On Jan. 14, 2023, about 14:25 central standard time, a Pitts Model 12 sustained substantial damage when it was involved in an accident near Conroe, Texas. The pilot sustained minor injuries and the passenger sustained serious injuries.
According to the pilot, he and the passenger were conducting a local flight to practice maneuvers and landings. The airplane contained about 40 gallons of fuel in the main fuel tank.
About three to four minutes after takeoff, at an altitude of 2,000 feet above ground level, the pilot noticed that a master warning light on the instrument panel illuminated but did not notice any anomalies or problems. The warning light then turned off, all indications were normal, and the engine was operating without issue. The pilot elected to return to the airport.
The pilot stated that, about a minute later, the engine sustained a series of power fluctuations “like someone was turning the (magnetos) off and on.”
When the pilot turned on the fuel boost pump, the engine produced a burst of power and then lost power.
He switched from the main fuel tank to the auxiliary tank with no change noted to engine power, then switched back to the main fuel tank.
Unable to reach the airport or a field due to a high descent rate, the pilot performed a forced landing to a nearby road. During the landing, the airplane hit a powerline and terrain before coming to rest inverted.
The airplane sustained substantial damage to the wings, fuselage, and empennage.
The airplane is equipped with a main fuel tank in the forward fuselage and a wing tank in the upper wing with a total capacity of 54 gallons. An aluminum header or inverted tank with a pickup (flop) tube is located beneath the main tank and provides the fuel supply for inverted flight.
Post-accident examination of the airplane and engine revealed small particles of non-ferrous metal debris were noted throughout the airplane’s fuel system when fuel system components and fuel lines were removed. The airframe’s inverted fuel tank pickup tube was removed, and an o-ring at the end of the tube was not present. No evidence of the o-ring was noted in the fuel tank or fuel system. The engine was removed for a functional test in a test cell.
The engine fuel pump was removed, flushed, and functionally bench tested before the functional engine test due to the presence of metal debris in the fuel system.
During the functional test, a leak was noted at the pump’s rear pressure relief valve and rear diaphragm. Although the leak was present, the fuel pump flows were normal at idle and cruise power settings.
The fuel pump was reinstalled on the engine for the engine functional test. During the engine prime procedure, the engine fuel pump leaked from the rear pressure relief valve and diaphragm, as observed during the bench test.
Due to potential fire and safety concerns, the pump was removed and replaced with a slave pump.
The accident fuel pump was disassembled. Scratches and scoring marks were noted on the pressure relief valve seat, which allowed fuel into the air side cavity of the fuel pump. The diaphragm was pliable and undamaged. Blue stains, consistent with aviation fuel, were noted on the external pump housing.
After the fuel pump was replaced, the engine started on the test cell without issue.
Around 800 rpms, a vertical vibration was observed with the engine and test cell stand. The functional test was terminated at that time due to the abnormal vibrations.
Probable Cause: The failure of the engine-driven fuel pump, which resulted in a total loss of engine power. Contributing to the failure of the fuel pump was an unknown non-ferrous metallic debris that was noted throughout the airplane’s fuel system.
To download the final report. Click here. This will trigger a PDF download to your device.
This January 2023 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.
“a master warning light on the instrument panel illuminated”?? Warning light for what?
“Unable to reach the airport or a field due to a high descent rate”?? High decent rate? Is this actual terminology from the NTSB?
How do we learn from these reports if they are written from what sounds more like a movie script?
“Unknown non ferrous material” ?
Vertical vibration on the test stand ?
Pretty poor exam for all the money their test lab cost us .
Last guy is right delivery to a/c should be examined.
Note to self: Don’t fill the airplane gas tank using the garden watering can.
Regards/J
And no further elaboration on the vertical vibration noted during the test run and whether or not that did or may have contributed to the power fluctuation or loss.
The post-accident investigation discourse does not say if the aircraft’s (electrical) fuel boost pump was tested for proper operation, or if there was an attempt to bypass the engine driven pump and run the engine with the boost pump.
They did test the boost pump and it had the same contamination and similar internal damage. What bothers me is, no one said if this was aluminum or brass or what so that one might determine where that contamination originated. Would it be possible that a fuel pump for filling aircraft had a problem?
Curious to know where all the metal contamination came from in the fuel system.