The pilot reported that after refueling his Luscombe 8, which was chocked with the parking brake set, he attempted to hand prop the engine.
After the engine started and while he was walking around the back of the airplane, the engine’s rpm began to increase, and the airplane began to pivot about 90° on the left wheel.
When the airplane bypassed the wheel chock, it then rolled towards a fuel station at the airport in Port Townsend, Washington.
The plane hit the fuel station, which resulted in substantial damage to the right-wing strut.
The FAA’s Airplane Flying Handbook, FAA-H-8083-3A, contains a section under the Ground Operations chapter titled “Hand Propping” which states: “It is critical that the procedure is never attempted alone. Hand propping should only be attempted when two properly trained people, both familiar and experienced with the airplane hand propping techniques, are available to perform the procedure.
Probable Cause: The pilot’s inadequate engine hand propping procedure which resulted in the airplane’s unexpected movement and subsequent impact with a fueling station.
To download the final report. Click here. This will trigger a PDF download to your device.
This March 2021 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.
Tailwheel aircraft are much better suited for hand propping than are tricycle gear aircraft. If you disagree you need to watch Hand Propping Light Aircraft by Larry Bartlett.
I hand-propped a J3-Cub solo, all the way from Maryland to Los Angeles and back again – maybe 50 times over 5 weeks – with no issues. On many fuel stops there was NO-ONE closeby to assist – I would have waited all day for a second person to be available!
Be VERY sure that throttle is set at near-idle and right wheel is chocked; if aircraft moves it will turn right around that chock – run under strut and retard throttle. If you decide to hand-prop with throttle advanced (for whatever reason), ALWAYS tie tail securely first.
I’ve hand-propped a number of airplanes over the years, but always with a qualified person in the pilot’s seat to control the throttle, switch, and most important, the brakes. I have seen many others hand-prop, though, without anyone inside, some without any chocks or tie-downs. I assumed that they had set the brakes—and to me, that’s pretty scary—I’ve seen very few airplanes with good parking brakes.
I hand my Luscombe 8A frequently when there is no second person to help. My Luscombe has an effective parking brake. I always set the parking brake and secure the tail with a rope or chain before starting. The only time I do not secure the tail is when I am in the pilot seat and have an experienced person performing the hand propping.
What’s the point of criticizing one’s spelling and grammar on a public post?
My dad taught me to. Hand prop airplanes when I was 12 never had an issue,but did have some start on me when the switch was in the off position,which is scary,but that’s why u always treat in as a hot prop even with the switch in the off poison.
So one guy screwed up doing what’s been done millions of times, high or low wing.
Guess that make that one guy not too bright.
Comment on tricycle gear, swing your leg as you pull to propel your body away from the blades….no issue.
Hand propping when done properly is no more dangerous than flying itself…. been doing it since I was a teenager. Pay attention to what your doing. As with anything, people get complacent. I once saw a very seasoned pilot prop a super cub with the throttle wide open after clearing a flooded engine. It took a hard right as he grabbed the wing strut in an effort to get to the cabin. Literally flew into the FBO building doing some serious damage to both plane and building. Luckily none one but the pilots pride was hurt.
I owned a 47 Luscombe 8A for 10 years. I agree hand propping can be very dangerous but if done correctly presents little threat. One comment made above that a tail dragger was more dangerous to hand prop than a tricycle gear. I disagree as I have been there and done that. Having the spinner at eye level on a tail dragger made me extend my arms upward to grab the prop with my eyes on the pilot in the airplane. Then once in the correct position to pull the prop through it resulted in my immediate movement away from the moving propeller. Not so when pulling a tricycle gear, which I will never do again, as it requires pulling with your arms and not your whole body. It is very difficult to get away from the propeller and the engines are generally > 100hp requiring more effort to prop.
The only sure way to hand prop an engine is to have a 2nd person in the cockpit, chock and if possible tie the tail to a secure restraint.
Hand propping a tail dragger is far harder and more dangerous that propping a similar nose-wheel Acft… although hand propping any aircraft should raise the hair on the back of the neck and ‘heighten’ situational awareness.
And for very small aircraft with a low compression engine there is ‘the standard practice’ for propping while in front of the blades [off centerline of power]… or with training to ‘prop’ from behind the blades on the pilots side, near the cockpit.
But in this instance… Quote… “When the airplane bypassed the wheel chock…”
Hmmmm… it appears that there was exactly [1] chock, under the front side of the [LH?] tire [pilot side?] as opposed to 2-PAIRS of tire-chocks… front/back, LH & RH tires.
Also if flight controls were NOT locked for elevator-up… to ensure tail down-load with power… then a floating elevator simply aggravated the tendency for jumping ‘the chock’ under power.
AND, it sounds like this pilot had done this several times… and gotten away with poor planning and complacency… and executed a ‘sloppy procedure’…. gone inevitably awry, as the power edged-up unexpectedly. I suspect that the pilot’s response was also affected by a ‘startle-factor’.
PS. I suspect that the suggestion, that the pilot was ‘planning to jump’ a single chock doesn’t pass the ‘sniff-check’… for many reasons.
I worked KC-135 Acft that were on nuclear alert. There were ‘special chocks’ designed/made/tested by SAC for -135s and -52’s for ‘rolling-over’ during war-emergency taxi… but were ‘scrap’ [FOD] afterwards. For this reason, these ‘soft-squishy roll-over-chocks’ were hated by ground-crews since they were ‘way-too easily damaged’.
Hand propping.is inherently dangerous. Solo hand propping even more so.
You could loose a hand or a head.. The Luscombe 8A in this case jumped a choke with seems the intent of the pilot. He must have been planning to jump the chicks once he was in the pilot seat..
In some extreme case tying the takedown with a solid anchor and a long and strong rape using a hitch knot so the rope can be released and retrieved. Any airport with fuel pumps almost certainly has someone who can monitor the mags, throttle and brakes.
Jump the “chokes?”
Jump the “chicks?”
Tying the “takedown???”
“…a long and strong “rape?”
A little proofreading would make your post more comprehensible.
And there are many, many airports with self serve fuel pumps that are totally unstaffed with not a soul around.
Please be AWARE that LONG ropes can STRETCH significantly and allow the airplane to suddenly move forward quite a bit more than you would expect.