A CFI and private pilot were attempting to do a two-leg cross-country flight in a Cirrus SR20. Before takeoff from Danbury, Conn., the CFI used a flashlight to look in the fuel tanks and determined they contained 25 gallons of usable fuel, and that the flight would require 23.3 gallons of fuel. He then entered 22 gallons in the airplane’s multifunction display (MFD) fuel totalizer. The airplane reached its destination airport and landed without incident. He did not refuel.
Shortly after takeoff for the return flight, the low fuel caution light illuminated, then the engine lost power. The CFI deployed the airplane’s parachute system and the Cirrus descended into trees about three miles northeast of the airport.
The post-accident examination of the airplane did not reveal any mechanical malfunctions or failures, however less than one gallon of fuel was drained from the fuel tanks.
The president of the flight school stated that, two days before the accident, he had 42 gallons of fuel added to the fuel tanks. He then entered 40 gallons in the airplane’s MFD fuel totalizer. He flew two more flights and estimated that the fuel totalizer should have indicated between 14 and 16 gallons before the first leg of the accident flight.
Recorded MFD data showed that the total amount of fuel used since the last refueling was 42.4 gallons. Investigators determined that it was likely that the flight instructor overestimated the amount of fuel in the airplane before departure and entered the wrong amount into the MFD fuel totalizer, which led to an erroneous display of the actual amount of fuel remaining and his belief that the airplane had sufficient fuel for the flight.
The NTSB attributed the accident to fuel exhaustion caused by the flight instructor’s inadequate preflight inspection in which he incorrectly estimated the airplane’s fuel quantity and his improper reliance on the fuel totalizer rather than the fuel quantity indicating and warning systems to determine the fuel on board.
NTSB Identification: ERA13LA117
This January 2013 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.
So they were using a fuel totalizer to determine fuel on board based on SWAG’s of fuel in the tanks ? Dosn’t that fancy aircraft come with a fuel guage system ?
And as an added commnet, any CFI that would launch on a X-Country flight with such marginal fuel reserves does not deserve to be a CFI. Can’t think of any reason why they would not fill that tanks first, maybe cost or too much time/trouble, neither of which compares to the cost and trouble of recovering the airframe and getting it back in the air after this demonstration of stupidity.
The CFI was both,Dumb and Dumber,and gives us Flight Instructors a bad name.
What a moron! This kind of crap gives us all a lot of grief.
This was just sloppy work on the part of the CFI that could have gotten his student killed.
You don’t use a flashlight to check fuel levels unless you use it to illuminate the dipstick calibrated to that aircraft.
In this case the dip stick was holding the flashlight.
Any CFI that doesn’t keep a hour’s flight time of fuel in reserve should not be a CFI. Three gallons of fuel in my car provides slightly more than one hour’s operation. Would love to have an aircraft so efficient.
Too many pilots and CFI’s relying on computers instead of brains and good old aviation skills, Kudos to the FAA for dropping added Sim time for Instrument, now just eliminate Sim from hours requirement for new certs and ratings. Allow for transitions and recurring.
Sims can be a useful tool. I don’t understand how you can blame sim time for inadequate fuel planning? Destination plus an hour is the same in both the Sim and real life.