The student pilot reported that the purpose of the flight was to practice landings. The takeoff was uneventful, but when the Glastar was on the base leg, the engine suddenly quit without warning or making any abnormal noises.
The pilot attempted to restart the engine several times without success. He initiated a forced landing onto a roadway near Concord, California. During the forced landing, the left wing hit a light pole.
The nosewheel collapsed, and the airplane then crossed an intersection and slid to a rest.
Postaccident engine examination revealed that the carburetor was fracture-separated at the attachment flange, and the air box exhibited heavy impact damage.
The carburetor was disassembled, and the needle valve and floats were observed stuck in the “up” position. Slight force was applied to the float assembly, and it moved freely.
No contaminants or obvious bends in the float system were found.
Although a stuck needle valve can restrict fuel from entering the carburetor bowl and lead to a loss of engine power, impact damage precluded a determination of whether the needle was stuck before the accident or during the accident.
No other mechanical anomalies were found with the engine that would have precluded normal operation, therefore, the reason for the loss of engine power could not be determined.
Probable cause: A total loss of engine power for reasons that could not be determined based on the available evidence.
NTSB Identification: WPR17LA110
This May 2017 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.
Power to idle abeam the numbers? I was never taught that. (Circa 1992). Can’t recall I’ve ever flown with anyone who does it. I’ll give you this…instructor pulls power abeam numbers and asks if I can make the runway. Sure. Every time. But my money says routinely MOST aren’t gonna make the runway with an unexpected power loss on base.
Key word – STUDENT pilot. C’mon guys – give the student a break til you get more facts- ie: how many hours did the STUDENT have? Was he advanced enough to have had training in engine failure? Was he taught that his first and primary responsibility is to control the aircraft ? Sounds as though some more experienced pilots need to go back and review their training syllabus if they still have a copy.
The hours would or should not be a factor because solo requirements under 61.87 first require satisfactory proficiency and safety by the student in emergency procedures and equipment malfunctions and approaches to a landing area with simulated engine malfunctions. Nevertheless, I think several comments are pointing to the only statement in the report which discusses the actions taken by the student: “The pilot attempted to restart the engine several times without success”. Does that mean the student focused only on the engine restart procedure and did not try to maneuver directly to the runway? We don’t know that, and we don’t know whether the tower had him extend making the gliding distance to the runway a mute point anyway. But basically I agree with what you are implying – a student pilot’s actions are usually more a reflection on the instructor than the student.
It was hammered into me to always fly the plane first and worry about fixing it once safely on the ground. It was also hammered into me to remain close enough to not need power to land once abeam the numbers. Sadly many of the college students were being taught to have (B-52) patterns and they would never be able to make the runway if they had an engine failure.
Focus on Student pilot and several attempts to restart the engine. Experience would tell you to divert straight to the runway and fly the plane. Land the plane. The first thing a student pilot would do is try to figure out what he or she did wrong. Precious seconds lost. Pilot looks up and sees he has lost the chance to make the runway and lands the plane on the nearest road.
Just a different viewpoint. Congratulations go to the student for getting the plane on the ground though. Good job.
Eons ago when I learned to fly, tight patterns and reduction of power to idle abeam the touchdown point was the norm. It seems that today’s training is to keep power on all the way to touchdown. So I’m not surprised that a total loss of power would make it impossible for the student to make the runway.
Agree. The main issue is the aiming point is too close to the beginning of the runway. The numbers seem to be a popular target but if an engine failure occurs that will likely result in not reaching the runway (depends on the descent angle). I’ve seen some articles where the pilot uses the ‘runway behind you is wasted’ concept for landings. This is advantageous for takeoffs but normally doesn’t apply to landings. I.e. if you are landing on a 5000 ft runway, you could descend at an easy 3-4 degree angle using the engine and still maintain gliding distance by establishing an aiming point further into the runway (but don’t go beyond the threshold without coordinating with the tower).
I agree completely, Warren. I wonder if he wasted time(and altitude) trying to re-start the engine instead of before heading for the runway?
My thought exactly
On base leg and the pilot couldn’t make the runway?! What kind of training did this student pilot receive? Was there other traffic that caused her/him from flying a normal pattern?
It seems very few CFI’s teach tight patterns these days.
They wan a “stabilize” approach which seems to translate into a pattern that goes into the next county.
KCCR is a towered airport – no information in the NTSB report regarding traffic flow or tower instructions. But you make the right point – if you are not instructed to extend for departing traffic or to follow traffic, keep it within gliding distance.
Carb ice?
My guess would be since they found the needle valve stuck in the up and closed. Position starving the engine of fuel, varnish from using auto fuel/Mogas was the culprit. As you would find in your lawnmower carburetor. Then moves freely after unsticking it. Hence lycoming Service Instruction No. 1534 read for yourself