What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

N54CT Prelim Report

Sam Buchanan

been here awhile
Location: Hurricane, UT Accident Number: WPR22LA046
Date & Time: November 22, 2021, 11:40 Local Registration: N54CT
Aircraft: Vans RV10 Injuries: 1 Minor
Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General aviation - Personal

On November 22, 2021, about 1140 mountain standard time, an experimental amateur-built RV-10 airplane, N54CT, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near the Grassy Meadows/Sky Ranch Airport, Hurricane, Utah. The pilot sustained minor injuries. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight.

The pilot reported that prior to takeoff, he conducted an uneventful engine runup with the fuel selector set to the left fuel tank. Following completion of the engine runup, he switched to the right fuel tank and back taxied on runway 17 for takeoff. The pilot departed runway 17 with the intention of conducting a downwind departure to the north. While on the downwind leg, he reduced power and decreased his rate of climb due to rising engine operating temperatures. Shortly after, the engine experienced a complete loss of engine power. He advanced the propeller control to full rpm, switched the fuel selector valve to the left fuel tank, and turned on the fuel boost pump. Unable to restore engine power, he conducted a 360° turn to lose altitude prior to landing. However, after turning onto final for runway 17, he realized he did not have enough altitude to make it to the runway and initiated a forced landing to an open field. Subsequently, the airplane landed hard and impacted terrain before it came to rest in a nose low attitude.

Post accident examination of the airplane by the pilot revealed that the fuselage and left wing were structurally damaged. The wreckage was recovered to a secure location for further examination.
 
Last edited:
The pilot reported that prior to takeoff, he conducted an uneventful engine runup with the fuel selector set to the left fuel tank. Following completion of the engine runup, he switched to the right fuel tank and back taxied on runway 17 for takeoff.

Whether this was a factor or not, this is a bad practice. I was taught to start up and taxi to the run-up area on one tank, then switch and do the run-up and take-off on the other. That should ensure that you have verified good fuel flow from both tanks prior to departure.
 
A couple of thoughts (but no speculation on this accident):
1. Prop control full aft (min RPM) may extend the glide, depending on the governor set up. But not full iin, for sure.
2. Many pilots do a power off circling approach to landing only once every 2 years - during their biennial Flight Review. In my experience the majority of this group vastly underestimate how much altitude they will lose in a 360, no power.
3. You tend to do what you practice. CFI's (including me) and examiners and the PTS/ACS tend to emphasize "land in the first 500'". So when an actual engine out happens, pilots try to set it down just beyond the threshold, even when there's 5000' available. This mind-set needs to be changed.
 
40-years ago while learning to fly as a student pilot, I was taught to use a checklist. The checklist had one check the fuel selector three times that it was on the fullest tank before engine start and it was not moved from that position for engine start, taxi, run up, and takeoff.

Been doing it the same way for forty years.
 
I’m of the mindset to run the tank you’ll take off with starting at Taxi. I’ll start and warm up on the tank I don’t plan to take off on. Then prior to taxi I’ll switch to “fullest” tank and taxi, run up and take off on it. This way I don’t ensure I have fuel flow from both but also confirm for a longer period that the tank off tank is all good.

My way but not the only way. YMMV
 
I’m of the mindset to run the tank you’ll take off with starting at Taxi. I’ll start and warm up on the tank I don’t plan to take off on. Then prior to taxi I’ll switch to “fullest” tank and taxi, run up and take off on it. This way I don’t ensure I have fuel flow from both but also confirm for a longer period that the tank off tank is all good.

My way but not the only way. YMMV

I think that does show fuel flow on both...maybe not for as long as if you taxied on the starting tank, but still good IMO, if your taxi doesn't start super-quickly after start-up (i.e., more than, say, a half a minute or so, I'd guess).

I guess what I was saying was I would never switch to the other tank just prior to departure...I want a good long period of time to know that there's no obstruction or failure to flow fuel before I get airborne. The other reason for checking both tanks on the ground is obvious...I don't want to find out in the air that one of them isn't flowing.

Anyway, good discussions...
 
40-years ago while learning to fly as a student pilot, I was taught to use a checklist. The checklist had one check the fuel selector three times that it was on the fullest tank before engine start and it was not moved from that position for engine start, taxi, run up, and takeoff.

Been doing it the same way for forty years.

How do you know the other tank isn't blocked? Granted, it's a very remote possibility, but I'd hate to learn that while airborne.
 
I was just taught the opposite. Never switch fuel tanks until a safe altitude is reached which gives you enough time to switch back. If you just switch before take off the fuel from the other tank might not even have reached the engine before airborne and contamination might just show up slightly after you are off the ground. So if you switch you would have to do a run up long enough to ensure that fuel from the other tank has reached the engine which might be longer then you think.

Oliver
 
I think that does show fuel flow on both...maybe not for as long as if you taxied on the starting tank, but still good IMO, if your taxi doesn't start super-quickly after start-up (i.e., more than, say, a half a minute or so, I'd guess).

I guess what I was saying was I would never switch to the other tank just prior to departure...I want a good long period of time to know that there's no obstruction or failure to flow fuel before I get airborne. The other reason for checking both tanks on the ground is obvious...I don't want to find out in the air that one of them isn't flowing.

Anyway, good discussions...

I fully agree with your statement, that’s why I switch before taxi and let her roll. We have slightly different processes but the same end goal. Depart on the tank you have running on for a little while and make no changes prior to departure.
 
I’m with Gary & Oliver. Start on fuller tank and leave it their til airborne. Change tank when hi enough and near an airport.
I’m near the departure end of the runway. In warm weather I doubt I use enough gas to drain the line from the tank if switched prior to takeoff.
 
plugged fuel line

How long can you run on just gas down stream of the plug in the fuel line?
I have no way of intentionally plugging a line, short of the off position, so I have no answer to this, but occasionally read of someone who was unknowingly trying to find out.

If you had a plugged line, the best case would be to find it on the ground. How long would you have to run to do that?
Worst case would be to find it just after T/O.
Door #2: In between the above 2 options is to find it at cruise altitude at a location of your choice.

I'll take door #2.
Always start, taxi, T/O on the same tank.

JMHO, YMMV
 
How long can you run on just gas down stream of the plug in the fuel line?
I have no way of intentionally plugging a line, short of the off position, so I have no answer to this, but occasionally read of someone who was unknowingly trying to find out.

If you had a plugged line, the best case would be to find it on the ground. How long would you have to run to do that?
Worst case would be to find it just after T/O.
Door #2: In between the above 2 options is to find it at cruise altitude at a location of your choice.

I'll take door #2.
Always start, taxi, T/O on the same tank.

JMHO, YMMV

I honestly don't know the answer to this, but I think a simple experiment with a straw or piece of tubing would answer it...if a line is plugged, is it even possible for the fuel that's in the line past the plug to get sucked out by the pump? Assuming a complete blockage, with no way for fuel or air to get past the block, wouldn't that prevent the suction from being able to pull fuel?
 
How long can you run on just gas down stream of the plug in the fuel line?
I have no way of intentionally plugging a line, short of the off position, so I have no answer to this, but occasionally read of someone who was unknowingly trying to find out.

If you had a plugged line, the best case would be to find it on the ground. How long would you have to run to do that?
Worst case would be to find it just after T/O.
Door #2: In between the above 2 options is to find it at cruise altitude at a location of your choice.

I'll take door #2.
Always start, taxi, T/O on the same tank.

JMHO, YMMV

Put the 'E' in our experimental category. Shut it off and find out?
 
I know a Cessna has just enough fuel in the carb bowl to taxi out and almost break ground before it quits. Probably can’t get that far of you include the run up on that bowl gas. Another scenario could be a plugged fuel tank vent. I would bet you could get some more time with a plugged vent than just a plugged (or valve off) fuel line. Also having a half tank and a plugged fuel vent probably would give you more time before the tank negative pressure is enough to starve the engine.

Needless to say, I prefer to start, taxi and perform the run up on the same tank. Then after 30 minutes, make the first tank switch so if there’s a problem, you have the altitude, time, and remaining fuel in the first tank to go back to.

I spoke to an old toner out of Homestead Florida who told me stories about the Fed’s contacting him to reposition planes that the drug runners would land and abandon on the levies in southern Florida.. Beech 18s, DC3s ect.. he would always take off on whatever tank they landed with. His theory was it probably landed with enough fuel to take off with!
 
Fuel Selector Usage

I follow the recommendation of the late John Deakin when it comes to fuel selector usage and that is to avoid switching tanks while on the ground. Essentially, if you use the fuel system as configured the last time the plane flew under power then odds are in your favor that it will operate correctly on the next take off. The trick for this to work well is to ensure that you always select the fullest tanks sometime before landing and/or fuel the plane after landing.

My thoughts on this are as follows:

1. Operating the fuel system “as set” during the previous powered flight helps to ensure that the system is in a “known good” configuration for the next takeoff.

2. The ability to start, idle, and taxi on one tank does not prove that the fuel system doesn’t have a partial blockage or suction side leak. These types of issues often only create problems under high fuel flow but not at the low flows required for idle and taxi.

3. If you always ensure that fuel selector changes in flight are performed at safe altitudes and with emergency landing options available and identified, then an engine failure due to a fuel system problem should not become a life threatening emergency. An engine failure at the wrong time during takeoff and initial climb out IS a dangerous situation.

4. I’m always extra cautious after maintenance has been performed on the fuel system because this increases the potential for problems and the system is no longer “proven” from the previous flight.

Skylor
 
Last edited:
Back
Top