• 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

Improperly installed throttle cable leads to forced landing

By NTSB · April 17, 2023 ·

The pilot was performing a practice VOR/DME-A instrument approach into Augusta Municipal Airport (3AU) in Kansas with a safety pilot onboard the Piper PA-28-140.

Shortly after passing the final approach fix inbound, he reduced engine power. He then attempted to increase engine power slightly, however there was no response.

He subsequently increased to full throttle without any corresponding increase in engine power. The pilot’s efforts to restore engine power were not successful and he executed a forced landing to a field.

The right wing hit a trailer and a fence post during the landing rollout and separated from the fuselage. The airplane came to rest adjacent to an outbuilding. The left wing remained attached to the fuselage. The fuselage, both wings, engine mount and propeller were damaged. An undetermined amount of fuel remained in the left fuel tank, the right fuel tank had been compromised, and a strong fuel odor was present at the accident site, according to an FAA inspector.

The safety pilot reported that the pilot reduced engine power and initiated a descent upon crossing the final approach fix inbound. About 30 seconds later, the pilot informed him that the engine was not responding. The safety pilot recalled that the engine tachometer was at an idle rpm indication. He noted that there was about three hours fuel onboard at the time of the accident.

A post-accident examination revealed that the throttle cable rod end bearing was not connected to the carburetor throttle arm. The attachment hardware was not located.

Maintenance records indicated that the carburetor had been replaced on Jan. 17, 2021, at a recording tachometer time of 8,244 hours. An annual inspection was completed on March 4, 2021, at 8,256 hours. The tachometer indicated 8,267 hours at the time of the examination.

A review of the airplane parts catalog noted that the throttle cable was to be secured to the carburetor throttle arm rod end bearing using a hex-head bolt with a drilled shank, a castellated nut, and a cotter pin.

Probable Cause: Inadequate maintenance at the time the carburetor was replaced, which resulted in the improperly installed throttle cable and a partial loss of engine power. Contributing to the accident was an inadequate annual inspection that failed to detect the improper throttle cable installation.

NTSB Identification: 102857

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

This April 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.

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. Jim Macklin says

    April 22, 2023 at 7:43 pm

    The runway very beginning is not the target. 25-30% down the runway to reduce undershoots. On an ILS the touchdown zone is 3000 feet long..

    • JimH in CA says

      April 23, 2023 at 1:29 pm

      Maybe, but the ‘aiming point’ is at 1,000 ft, and usual landing just past.
      I flying into some 2,000 ft runways and aim for the 1st center line at 400 -500 ft., depending on runway width.
      ref. AC150/5340

  2. Mitch Darnell says

    April 18, 2023 at 8:24 am

    Some mechanics are born with mechanical aptitude. Others not so much! The military had an entry appitude test that was to determine what jobs you were the best choice. But not in today’s time. It’s called grow your own mechanic! It’s a total failure!! I experienced it before I retired. Some were just not meant to be a mechanic!! I’ve met IA’S with book knowledge but just aren’t competent as a hands on person. I was told you are responsible for the pilots life when you sign off the aircraft for flight!! That’s a pretty heavy responseability!! It’s shameful things have deteriorated to the level today!! As an aircraft owner and licensed A&P I recheck everything that’s accomplished on my aircraft at the annual. You wouldn’t believe what I have found, loose bolts, not safetied, gouging for things that’s not necessary. It’s best to ask the locals about the mechanics they use to work on their aircraft!!

  3. JimH in CA says

    April 17, 2023 at 6:20 pm

    So, the lack of a $0.20 cotter pin though a castellated nut caused the throttle cable to disconnect from the carb, resulting in a crashed aircraft.

    The other problem is the the normal 3 degree approach on the ILS will not allow the aircraft to glide to the runway if the engine fails. 3 degrees requires a glide ratio of 19:1…not possible.

    My VFR approaches are at 4.5 – 5 degrees, which only requires a 11.4 to 12.7:1 glide ratio, which most SE Cessnas and Pipers can do.

    • Warren Webb Jr says

      April 18, 2023 at 8:18 am

      I think you are descending at a steeper angle. Using a calculator and Skyhawk gliding distances, I get a 6.3° descent angle with no wind and a 7.4° descent angle with a 10kt headwind. But what does that matter? If you are going to fly from point A to B or use your instrument rating, being beyond gliding distance of a runway is a risk you will have to take.

      • JimH in CA says

        April 19, 2023 at 7:21 am

        The tangent of 6.3 degrees yields a 9:1 ratio. My Cessna 175 does about 13:1 or more.
        An RV6/7 has a 9:1 glide ratio, so the need to carry power over the numbers.

        I fly VFR so I’m always looking for a place to land if I ever have a need.

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

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