The commercial pilot was on the second leg of a postmaintenance flight. The first flight leg, which was
about 1-hour long, was uneventful, and the pilot reported that the fuel selector was positioned to the
right tank during this flight leg. He landed the airplane but did not purchase fuel before departing for the
return leg. The pilot reported that, during the return leg, the fuel selector was positioned to the left tank.
While on final approach to the airport, the pilot added power to go around. He turned onto the crosswind
and then downwind legs of the airport traffic pattern, and while on the downwind leg, the engine lost all
power. The pilot switched the fuel selector to the right tank, but engine power was not restored.
Realizing that the airplane would be unable to reach the runway, the pilot conducted a forced landing in
trees, and the airplane came to rest inverted.
Category: NJ
The pilot reported that, shortly after the skydiving flight departed, the engine experienced a “mechanical
failure” and that he then executed a forced landing in a farm field south of the airport. The airplane
nosed over in the mud, which resulted in structural damage to the airframe.
During a postaccident test run of the engine on the airframe, lower-than-normal exhaust gas temperature
indications were observed on the engine’s left-side (Nos. 2, 4, and 6) cylinders. Excessive soot and
smoke were also observed on the engine’s left side. During a subsequent test run, the engine initially did
not achieve full power. Further examination revealed that both of the No. 2 cylinder intake valve springs
were fractured, and visible rust was observed on the surfaces of the springs. The springs showed
evidence of fatigue fractures that had originated from rust pits on the fracture surfaces. After the valve
springs were replaced, the engine was capable of operating normally at full power.
Inside video of the accident.
The pilot was returning to the airport after dropping off parachutists at 9,000 feet. He said that
the flight lasted about 30 minutes, and as he turned onto final approach in the traffic pattern,
he pulled the throttle back, and the engine lost power. The pilot performed a forced landing in
a field, and the airplane struck some power poles lying on the ground, resulting in substantial
damage to the airframe. Postaccident examination of the airframe and engine revealed no
evidence of a mechanical malfunction or anomaly that would have precluded normal
operation. Only residual fuel was recovered from the wing tanks, and there was no fuel in the
line from the tanks to the engine. The pilot stated that he should have monitored his fuel
gauges more closely.
The pilot reported that, during the final leg of the approach, the airplane was above the
intended approach path and speed. Over the threshold of the runway, the airplane encountered
a gust of wind. The pilot announced on the common traffic advisory frequency his intention to
perform a go-around maneuver. He was unable to perform the maneuver prior to the hard
landing; he then proceeded to overrun the runway and the airplane nosed over, which resulted
in substantial damage to the left wing. The pilot reported that there were no mechanical
malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. The
recorded wind at the airport about the time of the accident was variable at 4 knots and for the
hour before and an hour after the accident the wind was recorded as calm.