Pilots reveal their systems knowledge, or betray its shortcomings, in subtle ways. A misconfigured short-field takeoff; sloppy go-around; or a flat, long landing hint at the need for more cockpit time, and more book time. Pilots also betray gaps in their system knowledge in not-so-subtle ways—such as by having an accident.
That was the National Transportation Safety Board’s conclusion when a Piper Arrow retractable single lost electrical power and experienced a main-gear collapse on landing in Culpeper, Virginia, on October 6, 2011.
Losing electrical power during departure, the pilot decided to return to the airport.
“On the downwind leg of the traffic pattern, the pilot moved the landing gear lever to the down position but did not see the three green lights or hear the landing gear extend,” said the NTSB online accident summary. “He then called a maintenance facility located at the airport and asked them to verify if the landing gear was down while he performed a low pass over the runway. The maintenance personnel indicated that the gear was not down; the pilot attempted an emergency gear extension procedure. After another low pass, the maintenance personnel stated that the gear was extended, and the pilot landed the airplane. During the landing roll, the right main landing gear collapsed, and the airplane veered off the runway, impacting a runway light, which resulted in substantial damage to the right wing.”
A post-accident examination of the airplane “revealed that the battery had been removed, and, therefore, the reason for an electrical failure could not be determined,” the NTSB said, adding that “examination and operation of the landing gear revealed no anomalies.”
The pilot had owned the airplane for about eight years, accumulating “1,650 hours of flight time in the make and model; however, the pilot could not successfully perform or articulate the emergency gear extension procedure. The pilot was also unable to locate the emergency landing gear extension procedure in the pilot’s operating handbook.”
The NTSB’s determination of the probable cause was “the pilot’s inadequate knowledge of the airplane’s emergency gear extension procedures, which resulted in his failure to successfully perform a manual extension of the landing gear.”
A pilot and passenger were injured October 17, 2011, in Atlanta, Georgia, when a Cessna 172F ran out of fuel six miles from the destination and crashed in a residential area. The pilot believed the aircraft held more than an hour’s worth of fuel beyond what was needed for the flight. But a miscalculation and other complications took their toll.
“According to the pilot, prior to departure, he calculated that he had 3.5 hours of usable fuel for the two-hour, 15-minute flight,” the report said. “He also indicated that the airplane’s average fuel consumption was eight gallons per hour.”
The pilot performed a preflight and said the fuel gauges indicated “about three-quarters full, which he believed to be about 20 to 30 gallons of fuel. During climbout, the oil door on the engine cowling opened, and the pilot returned to the departure airport to close it. After landing, the pilot taxied to the ramp to secure the door and then departed again.”
The flight “was uneventful, but, when the airplane was on a gradual descent about six miles from the destination airport, the engine lost total power. The pilot attempted to continue to the destination airport, but the airplane descended into trees and impacted the ground in a residential area, resulting in substantial damage to the fuselage, wings, and empennage. A post-accident examination of the airplane revealed that the fuel tanks were not breached; recovery personnel removed a total of 1.5 gallons of fuel from the airplane.”
Noting no engine anomalies preventing normal operation, the NTSB commented on the pilot’s systems knowledge: “The pilot believed that the airplane had a fuel capacity of 42 gallons. According to the owner’s manual, the airplane had a fuel capacity of 39 gallons, of which 36 gallons were usable.”
Probable cause of the accident was determined as “the pilot’s inadequate preflight planning, which resulted in a total loss of engine power caused by fuel exhaustion.”
Could your POH provide an insight, or refresh a clouded memory about a performance figure, emergency procedure, or other bit of vital information?
Dan Namowitz is an aviation writer and flight instructor. He has been a pilot since 1985 and an instructor since 1990.
Related Articles
