According to the pilot, he was flying a 400-nautical-mile, cross-county flight in the Cessna 177RG.
He reported that the outside air temperature along the route had been hot. He recalled that the engine temperature had been high and that he “increased the mixture to cool the engine down multiple times.”
As he approached his destination, the engine began “coughing for 3-4 minutes” before it stopped. He attempted to land at the destination airport, but was unable to reach it, so he made a forced landing in a mud-filled drainage channel about .5 mile north of the airport in Byron, California.
The airplane sustained substantial damage to the lower fuselage and windscreen.
An FAA aviation safety inspector examined the airplane’s fuel system at the accident site. He reported that both fuel tanks were found empty, with about 1/2 cup of fuel at the bottom of the left tank, after removing the sump drain.
The pilot reported that the accident could have been prevented with the “use of a fuel dipstick for better measurement of fuel quantity.”
Probable cause: The pilot’s improper preflight fuel planning, which resulted in a loss of engine power due to fuel exhaustion.
NTSB Identification: GAA17CA505
This August 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.
There is no such thing as too much fuel unless you are on fire as the old saying goes.
Fuel = Options
I always top off no matter what the cost … as in buying fuel in the Islands for the flight back to Florida…
The 177 had a 180 HP engine. The 177RG had a 200 hp engine, and, due to the physically larger engine Cessna had a problem positioning the oil cooler so they chose to put it under the aft of the engine, but it didn’t get sufficient air flow so it put it at a 45 degree angle. The engine still ran hot so, with FAA consent, Cessna simply recalibrated the oil temp indicator so the needle would sit in the center of the gauge, rather than on the hot side (as told to me by an FAA inspector).
This pilot simply had no clue as to what he was doing. At altitude, the engine was fine at an elevated temperature. I suspect his higher temp was due to either friction from worn bearings or improper baffling, or both. Perhaps the gauge was wrong? Who knows now. The fact is that he was foolhardy in increasing his fuel flow without recognizing that he used more than usual fuel and that he would have to load extra fuel for the trip.
I used to fly a C77R based out of the DFW area. In the summer, temps on the ground would be 110F or better. We would file for and climb out to something above 8000MSL and the temp would still be above 80F.
So the engine would be running hotter than expected. Now if you decide to run a rich fuel flow, you may not get any more speed (true) but you may have added as much a 1.3 gallons an hour to your fuel flow. But he should have had the cowl flaps full open, even though he was up at his cruise altitude.
If you don’t think about this early, you will not only have burned your 30-45 minutes of reserve, you will, like this guy, actually burn a few minutes into your required for the cruise. And even though he was getting there on or slightly ahead of time…. He had over committed his fuel. If he had recognized this (and this is where a little bit of hypoxia/drowsiness will getcha), he would have known he had to make a fuel stop.
I agree completely with all comments. If you fly the tanks dry, you have overlooked something so egregious you should lose your ticket completely. You can re-apply after a certain number of years but have to start at hours = 0.
Keep your tanks full and you will
have your ticket safe in your pocket
These types of people should lose their ticket and have to pay back every dollar incurred to those that were stiffed !!! Plus never to be able to obtain a pilots license ever again. Once is to often and should not be given the chance to do it again. It is almost guaranteed they will certainly do it again..With worse than damage to the aircraft, possible death to some innocent person..
I think that the insurance companies should say…..”Run Out of Fuel, We No Pay” plus a large FAA fine in most cases other than a catastrophic sudden fuel leak.
Agree. And if they hurt or kill anyone or damage property they should be liable.
I think that if you ever make a mistake they should apply that to you
I am beginning to get very nervous. I’m considering turning my ticket in. The thought that these people who don’t give a damn for their lives or the lives of anyone around them is really starting to scare me. They share the air space with us. These are really loose cannons. I completely agree with everything that the people ahead of me have said. The has come; something must be done about this stupidity. Folks there is just no darn good excuse to run out of fuel. These people have no business being in the left seat.
Why is it that these pilots who run out of fuel always forget to mention that they carefully monitored the fuel gauges and they verified adequate fuel remaining to destination plus reserves? I would think they do that in their car – it’s not a new concept.
“Fuel exhaustion” is a euphemistic phrase intended to minimizes the seriousness and maliciousness of flying without enough fuel. Those who commit this sin should lose their tickets ON THE SPOT. There is no excuse for getting into the air without the fuel to make a proper landing again without incident.