The pilot of the twin-engine Piper PA-44 reported that while on an instrument flight rules cross-country flight at night, he became concerned about the amount of fuel aboard and considered stopping for fuel.
About the time he became aware of the fuel state, the airplane encountered instrument meteorological conditions and his attention was diverted from finding an alternate airport to maintaining his flight path.
When air traffic control cleared the pilot to go direct to the initial approach fix at his destination airport, the airplane experienced an uncommanded right yaw.
The pilot recognized that the right engine experienced a total loss of power and he began to secure that engine.
He declared an emergency and requested radar vectors to the nearest airport.
Then the left engine began to “sputter” and experienced a total loss of power. The pilot told investigators he “was sure that it was fuel exhaustion.”
Unable to glide to an airport, he aimed for the darkest landscape to avoid any ground injuries and the airplane hit terrain near Hawkinsville, Georgia, resulting in substantial damage to both wings and the fuselage. The pilot sustained minor injuries in the crash.
Post-accident examination of the airplane by an FAA inspector noted no smell of fuel or indications of fuel present at the accident site.
The pilot reported that there were no pre-accident mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
Based on this information, it is likely that the pilot exhausted the available fuel supply, which resulted in a total loss of engine power and subsequent forced landing.
Probable Cause: The pilot’s inadequate in-flight decision-making, which resulted in a total loss of engine power due to fuel exhaustion.
To download the final report. Click here. This will trigger a PDF download to your device.
This December 2022 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.
Figure
1) taxi fuel
2) contingency fuel/ 5% in case gets moved around die to traffic or weather.
3) 30-45 minute reserves
4) alternate airport fuel
PS- remember “useable fuel”. Just because your tank is a certain size there’s a small amount that is unusable.
Plan fuel accordingly in IMC
The only thing I disagree with in the statement is that by “regulation” you should be on the ground in 3:45. Personally in IMC that does not give me as much cushion as I’d like but being technical you only must “ plan” to be on the ground. So as long as you plan to land with a reserve you are legal if you land with a couple minutes fuel. It does not make sense to plan a reserve that you are not legal to burn.
My thoughts are use 1/4 note time on each tank , time the next 1/4 then you learn how far you can go to next fuel stop
and our insurance rates go up. Go directly to the nearest FSDO and hand in your FAA Pilot Certificate.
Every airplane that I’ve ever flown burns a relatively consistent amount of fuel PER HOUR. So I have a hard time understanding why pilots consistently seem to ignore that fact. It doesn’t matter how fast the airplane flies; it only matters how long it’s in the air. If it has a 4 hour maximum endurance to empty, and it’s being flown at night in IMC, then it ought to be on the ground by regulation in 3 hours 15 minutes—and by most safety recommendations, in 3 hours. What is so hard about that?
I often take off with partial tanks, but I stick them to know how much fuel is there. My airplane burns less than 10 gallons per hour, so I know if by sticking the tanks, I have 15 gallons in each tank, then I have a maximum endurance of 3 hours. That means to me that I have enough fuel for a 2 hour flight. In reality, I have more than that, but that’s how I think. I’ve had a total engine failure caused by a thrown rod; I don’t want one caused by my own stupidity.
I am not sure about the PA-44 but the aircraft I have flown in the PA-28 series, from which the PA-44 was derived, had a metal tab at the filler locations so you had a ready indicator of the fuel in the tank. I recall on some Piper aircraft that tab also had a hole in the tab that provided a reference mark for the fuel amount at that level also. That was a good idea on the part of Piper and it could possibly prevent some of these aircraft accidents if more universally implemented. Of course, they are of no help if the pilot does not take the time to actually remove the fuel cap and note the fuel level relative to that reference.
“Every airplane that I’ve ever flown burns a relatively consistent amount of fuel PER HOUR. So I have a hard time understanding why pilots consistently seem to ignore that fact. It doesn’t matter how fast the airplane flies; it only matters how long it’s in the air. If it has a 4 hour maximum endurance to empty, and it’s being flown at night in IMC, then it ought to be on the ground by regulation in 3 hours 15 minutes—and by most safety recommendations, in 3 hours. What is so hard about that?”
Agree 1000%, nothing else needs saying! Another functional airplane destroyed by pilot stupidity… and we all pay for his actions with more expensive insurance rates, dwindling aviation insurance providers and additional cumbersome regulations that will never eliminate human stupidity.
In case that ever happens to anyone, CALL ATC IMMEDIATELY, inform them of your fuel situation and request assistance to land ASAP!
My friend want to do an avionics upgrade…..but before that I think he should get a fuel computer. My fuel computer tells me how much fuel I have on board and how much fuel I’m burning and how much fuel I need to my destination at current fuel burn. My glass panel also tells me to switch fuel tanks every 15 minutes which reminds me to look at my fuel tank gauges, and confirm amount with the fuel computer.
Both JPI and EI warn to not use the unit to know the amount of fuel in the tanks..
ie; ” The fuel remaining displayed by the FP-5 is not a measurement of the fuel in the tanks. It is an amount calculated from the starting fuel level you programmed into the FP-5, minus the fuel used while the engine was running.
An aircraft has a number of hours of fuel , depending on the fuel in the tanks at the start of the flight, and the power setting.
I don’t know of any fuel computer that automatically tells the pilot how much fuel is aboard—the pilot has to properly program it. I think they’re a great addition to a panel (I have one), but it’s up to the pilot to input how much fuel has been added at each fuel stop. That’s why most are installed with a placard that warns the pilot not to rely on it. It’s the old “garbage in, garbage out” scenario.
Yep. A classic example of GIGO.
Ronny, so what happens when the electronics quit or you forget to reset the amount of fuel after adding some? Do you do your own fueling? If you topped off, did the amount of fuel match what was indicated by the fuel computer? Computers are nice, but always back it up with your watch.
So, at night and you realize fuel level is low and then you get in IMC so you say, “I’m in IMC, I cant be concerned about low fuel, let me focus on flying in IMC at night”. Got it.
So, when he noted that his ground speed was 120 kts, not 135 or 145 kts, simple math calculates that the 600 nm will take 5.0 hrs…and you don’t have that much endurance.
The correct action…LAND and refuel.!
More stupid pilot tricks and a wrecked aircraft. !
When I get below half a tank on each side with my twin, I consider it out of gas. I might have problems, but I’m not gonna run out of gas.