• 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

Bellanca suffers fuel starvation during transition from auxiliary tank

By NTSB · February 5, 2016 ·

The Bellanca 17-30A was cruising at 8,500 feet when the engine experienced a partial loss of power. The pilot switched the fuel selector from the auxiliary tank to the left main fuel tank.

During the transition, the engine experienced another loss of power.

The pilot was unable to restore the power, so he shut down the engine and made a forced landing on a road near Santa Rosa, N.M.

During the landing roll, the plane veered off the right side of the road and hit a post, which resulted in substantial damage to both wings.

The pilot noted that he exhausted the entire fuel supply in the auxiliary fuel tank. An examination of the wreckage by an FAA inspector revealed that the auxiliary tank did not contain any fuel. The right and left fuel tanks contained 4.5 and 20 gallons respectively.

It is likely that the loss of engine power was a result of the brief fuel starvation during the transition from the empty auxiliary tank.

The NTSB determined the probable cause as the pilot’s mismanagement of the available fuel supply, which resulted in a loss of engine power and subsequent emergency landing.

NTSB Identification: CEN14CA151

This February 2014 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. Brian K says

    February 9, 2016 at 11:47 am

    Interesting discussion about running tanks dry (or not). Here is an avweb article taking an opposing view:

    “Run That Fuel Tank Dry!”
    http://www.avweb.com/news/pelican/182044-1.html

  2. Doug says

    February 8, 2016 at 12:31 pm

    N9741E, the accident aircraft is a 1977 17-30A model. The multiple fuel transfer switches before 1973 models led to a high accident rate of engine failure from fuel mismanagement followed by a forced landing. The 1977 17-30A has a single fuel transfer switch between pilot and co-pilot serving all the tanks, which simplified fuel management. Post 1973 there is a prominent single fuel gauge to left of pilot’s control wheel serving all tanks. You should never run a fuel tank dry in flight; there is never a logical or safe reason for that.

  3. Chuck says

    February 8, 2016 at 8:58 am

    I guess my guestion would be why running on reserve with full main unless to just burn off old fuel
    And i can’t ever seeing running any tank dry except on the ground for repair or maintience
    Just a thought

  4. Mike says

    February 8, 2016 at 5:56 am

    Let this be a lesson to anyone who still thinks it’s a good idea to run a tank completely dry.

    • Rich Dugger says

      February 8, 2016 at 8:03 am

      My neighbor has owned one for years and tells me that fuel management, switching the valves, incorrectly can get you in big trouble.

      This guy apparently was not familiar enough with the system.

      He had the gas.
      Just couldn’t plumb it to the engine.

      Operator error.
      Maybe he was out if his league.

      • Paul says

        February 8, 2016 at 8:35 am

        Definitely out of his league. Why would anyone allow any fuel tank to run bone dry remains a mystery to me. Just asking for trouble and as this pilot learned, big trouble. I get uncomfortable when the indication reaches the 1/4 mark and that includes when I’m operating a ground vehicle.

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

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