a reliable substitute for flight manifests, crew assignment records, or official confirmation. The identities of the May pilots therefore remain unknown, and attributing that flight’s handling or turbulence encounter to either member of the November crew would be premature.

The November 1 Crash: A Routine Flight Turns Into a Catastrophe

The November flight departed Austin-Bergstrom International Airport at approximately 9:37 a.m. Central Time, carrying seven passengers and two pilots to North Eleuthera in the Bahamas. The aircraft traveled across the southeastern United States before approaching a broad area of thunderstorms over South Florida.

As the jet approached Florida, its crew received permission to deviate around hazardous weather and descended from 41,000 feet to 35,000 feet. At approximately 12:47 p.m., the pilots reported an outside air temperature of minus 47 degrees Celsius, light clear icing, and moderate turbulence producing altitude fluctuations of approximately 600 to 700 feet.

The crew subsequently encountered precipitation and requested clearance to climb to 37,000 feet in search of improved conditions. Within moments of beginning that climb, the aircraft entered a rapidly accelerating descent. Radio communications captured the crew declaring an emergency, reporting an overspeed condition, and describing a descent rate reaching approximately 20,000 feet per minute. Flight tracking information subsequently showed an even more extreme descent before the aircraft disappeared from radar near Greenacres.

The jet struck the ground at approximately 12:49 p.m., killing everyone aboard. The impact left a large crater, scattered wreckage across the surrounding area, and forced nearby residents from their homes. The sequence of events has been documented through flight tracking information, recorded radio communications, and preliminary statements from federal investigators.

Investigators Recover Pieces of the Aircraft’s Tail Miles From the Crash Site

One of the most consequential developments in the investigation involves the discovery of separated components from the aircraft’s left elevator. The elevator is a movable aerodynamic surface attached to the horizontal stabilizer at the rear of an aircraft. It plays a central role in controlling pitch, allowing pilots to raise or lower the aircraft’s nose.

According to the investigative information provided, three pieces of the left elevator were recovered approximately 1.3 to 3.8 miles from the main crash site. Their locations suggest that portions of the aircraft separated before ground impact. That discovery introduces several possible scenarios, each requiring a different technical explanation.

One possibility is that an existing structural weakness or mechanical failure contributed to a loss of control. Another is that the aircraft first encountered an aerodynamic upset, entered an extreme descent, and subsequently experienced structural damage because of excessive aerodynamic loads. Investigators must also consider the potential interaction of turbulence, icing, aircraft speed, flight-control inputs, and the structural limits of the Learjet 60.

The distinction is critical: Finding aircraft components miles from the crash site can help establish that an in-flight breakup occurred, but it does not automatically establish what initiated the emergency. The NTSB has confirmed that debris was recovered away from the primary impact location and that the wreckage is being collected for further examination. Its November 5 update emphasized the importance of recovering even small pieces that could provide evidence about the accident.

Could the May Turbulence Encounter Be Connected to the Fatal Crash?

The emergence of the earlier recording raises a question that investigators may need to answer: Did the aircraft experience an unusually severe turbulence event months before the accident, and, if so, was it appropriately inspected afterward?

Severe turbulence can impose significant loads on an aircraft, although an encounter does not necessarily cause structural damage. Aircraft are engineered to withstand demanding operating conditions, and the need for a subsequent inspection depends on the circumstances, applicable maintenance instructions, and aircraft operating limitations.

If the May flight involved a qualifying severe-turbulence encounter, relevant records could include pilot reports, maintenance logbook entries, inspection findings, and any subsequent repairs. Investigators could examine whether the aircraft experienced additional turbulence events, whether any flight-control concerns were documented, and whether its maintenance history reveals a recurring problem.

However, the May recording alone cannot establish that an inspection was required, that an inspection was missed, or that the aircraft was unsafe to fly. The NTSB has not publicly confirmed that the May recording is part of its investigation, nor has it identified a causal connection between the earlier flight and the November accident.

The Aircraft’s Maintenance Records Could Become Crucial Evidence

N722BD was a Learjet 60 manufactured in 2004, making it approximately 22 years old at the time of the crash. It was registered to LR60271 LLC and operated by Aurora Aviation, doing business as Upper Jet, under Part 135 charter operations. The aircraft’s age does not, by itself, indicate that it was unsafe. Business jets can remain in service for decades when maintained in accordance with applicable regulations and manufacturer requirements.

Nevertheless, the aircraft’s history is especially relevant given the reported separation of elevator components and the earlier turbulence encounter. Investigators may examine maintenance inspections, structural repairs, flight-control adjustments, component replacements, service bulletins, and any documented discrepancies involving the tail assembly. They will also need to determine whether any recovered structural components show evidence of fatigue, corrosion, pre-existing cracks, or overload failure.

Such distinctions often require detailed laboratory analysis. A fracture that developed gradually over time may leave different physical characteristics from one caused by a sudden overload during an uncontrolled descent. These examinations could ultimately help establish whether structural failure contributed to the loss of control or occurred after the aircraft was already descending beyond its normal operating envelope.

Nine Lives Lost, Including a Young South Florida Pilot

The November disaster killed all nine people aboard, including the two pilots, a family traveling with young children, and other passengers headed to the Bahamas. Among the victims was 20 year old First Officer Nathalia Gadelha Filgueiras, whose aviation career began at a young age in South Florida. Her death has resonated throughout the regional aviation community, particularly among those familiar with her determination to become a professional pilot.

Her family’s public remarks following the tragedy brought an intensely personal dimension to an investigation otherwise dominated by flight data, technical analysis, and questions about aircraft performance. For the families of all nine victims, determining what happened in the final moments of the flight remains an urgent concern. Whether the accident resulted from an aerodynamic upset, a mechanical problem, a structural failure, a combination of factors, or another cause has not yet been established.

What Happens Next in the Federal Investigation?

The National Transportation Safety Board is leading the investigation, identified as ERA27MA026, with support from the Federal Aviation Administration and other participating organizations.

Investigators are examining the wreckage, available flight data, air traffic control communications, weather conditions, and the aircraft’s operational and maintenance history. The earlier May recording provides an additional potential avenue of inquiry, particularly if flight records confirm the reported encounter and establish whether it warranted inspection or other follow up.

Several questions remain unresolved: Who was flying N722BD in May? How severe were the conditions encountered? Were any aircraft discrepancies documented afterward? What caused the November loss of control? And did the left elevator separate before or after the aircraft entered its extreme descent?

The answers will require evidence rather than speculation.

For now, the most important finding is also the most limited: The same Learjet involved in the fatal November crash was reportedly captured in an earlier recording experiencing significant turbulence related altitude deviations. That history may be relevant, but the recording does not prove a mechanical connection between the flights. As federal investigators work to reconstruct the final seconds of N722BD, the newly circulated audio adds another question to an already complex investigation: Was the aircraft’s earlier encounter simply an unrelated episode of severe weather, or was there something in its operational history that deserved closer examination? Until investigators complete their work, that question remains unanswered.

Sources & Further Reading

• National Transportation Safety Board — Official Learjet 60 Investigation, ERA27MA026

• The Florida Learjet Was Warned Once Before — May ATC Recording (YouTube)

• Flightradar24 — Learjet 60 Crash Flight Data and Timeline

• Associated Press — Investigators Examine Evidence of Midair Breakup

• Aviation Week — Icing, Turbulence and Aircraft Investigation

• Reuters — Nine Killed in South Florida Learjet Crash