• 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 exhaustion brings down Cessna 206

By NTSB · May 30, 2017 ·

The pilot reported that while on a cross-country flight, as the Cessna 206 was about 30 miles from the destination, the engine began to surge and lose power.

In an attempt to restore full engine power, he switched the fuel selector valve from the right fuel tank to the left tank, placed the fuel mixture to the full rich position, and turned on the auxiliary engine fuel boost pump.

He said that the engine regained full power momentarily, but when the airplane was about 17 miles for the destination, the engine began surging again.

He placed the fuel selector valve back to the right tank, but engine power was not restored.

The pilot then selected a mountainous tundra-covered ridgeline near Port Alsworth, Alaska, as a forced landing site. During touchdown on the soft terrain, the nosewheel struck an object beneath the tundra, and the airplane nosed over, coming to rest inverted.

The airplane sustained substantial damage to the wings and fuselage.

The day after the accident, during a telephone interview with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigator-in-charge, the pilot stated that he had failed to verify the amount of fuel onboard before departing.

In the pilot’s written statement to the NTSB, which was completed and submitted by the pilot’s attorney, dated 11 days after the accident, he reported that 20 days before the accident he had the airplane fueled and verified that the fuel tanks were full. He stated that he flew two short flights, then the airplane sat for 12 days until the day of the accident flight.

The accident flight occurred a day early and followed a different route than the pilot had anticipated to fly. The pilot stated that they flew extra miles and encountered significant headwinds and decreased ground speed before the engine began surging.

Probable cause: The pilot’s inadequate preflight and mismanagement of the fuel supply, which resulted fuel exhaustion.

NTSB Identification: ANC15CA030

This May 2015 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. Joe Gutierrez says

    June 4, 2017 at 12:33 pm

    Just another example of,” poor decision making, even by high time pilots”. How can that be corrected???

  2. Paul says

    May 31, 2017 at 7:24 pm

    What’s probably THE most important item on a preflight check especially if you’re planning on a cross country trip? Fuel on board of course. I don’t care when it was refueled. Assumptions about the amount of fuel on board are worthless, dangerous and can be costly. Unless you refueled it yourself very recently open the fuel caps and check the fuel level especially if the plane has sat unattended for a while.

  3. BJS says

    May 31, 2017 at 2:33 pm

    Fuel thefts certainly occur. One of my sons flew his plane, Cessna 172, from El Dorado, Arkansas, to Petit Jean Mountain Airport near Morrilton; leaving El Dorado with both tanks topped off to the brim. The plane sat for two days and when he was doing his pre-flight prior to departure he found one tank completely dry. Fortunately, since at that time 100LL was not available at PTMA, he had enough fuel remaining in the other tank to fly back to El Dorado. Of course he could have stopped for fuel in route, which I would have done, but he determined he had sufficient fuel for the flight.

  4. Charlie=7 says

    May 31, 2017 at 6:02 am

    With over 7000 hours in C-206 and C-207, I share this little tidbit that might save a life. When the fuel is exhausted in a C-207, you can slip the airplane and get about 20 mins more time out of that tank. It works for both sides. I have had to use that on more than one occasion returning from a flight where there was no fuel on the other end.

    • Richard says

      May 31, 2017 at 7:38 am

      I agree, Charley. An old flight instructor aroiund here used to teach his students that. I learned about it from hearing him talk about it. You can get just about every drop of that unusable fuel out of the tanks that way.

    • Ed Smith says

      June 26, 2017 at 2:25 pm

      Are you freaking kidding me? You’ve “had” to do this on “more than one occasion”?

      While I agree that a pilot should have every tool at his disposal in an actual emergency, I’m truly disheartened that you seem to encourage reliance on a”technique” like this.

      Fly the usable fuel, not some imaginary ghost fuel — it is called unusable for a reason — and consider yourself lucky you’re still here to tell about it.

  5. Hans says

    May 31, 2017 at 5:03 am

    I say it over and over, you can’t fix stupid.

    Another black eye on GA because of stupidity.

    When are pilots going to learn to just use the check lists.

  6. Joh says

    May 30, 2017 at 7:44 pm

    According to docket statements, the pilot reported the aircraft was flown about 3.7 hours prior to fues exhaustion on what he thought, but did not confirm, were full tanks. The aircraft was filled a couple of weeks prior to the accident flight after it was refueled, flown for .3 hr and tied down. I wonder if it was on an open, unsecured ramp? Are fuel thefts common in Alaska? It seems like stealing gas would merit the same accounability as horse stealing in the ‘wild west’ of the 1900’s. In any case, he shoulda LOOKED in his tanks before launching, or confirmed his stated assumption that gas was cached at the lodge where he dropped off items.

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

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