No fatalities

28 Jun 2012: PIPER PA-23 (N3170P) — Baltic, OH

Baltic, OH, United States

On 28 Jun 2012, a PIPER PA-23 (registration N3170P) was involved in an aviation accident near Baltic, OH. No fatalities were reported. Investigators recorded the probable cause as: Loss of engine power due to fuel starvation as a result of particulate contaminant on the carburetor screens. This summary draws on records from NTSB; 12 related events involving the same aircraft type or operator are linked below.

SourcesNTSBPrimary reportUpdated 1778583330Data APIEditorial standards

On June 28, 2012, a Piper PA-23 (N3170P) sustained substantial damage during a forced landing near Baltic, Ohio, after both engines lost power. The pilot and passenger were seriously injured.

Accident Overview

On June 28, 2012, at approximately 0920 eastern daylight time, a Piper PA-23, registration N3170P, was substantially damaged during a forced landing to a field near Baltic, Ohio. The pilot and passenger were seriously injured. The personal flight was conducted under 14 CFR Part 91 without a flight plan in visual meteorological conditions. The cross-country flight departed Akron-Canton Regional Airport (KCAK), Akron, Ohio, around 0900, en route to Mallory Airport (WV12), South Charleston, West Virginia.

Accident Sequence

About 10 minutes after departure, the left engine began to surge and subsequently lost power. The pilot feathered the propeller, secured the engine, and diverted to Richard Downing Airport (I40) near Coshocton, Ohio. Unable to maintain altitude, the pilot elected to perform an off-airport landing to a field. While approaching the field, the right engine lost power. During the emergency approach and landing, the airplane impacted the tops of trees before hitting the ground. Both wings were bent and the fuselage was wrinkled. During recovery, both main and auxiliary fuel tanks were drained.

Aircraft Examination

An NTSB investigator and two FAA inspectors examined the airplane, both engines, and related systems. A fuel sample from the left wing contained small particles. The left engine fuel system revealed metal, dirt, and paint chip contamination in the fuel bowl, which was pitted and corroded. The fuel screen in the left carburetor was 100 percent occluded with similar contamination. Additional contamination was found in the left carburetor bowl. The left engine-driven fuel pump was pitted and corroded, and the left engine electric fuel pump screen was occluded; the magnet in the pump contained corroded metal fragments.

Examination of the right engine fuel system showed contamination in the fuel bowl consistent with that in the left system. The strainer bowl housing was corroded and pitted. The fuel screen in the right carburetor was 90 percent occluded, and contamination was present in the right carburetor bowl and right engine electric fuel pump. The fuel pump housing exhibited pitting and corrosion. No other anomalies consistent with a loss of engine power were observed.

Maintenance and Fuel Sumping Procedures

In November 1988, Piper issued Service Bulletin (SB) 827A to address engine power loss due to water and sediment accumulation. It required pilots to sump both main and auxiliary fuel tanks if the dual fuel drain kit was not installed, by selecting both tanks with the cockpit selector valve and then selecting a crossfeed setting for an additional sump. On August 21, 1992, FAA issued Airworthiness Directive (AD) 92-13-04, mandating compliance with Piper SB 827A, including adding the procedures to the Owner Handbook and Pilots Operating Manual.

Maintenance records showed the last annual inspection was completed on October 1, 2010, under 14 CFR Part 43 Appendix D. The logbook entry indicated AD 92-13-04 had been complied with and was to be accomplished before each preflight. However, SB 827A was not found in the airplane paperwork or manuals during the investigation.

The pilot reported a normal preflight inspection, adding 54 gallons of fuel to both main tanks, and sumping one fuel sump cup from each main tank. The previous owner confirmed only one fuel sump per wing and did not advise of special sumping procedures. The pilot stated he was unaware of SB 827A or AD 92-13-04 and did not notice contamination when sumping the fuel.

Contributing factors

Causes

Fluid condition

Other contributing factors

Inadequate inspectionPilotMaintenance personnel