• 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 starvation ends instructional flight

By NTSB · May 3, 2019 ·

The flight instructor stated that a preflight visual inspection of the Beech 19’s fuel tanks indicated that the fuel in each tank was just above the tabs, which corresponded to 30 total gallons of fuel on board.

He added that a pretakeoff engine run-up revealed no anomalies.

He and the student pilot departed on the instructional flight and flew for about 30 minutes using fuel from the left fuel tank before switching to the right tank.

The student reported that, when they switched fuel tanks, the left tank gauge indicated “just above half” full, and the right tank gauge indicated “slightly higher” than half full.

Shortly after, the student activated the carburetor heat and reduced engine power to idle to perform a simulated engine failure and forced landing. However, when he applied the throttle at the conclusion of the simulation, engine power did not increase.

The flight instructor performed a forced landing near Weatherford, Texas, during which the airplane hit a tree.

Post-accident examination of the airplane revealed that the fuel selector was positioned to the left fuel tank, which was undamaged and contained no fuel. The right fuel tank contained about 14 gallons of fuel. The fuel lines from the engine firewall to the carburetor did not contain fuel. The fuel quantity transmitters were not tested, and their accuracy was not determined.

No mechanical anomalies were noted that would have precluded normal operation of the airplane, and the loss of engine power is consistent with fuel starvation.

Probable cause: The flight instructor’s inadequate in-flight fuel management, which resulted in fuel starvation and a total loss of engine power.

NTSB Identification: CEN17LA179

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.

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. Sarah A says

    May 6, 2019 at 2:57 pm

    There is something very wrong in all of this if they could run that tank out of fuel in that short flight after having already switched to the tank that did have fuel. Some extra info to consider is that the aircraft had made two flights totaling 2.7 hours since last serviced so the observed fuel quantity preflight is not out of reason. So in one hour could you burn off the assumed 15 gallons in the left tank with an O-320 engine in normal training operation? Someone current with that powerplant could probably provide an accurate assessment there. If the pilot and instructor are accurate on what the gauges read when they switched tanks I would say immediately that the left gauge was not accurate because they took off with essentially even fuel between the tanks and they still showed even after one hour. So if they did switch the tanks then the engine quit while connected to a fuel source with the boost pump on and fuel mismanagement WAS NOT the cause of the loss of power. It is reasonable to assume that they did switch back to the Left tank as part of the normal procedure for loss of power and it just did not get noted so misuse of the tank selector was not an issue but they might have had better luck with the Right tank. So what we have is another case of an engine quitting after prolonged time at idle, with all proper procedures followed, and another mystery that cannot be explained away with wild acquisitions against the Student or Instructor. If you want to sit in judgement then read ALL of the available data before you even think of making any damning statement.

  2. gbigs says

    May 6, 2019 at 5:59 am

    Once again a CFI who should not be flying at all, let alone teaching others. This should result in his ticket being pulled at a minimum. It’s no different than driving drunk on the roads or in the air.

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

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