• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
General Aviation News

General Aviation News

Because flying is cool

  • Pictures of the Day
    • Submit Picture of the Day
  • Stories
    • News
    • Features
    • Opinion
    • Products
    • NTSB Accidents
    • ASRS Reports
  • Comments
  • Classifieds
    • Place Classified Ad
  • Events
  • Digital Archives
  • Subscribe
  • Show Search
Hide Search

Fuel starvation for Mooney

By NTSB · August 29, 2013 ·

Aircraft: Mooney M20C. Injuries: 1 Minor. Location: Allen, Okla. Aircraft damage: Substantial.

What reportedly happened: The pilot was on a cross country flight with the fuel selector set to the left tank when the engine quit.

He attempted to restore fuel to the engine by switching to the right tank, which contained fuel. The pilot said he was too low to attempt an engine restart, so he elected to perform a gear-up landing in a field.

The airplane’s fuselage and right wing sustained substantial damage during the landing.

Probable cause: A total loss of engine power in flight due to fuel starvation as a result of the pilot’s inadequate fuel management.

NTSB Identification: CEN11CA609

This August 2011 accident report is provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. Published as an educational tool, it is intended to help pilots learn from the misfortunes of others.

About NTSB

The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent federal agency charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation accident in the United States and significant events in the other modes of transportation, including railroad, transit, highway, marine, pipeline, and commercial space. It determines the probable causes of accidents and issues safety recommendations aimed at preventing future occurrences.

Reader Interactions

Share this story

  • Share on Twitter Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook Share on Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit Share on Reddit
  • Share via Email Share via Email

Become better informed pilot.

Join 110,000 readers each month and get the latest news and entertainment from the world of general aviation direct to your inbox, daily.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Curious to know what fellow pilots think on random stories on the General Aviation News website? Click on our Recent Comments page to find out. Read our Comment Policy here.

Comments

  1. Buford Suffridge says

    August 30, 2013 at 4:46 pm

    I’m a low hour private pilot (290 hours, 150 of it in a Cessna 182) so someone needs to set me straight on a question I have? I constantly see where plane after plane crashes because the selector is on one tank which runs empty while the other one held fuel. I NEVER start my engine without the selector on both tanks. Why do so many pilots fly on one tank? Is it stupidity or is there a reason that I’m unaware of? Not once did either of the two CFI’s I’ve had tell me to fly with the selector only on one tank, nor did the FAA examiner who gave me my check ride. Practically the first item on my check list is: Selector on both.

    • John cavanagh says

      August 30, 2013 at 8:42 pm

      Unlike Cessna’s both selector,the mooney has only left or right choice

    • Rob Pippins says

      September 9, 2013 at 6:30 am

      Not only mooneys! Most, if not all low wing aircraft have a fuel selector knob because gravity does not play a roll in fuel to the engine as it does on a high wing aircraft. Fuel management is a major task in any aircraft, but on these its a bit different. On start up, you choose one tank. Taxi, on the same tank and then switch before run up. Run on this tank for 30 min. Switch tanks with fuel pump on and run for an hour if on a long cx then swap again. The idea is to use the tanks fuel supply equally as to not off set the weight of the plane. As I stated, it’s another thing to have to manage in a low wing but if its what your used to, as anything else, you just do it. I find that fuel starvation stories typically come from older pilots and those with high hours trying to stretch the limits of fuel and make longer legs. Had they just swooped down for 15 min, topped off and continued, they would either still be alive or had a flyable plane the next day. Plan for 1-2 gal more burned, 30 min less than FAA says and calculate while you fly like you did when you started and there should be no reason pilot error should cause the statistic. Just my thoughts.

  2. Pete says

    August 29, 2013 at 7:42 am

    Why was he too low? If he was too low for an engine restart, he should’ve been near an airport or on an approach to land. Doesn’t make sense.

    • chuck says

      September 2, 2013 at 8:14 am

      “too low” is a function of risk tolerance, not an absolute.

  3. Mooney 9242V says

    August 29, 2013 at 6:04 am

    But, I bet he had a current third class medical certificate. Ask the pilot if givena choice, would he get a medical or an anual hour of dual instruction on emergency procedures, not FAA regulations!

© 2025 Flyer Media, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy.

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Comment Policy
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Writer’s Guidelines
  • Photographer’s Guidelines