After completing routine maintenance on the experimental, amateur-built airplane, the private pilot decided to conduct a test flight near the airport.
He completed a preflight inspection, a ground engine run, and taxi checks, which were normal. He noted that about 12 gallons of fuel was onboard the airplane.
About 10 minutes after departure, he chose to extend the flight, as he did not observe any anomalies with the airplane.
After an uneventful period of flight, the airplane was about 500 feet above ground level over mountain ridge tops when the engine lost partial power. The pilot maintained level flight and maneuvered the airplane toward more favorable terrain before the engine lost total power.
He performed a forced landing in a small clearing within heavily wooded mountainous terrain near Deadwood, California. During the landing roll, the airplane hit a tree and came to rest upright.
The pilot reported that, after the accident, he noticed that the left-wing fuel cap was not fully secured. Wreckage recovery company personnel indicated that the right-wing fuel tank was void of fuel, and the left-wing fuel tank contained about 1/2 gallon of fuel.
Review of a photograph provided by the wreckage recovery company taken 10 days after the accident revealed a small amount of residue and discoloration directly aft of the left-wing fuel filler neck, extending to the trailing edge of the fuel tank cover. It is likely that fuel vented through the loose fuel cap in flight, which reduced fuel quantity and led to the subsequent loss of engine power. Further, the pilot failed to adequately monitor the fuel quantity sight gauges while in flight.
Probable cause: A loss of engine power due to fuel exhaustion and the pilot’s failure to ensure that the left-wing fuel cap was secure before flight. Contributing to the accident was the pilot’s failure to monitor fuel levels while in flight.
NTSB Identification: WPR18LA233
This August 2018 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.
This report doesn’t pass the ‘smell test’ !
He flew to Osh and back, so he should have known of the left tank cap leaking/siphoning fuel with each fuel stop…gallons of refuel vs hours flown.
Then the NTSB review of the Dynon data showed that with the tanks empty, [ as reported by the recovery folks], it indicated 4.7 gallons remaining. So , he had about 7 gallons of fuel, not 12 gallons.
so, questions;
– did the pilot not program the Dynon correctly, or did he set ‘full tanks’ when they were 7 gallons short?
– why wasn’t the left cap seal problem not corrected ?
– why go off on a test flight with 1/4 tanks ? Assuming that it had the standard 24 gallon tanks and not the 40 gallon optional tanks ?
This ‘stupid pilot’ wrecked a 1 year old, expensive aircraft due to poor maintenance and planning.
I think your criticism is posted to the wrong incident 🤔