The flight instructor stated that he and the private pilot receiving instruction had planned a long cross-country flight to build flight time. The cross-country flight was uneventful and they landed back at their home airport; however, they performed a touch-and-go to fly more and practice instrument approaches.
After two approaches, the pilots were again approaching their home airport when the Diamond DA-20’s engine lost all power.
The flight instructor was unable to restart the engine and performed a forced landing to a field near Moreland, Georgia.
He further stated that he had miscalculated fuel consumption and that the engine lost power due to fuel exhaustion.
Examination of the wreckage by a FAA inspector revealed substantial damage to the right wing.
The inspector noted that the single fuel tank remained intact and was absent of fuel. One gallon of fuel was then added to the fuel tank and the engine started without hesitation and ran continuously. The inspector stated that according to Hobbs time, the airplane was operated for 3.6 hours since its last fueling.
Probable cause: The flight instructor’s inaccurate fuel planning, which resulted in a total loss of engine power due to fuel exhaustion.
NTSB Identification: ERA15CA243
This June 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.
These reports of accidents caused by fuel exhaustion which seem to occur with regularity are flabbergasting to say the least. I’m always left with the question which is never answered in any of the reports: Was there an operable fuel gauge (a required piece of equipment) and did it also indicate “empty?” Would this same pilot continue to drive his car around on a cross country with the fuel gauge sitting on empty? Not likely but it seems that flying an airplane which drinks fuel at a prodigious rate compared to today’s economical car engines is altogether quite acceptable. I understand that for rough planning purposes timing of fuel consumption is used to measure the corresponding distance on a cross country for the next pit stop but what I don’t understand is the suggestion that keeping an eye on the clock is the primary means used to determine when to land for fuel?
There is NO excuse to ever run out of fuel (there are min fuel reserve requirements for VFR and IFR flight). Every preflight check requires draining fuel and checking for dirt and water. Then while returning the fuel to the tanks a visual check and possibly dipped if the plane has no fuel gauge.
On a cross country trip no one should take to the air without topping the tanks as a standard procedure.
It’s high time to get back to basics. Looks like the instructor was just along for the ride this time. I don’t think I would hire someone like that to teach me much of anything except ground school.
Flight test engineers and test pilots using methods and equipment that is not commonly available as standard equipment in commercial aircraft. Fuel totalizers, precise leaning with engine anylizers and often actually weighing fuel and checking specific gravity, to arrive at POH data that is exact but very likely not actually achieved by pilots in the “real world.”
How many minutes does it take on a take-off and departure to reduce power, manage the fuel and power settings, adjust for non-standard conditions, etc? The flight test airplane was new, clean and polished, is your old trainer dirty and bug splattered?
After 3.6 hours, didn’t the need for a pit stop for the pilots who have likely reached maximum bladder capacity indicate a landing would be a good idea? Then the calculated fuel consumption could be compared to the fuel needed to top-off the tanks could have become part of the cross country fuel planning.