The pilot reported that, while on a cross-country flight, he diverted from his destination to a nearby airport due to low fuel.
He added that the right fuel tank “went dry” and that the engine lost power on downwind, so he switched to the left fuel tank, and the engine momentarily restarted before it experienced a total loss of power on base.
Subsequently, the Piper PA-28 hit the instrument landing system lights at the airport in Thomson, Georgia, which resulted in substantial damage to both wings.
The pilot reported that he miscalculated the fuel and “ran out of gas.” A post-accident examination found about one cup of fuel in one of the tanks.
Probable cause: The pilot’s improper preflight planning, which resulted in fuel exhaustion and the total loss of engine power.
NTSB Identification: GAA17CA089
This December 2016 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.
I don’t think a government requirement for all future GA planes to have fuel meters accurate at full, 3/4, 1/2, 1/4, and empty would be too onerous. Even with odd shaped fuel tanks, digital technology is well equipped to accurately translate the fuel sender information to the above readings, and interpolate readings in between.
As I read these comments about errors in judgement for fuel management and a thought comes to mind on the FAA side of “they can do better” or has the FAA sided with the manufacturers in keeping manufacturing costs down. I say this because the fuel gauge on certified aircraft MUST BE ACCURATE WHEN IT READS EMPTY not 3/4 or 1/2 or 1/4 tanks. (Correct me if Iam wrong here). That being the case a pilot May assume more fuel on board rather than calculated in a flight plan. That level of confidence maybe fueled by a slower output reading giving a sense for continuing a flight. For me in my plane there are fuel senders in my tanks and backed up with a fuel tolalizer giving me a accurate reading of fuel consumption. When I think of NTSB,,,,,,,,,,,,, I not only think planes but trucks,cars, highways and bridges. NTSB in my thoughts is a agency to find blame for safety reasons, rightfully so,! . Pilot or plane mechanics. If it’s plane mechanical, there’s a manufacturer conversation and a AD maybe issued. If it’s a pilot caused then the insurance company does the settling there after and remedial training and NTSB goes about their business. I think this partnership FAA/NTSB needs parenting from association like AOPA,EAA. People whom do the flying. For instance your two year old child is learning to pedal a tricycle and is peddling to fast and the child’s shoe slips off the peddle causing the child to lose her/his balance, the parent sees the handlebar go quickly in another direction and the child is saved by the parents grab to the child’s shirt collar. Not for a moment would a parent allow a child to continue without some safeguards for the child’s next bike ride. This might include pedal shoe straps. This would target the actual CAUSE of the tricycle ACCIDENT. Do you all see where iam going with this. Do you thing for a moment if there were studded snow tires for planes that you could mix or match the set. Course NOT! So why should Pilot’s have to GUESS the fuel consumption level readings of a fuel gauge of a particular manufacture if the FAA says they only HAVE TO BE ACCURATE WHEN THE FUEL GAUGE READS EMPTY! If your snow tire goes flat something is going to happen and when the fuel runs OUT something is going to happen! So why not put the shoe strap on the pedal in other words give the planes very accurate fuel consumption system like fuel gauges in autos with near empty notification lamp. Remember the parent in this scenario,they are your national pilot groups that help negotiate the governmental agencies. The way I see it in government agencies, a employee should not stir the pot if they want to keep their job and retirement. It’s up to us to say enough Is enough and have recalls on aviation products deemed detrimental to flight safety.
I was, before anyone else had posted here, going to just enter “Yawn.” But then I decided to wait and see how people responded to this.
With all the items brought up and even politics thrown in, what all of you should do is go take a look at 49USC 44709 (which is where the “709” ride gets its name).
All of us need to think in terms of time when it comes to fuel. How much time do I have before I hit my reserves?
With simple aircraft, this is mostly easy to do using the charts for power vs. GPH and altitude.
With Complex aircraft this becomes a bit different because of MAP and RPM settings with GPH flow.
Never-the-less, it is possible to run out of fuel because of incorrectly setting the fuel flow and not catching that in your scans. So you might think you have 5 hours of fuel and then 1.5 hours of reserve, to suddenly find out you are out of fuel at 4:45 because you didn’t correctly lean the engine.
That is still a fuel mismanagement problem.
I know of a guy who ran out of fuel, at night, and landed in a field about a mile from the airport. He was told he was rather lucky because had he tried to do this in the day time, he would have probably run into one of the two power lines he flew between.
Oh, and he got a 409 ride out of it.
BTW — we read these NTSB reports, but the NTSB doesn’t tell us if that pilot got and passed a 409 ride.
As one who did run in to a headwind that I didn’t figure on and no airports with near by and a fuel gauge that was less than accurate and a header tank that should have been full of about a gallon and a half of fuel (but wasn’t) I ended up in a Rancher field one day. I walked over to the barn, found a gas can left a note and money for the gas and flew home (about 3 more miles). I was figuring the header tank as my reserve and it didn’t work and I will never trust a gauge again. I put FS450’s in all my airplanes I have had since then and have never looked back. I also don’t fly over anything congested if I can help it and Texas is a big state with lots of places to land.
The simple problem with this is that, If you run out of gas in a car you don’t come crashing down on people possibly killing them and yourself. You can’t compare cars to airplanes, if you do you are probably one of the one’s that run out of gas in a plane. So far everybody leaves out the most important aspect of this whole thing, and that is, ” it’s the bad decision making of people who don’t think of what the consequences would be if you don’t make the right decision”, It’s not in the training, time of day, aircraft you fly, It’s the decision that is made at that particular time, that is what causes these problems. To say that a pilot is o.k. to run out of gas is very irresponsible to say the least. I too think a person who does run out of fuel in an airplane, should suffer some kind of consequence, like a loss of ticket for say six months, first offence, but something, it has to cost something other than a hand slapping, that is nothing but an insult to everyone who flys. Guaranteed that person will do it again, until something bad happens. I know of people that fly like that, with no regard for safety and for anyone else, they continually break rules and laugh about it, what do you think of someone that does that deliberately ??? readers ?
I think more of them than I do of people who rant and rave like you are to get the government to add more and more regulation and penalties for everything thing we do… if someone Is so scared of the whole world maybe they should wrap themselves in bubble wrap and put their helmet on and stay in bed
Again I don’t understand. You call it a knee-jerk reaction. That’s something that has happened simultaneously and quickly. This is been going on for how long? how many of these have we read about? Personally, I cannot fathom how anyone can put their life and the lives of others in jeopardy by running out of gas. It is criminal as far as I’m concerned and should have the appropriate punishment.
You can’t fix stupid, so the natural selection theory is the only hope. We just have to hope the fools don’t kill some innocent person in the process.
Again! This lunacy has got to stop. Go ahead and kill yourself. Eventually one of these idiots is going to kill a member of the general public. This negative publicity will effect GA in general and each of us specifically. The last thing we need is to be viewed by the public as a bunch of careless cowboys. I think these lazy careless fools should loose their tickets. I hate government over regulation but I would support a loss of license or at a minimum mandatory retesting. This has got to stop.
Ever crash your car? Should they take away your license? How many “general public” deaths are there on record because someone miscalculated his fuel? How many deaths are there because some jagwad was texting in his car? Do you over react to everything? The guy made a mistake. It’s Liberal statements like yours that have ruined our country. One careless jerk does NOT represent me or you. He represents himself. If he had died, it’s called Natural Selection. Life has inherent risks. We don’t need Government running our lives. I’d prefer to run my own thank you.
Well said. I totally agree.
Exactly
Sir, psychiatric principle number one; behavior is consistent over time and place. If one is careless in one setting, one will be careless in others. Quite simple. Do a BI on this ‘pilot’ and I bet you will be astonished. Just a guess. I have no facts on the matter.
I agree with both, there should not be a knee jerk reaction, but I also think there should be some sort of remedial action. Why would you run out of fuel? I have cut into my minimums before, but never come close to completely running out. Maybe just some retraining, because what other planning tasks are being short-cut? Running out of gas isn’t an accident, it is a screw-up and there should be some sort of consequence
Agree
Well said! I would bet your a very capable pilot/person. You look at the facts, you reason then ACT – not overreact or panic.
I think your analogy is seriously flawed. I have no idea the relationship between number of cars on the road and aircraft in the air. I suspect that it is disproportionate. I take disregard for safety with an aircraft traveling at 100 miles an hour 5000 feet in the air much more then traveling down the Thruway. Anyone who willingly will place all of us in jeopardy by something as stupid as not dipping a tank or unscrewing a cap and looking at the level in my mind is at the least fatality careless and not worthy of a certificate. I don’t understand people such as you. You cannot enter into any kind of a discussion without taking a personal shopper at the other person. I suspect you’re one of those people that is too lazy to take the cap off.
I suspect you voted for Obama. Or work for the Federal Government. Both wastes of time…Soon we will all be wearing helmets.
In 2010, there were an estimated 5,419,000 crashes, 30,296 of with fatalities, killing 32,999, and injuring 2,239,000. About 2,000 children under 16 die every year in traffic collisions.
Go here https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/data/Pages/AviationDataStats2015.aspx
to see how many accidents and deaths from GA in 2015. 238 total deaths. Need a calculator to decide the difference. Wanna save lives Dave, BAN CARS.
Your argument is so sophomoric it barely merits a response.