• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
General Aviation News

General Aviation News

Because flying is cool

  • Pictures of the Day
    • Submit Picture of the Day
  • Stories
    • News
    • Features
    • Opinion
    • Products
    • NTSB Accidents
    • ASRS Reports
  • Comments
  • Classifieds
    • Place Classified Ad
  • Events
  • Digital Archives
  • Subscribe
  • Show Search
Hide Search

Pilot mistakenly pulls mixture control instead of carb heat

By NTSB · October 14, 2022 ·

The pilot reported that, while on final approach to the airport in Bishop, California, he was high, so he reduced power, extended 10° of flaps, and entered a slip while he applied carburetor heat.

Shortly after the engine lost power.

He unsuccessfully attempted to restart the Cessna 150’s engine.

He then made a turn to an area that he thought was suitable for landing.

The airplane landed hard and came to rest inverted, substantially damaging the vertical stabilizer and horizontal stabilizer. The pilot sustained minor injuries in the crash.

The pilot reported that he mistakenly pulled the mixture control rather than carburetor heat.

Probable Cause: A loss of engine power due to the pilot’s inadvertent closure of the mixture control, which starved the engine of fuel and resulted in a hard landing and collision with terrain.

NTSB Identification: 102128

To download the final report. Click here. This will trigger a PDF download to your device.

This October 2020 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.

About NTSB

The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent federal agency charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation accident in the United States and significant events in the other modes of transportation, including railroad, transit, highway, marine, pipeline, and commercial space. It determines the probable causes of accidents and issues safety recommendations aimed at preventing future occurrences.

Reader Interactions

Share this story

  • Share on Twitter Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook Share on Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit Share on Reddit
  • Share via Email Share via Email

Become better informed pilot.

Join 110,000 readers each month and get the latest news and entertainment from the world of general aviation direct to your inbox, daily.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Curious to know what fellow pilots think on random stories on the General Aviation News website? Click on our Recent Comments page to find out. Read our Comment Policy here.

Comments

  1. scott k patterson says

    October 22, 2022 at 5:50 am

    EEC fans….You might want to notice how many cars are TOWED into service facilities these days because the EEC FAILED. And certainly FFA/PMA parts will be a little more expensive…more like EV batteries($22,000.00) vs a Gil 35..

  2. George says

    October 19, 2022 at 12:27 pm

    I had a guy pull the mixtures turning final in a Twin Comanche while giving a BFR. Kinda scary. Experienced flight instructors never relax.

  3. Les Hunter says

    October 18, 2022 at 12:14 pm

    Coming from a career in the equipment industry over the last decades I can vouch for the reliability and efficiency of eec conversions on gasoline powered equipment. The cost involved for General equipment is amazingly inexpensive and could easily be parlayed into the General Aviation world. I can’t imagine why it is not already standard but I can say the reliability itself should earn it a great deal of consideration by the governing powers that be.

    • JimH in CA says

      October 18, 2022 at 4:11 pm

      As an electrical engineer, pilot and aircraft owner, adding complex electronics will NOT increase the reliability of the current mechanical fuel and ignition systems.
      Electronic ignition units are available that drop-in replace magnetos, and do have the advantages of higher energy spark and some ignition advance to improve fuel efficiency.
      Most of these units require aircraft electrical power, so if the electrical system fails, the ignition does to.
      The same is true for electronic fuel injection systems, vs the 1960’s Rochester continuous flow mechanical fuel injection used. [ Rochester as in Chevy Corvette of the ’60s ]

      • Jerry King says

        October 22, 2022 at 6:02 am

        AMEN, Jim. Simplicity equals reliability. Less crap to go wrong when you need it the most.

    • PD says

      October 22, 2022 at 5:40 am

      That’s about the weirdest causality statement I could ever read… EEC…?
      Someone, with self proclaimed industry experience, no less, is suggesting EEC has no buttons, levers, switches that could disable it based on improper user actions? Sheesh….

  4. Henry K. Cooper says

    October 17, 2022 at 10:44 am

    EEC! EEC! Let’s hear it for EEC! But this has NOTHING to do with why this accident occurred!

  5. Tom Curran says

    October 17, 2022 at 9:51 am

    ….if you’re too high at KBIH…you’re REALLY too high! Was he trying to “slip” his way down to hit the numbers on a 5,600′-long runway?

    His “Pilot Narrative” says he entered on a “wide left base”…whatever that looked like…
    He never mentions being on “final approach”; I guess we/GA News are assuming that because he could see “four white lights”? Not necessarily.

    Too bad these folks can’t come back two years later and explain what they were really thinking/doing.

  6. mjn says

    October 17, 2022 at 8:57 am

    I did this once as a low time student. I realized my mistake and pushed the mixture back in. My instructor of course watching the whole time said “I’ll bet you never do that again” 🙂

    • PD says

      October 22, 2022 at 5:44 am

      Me too… it was over thirty years ago on downwind at Bay Bridge airport in MD. My instructor looked at me calmly and said similar words (Bet you’ll never do that again) as I pushed the mixture control back in. I think about that each time I touch the prop, throttle, or mixture control (and flaps and landing gear… and lights…).

  7. Ken M. says

    October 17, 2022 at 7:37 am

    If the pilot was high on final approach why could he not make the runway?
    Did the slip maneuver cause the aircraft to get too low?
    I was taught to fly a pattern so that if you lost an engine you could make the runway

  8. rcdpe says

    October 17, 2022 at 7:03 am

    Mixture knob….carb heat knob…..
    not to be a Monday Morning qb, but that’s akin to confusing a pineapple and a peach.

  9. John says

    October 17, 2022 at 7:01 am

    I’m an 82+ Pilot CFII back in the day a blind fold was used…one had to touch the knobs and Identify…they have distinctive size, and feel,placement,,,still use this drill

    • Gil Jennings says

      October 22, 2022 at 6:40 am

      That brings back an experience I had in the 70’s. On final to a towered airport in Notheastern Ohio, I accidently pulled the mixture control and the engine sputtered to a stop. I continued the approach and dead sticked the Cessna 150 to a perfect landing. However, I soon got a call from the tower. I explained that I had forgot to relieve myself before taking off on the cross country and I was in considerable pain and became distracted. They directed me to the nearest restroom.

  10. Paul Oliveira says

    October 16, 2022 at 11:55 pm

    That’s why there is a something called a checklist. USE IT

    • Warren Webb Jr says

      October 17, 2022 at 6:03 am

      I think it’s more a case of identifying the proper control, which is necessary with a checklist also. And the long-time recommended action that if the engine quits after you change something, then un-change (reverse) what you just changed.

  11. JimH in CA says

    October 15, 2022 at 11:56 am

    The legacy GA aircraft used carburetors and mechanical fuel injection, and use magnetos, so the engine does not need electrical power from the aircraft.
    Up to about 1960 the aircraft were equipped with DC generators and relay type voltage regulators. The DC system had an average life of about 1,000 hours, so was not very reliable.
    With the change to alternators and electronic voltage regulators in the 1960’s, the expected life extended to about 3,000 hours, with the main failure being the alternator field brushes . The brushes are easily replaced at low cost.
    Alternators also can provide much higher current, over 100 amps, where most DC generators were only capable of 25-30 amps.

    There are electronic ignition replacements for the magnetos, and most require electrical power to operate, so the need for a 2nd , backup battery. They provide a much higher voltage to the plugs and provide a better fuel ignition. They also provide ignition advance , so at lower power, the fuel efficiency is improved.

    Electronic fuel injection is available for experimental aircraft, and does provide more even fuel distribution, lower fuel use and a bit more horsepower. But, again, these require electrical power to operate, so the need for a backup battery.
    These do not need a ‘mixture control’, but most do have a ‘fuel trim’ control for cruise leaning.

    Incorporating these 2 systems in a certified engine and airframe is a very high expense, which most engine and aircraft manufacturers cannot justify financially.

  12. John Preniczky says

    October 15, 2022 at 6:38 am

    I’m a new pilot, still training. I’ve been a shade tree mechanic since I was 12 years old. Electronic Engine Control (EEC) was a significant improvement for automobile engines. It improved reliability, efficiency, and longevity of engines. It also reduced the task saturation for drivers, caused by adjusting both the mixture and the throttle when needed. While I understand that developing new technologies for engines is expensive, and GA aircraft are not nearly as plentiful as automobiles, I believe it is important to bring the safety and reliability of electronic control into GA engines. When I search for aircraft to fly, I try to find engines with electronic engine controls, for my own safety, but they are rare, and difficult to find. I think the FAA should “fast track” development and approval of EEC conversions for the most common GA engines from Lyncoming and Contintental, and encourage adoption.

    • Glenn Swiatek says

      October 18, 2022 at 10:59 am

      i was once a new, low time pilot back in the early ‘90s. i knew my way around machine shops and enjoyed programming CNC machines. 15 years prior to that we used teletype machines with paper tape to program the mills and lathes.

      those teletype machines were based off 96 baud teletypes from the ‘50s.

      one of the main applications for those machines was transmitting weather conditions across the country. since the speed was so slow abbreviations were used instead of full words or phrases.

      the very same abbreviations are still used by the faa to this day.

      sorry, young man … don’t hold your breath about your spot on suggestion, it has been made … once or twice before.

      in the mean time welcome to a select fraternity. enjoy your time in the air and keep reading these accident reports. always make sure we never read about you.

      keep a good attitude. attitude is the most important factor in aviation.

© 2025 Flyer Media, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy.

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Comment Policy
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Writer’s Guidelines
  • Photographer’s Guidelines