Shortly after departing from Tallahassee, Fla., on an instrument flight rules flight, the Mooney M20R abruptly lost all electrical power while operating in IMC. The pilot reported that, given the abrupt nature of the electrical power loss, he assumed it was due to a short circuit, so he did not troubleshoot the electrical problem.
He then descended to visual meteorological conditions and used a portable electronic device to navigate back toward the departure airport.
During the return flight, he was concerned about a possible electrical fire and smoke in the cockpit and wanted to land as soon as possible, so he chose not to perform the emergency procedure to manually extend the electrically actuated landing gear.
Upon reaching the airport, he conducted a gear-up landing, which resulted in substantial damage to the fuselage. There were no injuries.
A post-accident examination of the electrical system found that the No. 2 battery was inoperable and that the total loss of electrical power was likely caused by an internal electrical short of the battery.
When the electrical system’s redundant (No. 1) battery was selected, the electrical system operated normally. It is likely that, if the pilot had attempted to troubleshoot or isolate the electrical problem, he could have restored electrical power, extended the landing gear normally, and executed a precautionary landing without damaging the airplane. Alternatively, he could have manually extended the landing gear.
The NTSB determined the probable cause as the pilot’s failure to troubleshoot the in-flight electrical problem and restore power using the operable redundant battery and his decision not to manually extend the airplane’s landing gear, which resulted in a gear-up landing. Contributing to the accident was an internal electrical short of the No. 2 battery, which resulted in a total loss of electrical power.
NTSB Identification: ERA13LA363
This August 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.
The reason why I read this post was because a similar event took place while I was piloting my Mooney today.
I must first say that not in any way does this pilot deserve a kudos for preserving life. His actions put unnecessary risk and danger to himself, his passengers and to the general population. Imo this pilot should be grounded until further training has been successfully completed not to mention some serious deciplinary action brought forth. Just because this incident did not end in tragedy, should most definitely be described as what not to do!
I get the fact that there may have been smoke or may not, there may have been a fire or may not but a gear up landing without even an attempt to manually crank down?????? That is sheer ignorance!!! The only reason the pilot or any of his passenger walked away without injury is dumb luck!!! Could have been far worse!
Today I was on a VFR flight at 8500′ agl. I was 10 miles to my destination and had a total power loss. i had two passengers with me whom did. It notice that I had lost all electrical power just yet. The aircraft is still fully operational and I know the area very well!
I knew it was a battery issue and power was not going to be restored. The very first thing I did was manually crank down the landing gear, a couple of shakes of the rudder and I heard the gear lock into place. I found the field and called a friend I knew was on the ground to request a visual that my gear was down. He confirmed and we found ourselves on the ground safe and sound.
A gear up landing was not option for me!!!!
Hey JW, are you an instructor or something? Obvious not or you would not say stupid stuff like “according to some theories” . This was a real life emergency, maybe not handled perfectly but done well enough by this pilot to let everyone walk away unhurt.
You sound like you were up there with him you know so much. Not even the ntsb condemned this pilot like you do, they just determined that he could have tried this and that and the other.
Have you ever had an electrical fire in your cockpit? I have and let me tell you it is very scary when that smoke starts coming out of the panel and your copilot panics. Besides, electrical fires stink worse than you can imagine, choking you and making your eyes burn so you can hardly see. Of course I went by the book, master off, etc. Calmed down my wimp copilot, the smoke stopped after a long few minutes, but not the smell. Never dared to turn anything back on in the air and isolate the problem. Fortunately we were VFR and landed without radios at the nearest airport. It turned out that an old radio had burned up in the middle of the stack.
So if you have not been up there with them please refrain from Monday morning quarterbacking about things you only have theoretical knowledge. L
I have been a pilot, for 50 years next month, a CFI-ASMEL&I for 48 years, with over 15,000 hours flying, I have experienced, 2 inflight electrical fires in IMC, 1 engine fire also in IMC, 5 total radio failures in IMC and had a propeller come apart on takeoff, except for damage to the nose of the baron when the prop came apart, i have never bent any metal or for that fact scratched the paint on any airplane that i was operating.
I for one would not have been real happy if i had been IFR, 1000 ft below him when he decided to punch out of IMC and head for the airport,
I did not read that there was actually fire or smoke, only that he feared for that circumstance, Regardless of the thoughts going through his mind, he should have kept flying the airplane, that includes troubleshooting and trying to cure the problem, Had he simply done that, the problem would have gone away. His actions, or lack thereof, posed not only an unnecessary risk to himself, his passengers, everyone flying IMC in that area, and people on the ground, remember that gear up landing could have resulted in a fire.
This guy gets no KUDOs or attaboys from me, only encouragement to seek some serious retraining in procedures and systems.
I find the lack of training in systems, lack of knowledge of systems and how to use them, lack of basic stick and rudder skills, across the entire aviation spectrum to be appalling and as this case clearly demonstrates an unacceptable risk to life and limb.
He didn’t have an electrical fire, and the NTSB certainly did condemn this pilot:
The pilot’s failure to troubleshoot the in-flight electrical problem and restore power using the operable redundant battery and his decision not to manually extend the airplane’s landing gear, which resulted in a gear-up landing. Contributing to the accident was an internal electrical short of the No. 2 battery, which resulted in a total loss of electrical power.
I agree 100% with John Wesley.
But there was no smoke. No rush. We all pay for this with higher insurance rates.
All this is well and good, could’ve, should’ve (sounds like he wasn’t far from the airport and likely not much altitude so had little time to be monkeying with everything), but he walked away from it without injury and there is always another airplane.
Nor the point, had he simply followed the prescribed procedures for his airplane, it would not have gotten bent, his insurance would not have gone up and we would have 1 less accident statistic.
I agree with BJS. A fire in flight and an electrical system failure in IMC is not the place or time to screw around with trouble shooting all the potential sources of a major system failure. AVIGATE, NAVIGATE, communicate. It was not necessary, nor was it prudent for the pilot to divert attention from flying the aircraft in IMC. Rather the pilot immediately went to the backup system (the portable GPS). According to the report the odor of smoke then was detected in the cockpit. Fire demands IMMEDIATE action. None of the aircraft occupants were injured by the precautionary emergency landing. Performing correct actions, immediately and withut hesitation are the sole reason to carry hull insurance. As soon as the pilot detected smoke in the cockpit his duty was to protect his passengers and himself, not to preserve the machine. Kudos to him. Too bad for the arm chair critics.
Fully agreed. Kudos for aviating and protecting human life, first and foremost.
It doesn’t say anywhere there was smoke in the cockpit, it said he was concerned about possible smoke in the cockpit. I can think of no circumstance where assuming what the problem is and not even taking step one on the emergency checklist constitutes good airmanship. He seriously didn’t make any attempt whatsoever to figure it out, even once he had gotten into VMC? By this logic we should all just crash land at the end of every flight. Hey, human life was preserved, right? Wow.
According to some theories, He was lucky, so now his luck bag is lighter and his experience bag is heavier, NOT.
had he been properly trained, properly prepared and followed the procedures for his airplane, his bag of luck would still be full and his airplane not bent. Skill trumps luck everytime.