Accident Overview
On April 24, 2009, at approximately 1425 Pacific daylight time, a Cessna T210M (registration N6584B) impacted terrain during a forced landing on rough ground about five miles southeast of Hanford, California. The commercial pilot and his three passengers were not injured. The airplane, owned and operated by the pilot, sustained substantial damage. The flight was conducted under 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 as a personal pleasure flight, operating in visual meteorological conditions. It had departed North Las Vegas Airport about two and one-half hours earlier, en route to Vacaville, California. No flight plan was filed.
Sequence of Events
According to the pilot, while en route to Vacaville, he noticed the fuel quantity was lower than comfortable. He decided to divert to Hanford Municipal Airport to take on additional fuel. During the descent into Hanford, the engine lost power, and the pilot was unable to restart it. He executed an engine-out forced landing in an open field. During the landing roll, the airplane's wing contacted the rough terrain.
Post-Accident Inspection
A post-accident inspection by a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspector found eight gallons of fuel in the left wing tank, while the right wing tank was empty. Further discussions with the pilot revealed that he had the right tank selected when the engine quit. Although he attempted a restart sequence, he did not select the left tank at any time during the restart attempt.
Additional Information
The pilot stated that prior to his purchase of the airplane about seven years before the accident, it had undergone a RAM Aircraft Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) engine conversion, increasing its output to 310 horsepower and changing its performance and fuel flow figures. Approximately two weeks before the accident, his current maintenance provider gave him a copy of the RAM conversion performance charts. Until then, the pilot did not realize there was a fuel flow difference between the original/standard engine and the RAM conversion. Despite having the RAM charts, the pilot continued to use the performance/fuel flow charts that came with the aircraft at the time of its manufacture. Consequently, on the accident flight, he ended up with less fuel remaining than he expected for the time airborne.