CEN14LA290
2014-06-04 · Fort Worth, Texas, United States · Serious · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport 2TE2
N8DT has since been reassigned. It is now registered to a different aircraft (AIRBUS HELICOPTERS INC AS350B3, built 2024), which was not involved in this event.
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The non-certificated pilot’s inadequate preflight planning, which resulted in a loss of engine power during takeoff due to fuel exhaustion.
Factual narrative
On June 4, 2014, about 1800 central daylight time, an experimental, amateur-built Tuenis Starduster TOO SA300, N8DT, sustained substantial damage when it impacted tress and terrain after a loss of engine power during takeoff from the Flying Oaks Airport (2TE2), Fort Worth, Texas. The non-certificated pilot and passenger received serious injuries. The airplane was registered to and operated by the pilot individual under the provisions of the 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 as a personal flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident, and no flight plan was filed. The airplane was departing 2TE2 about 1800. The airplane departed runway 15 (2,800 feet by 150 feet, turf). Shortly after takeoff, the engine lost power and the pilot turned the airplane 180 degrees. He was unable to return to the runway, and the pilot attempted to land on a 1/4 mile long driveway that paralleled the runway. During the forced landing, the airplane struck a tree, and then impacted the driveway about 65 feet from the tree impact, and came to rest about 131 feet from the initial tree impact. A witness reported that she heard the engine sputter and lose power before it impacted the ground. The passenger was able to free himself from the wreckage, but the pilot in the rear seat had to be extricated by first responders who separated the fuselage aft of the pilot's seat. A Federal Aviation Administration inspector arrived at the accident site about 4 hours after the accident. The examination of the accident site revealed that the airplane's propeller and spinner had separated from the engine. There was minimal impact damage to the propeller blades and spinner, and there were no signatures of rotational damage consistent with an engine developing power. He observed no evidence of a fuel spill or fuel odor in the debris path. He removed the top wing fuel tank cap and there was no evidence of fuel. He checked the fuselage fuel tank for fuel and none was observed. There was no evidence of fuel leaks or fuel staining. He reported that the fuel tanks were intact and not breached. The following morning he returned to the accident site and checked the fuel tanks again with an inspection camera and confirmed that there was no fuel in the fuel tanks. The wreckage was moved with a tractor and the ground was checked for evidence of fuel, but none was observed within the wreckage area. The airplane was registered to the pilot. A bill of sale indicated that he purchased the airplane on January 27, 2014. Maintenance records indicated that the last conditional inspection of the airplane was conducted on December 9, 2013, with a reading tachometer time of 406.71 hours. The recording tachometer time at the accident site was 421.46 hours. The pilot was not a registered pilot and he did not hold a FAA medical certificate. The pilot's flight experience is unknown. The airplane's recording tachometer indicated that it had flown about 15 hours since the last conditional maintenance inspection. The pilot did not provide the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) a completed NTSB Accident Form 6120.1. Shortly after takeoff, the airplane's engine lost power. The pilot attempted to return to the runway but was unable to reach it so he attempted to land on a 1/4-mile-long driveway that paralleled the runway, but the airplane struck a tree and impacted the driveway. Postaccident examination revealed that the airplane's propeller and spinner had separated from the engine and had sustained minimal impact damage: there were no signatures of rotational damage consistent with the engine developing power at the time of impact. The airplane's fuel tanks were examined and no fuel was observed. The fuel tanks were not breached during the impact, and there was no evidence of fuel leaks or fuel stains at the accident site. The pilot was not a registered pilot and did not hold a Federal Aviation Administration medical certificate. The pilot's flight experience is unknown. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12
NTSB Findings
FAA avdata. C = Cause, F = Factor.
- C Aircraft-Fluids/misc hardware-Fluids-Fuel-Fluid level - C
- C Aircraft-Fluids/misc hardware-Fluids-Fuel-Inadequate inspection - C
- C Personnel issues-Task performance-Planning/preparation-Fuel planning-Pilot - C
- C Personnel issues-Experience/knowledge-Experience/qualifications-Qualification/certification-Pilot - C
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2014_CEN14LA290.txt.
Findings + structured fields enriched from FAA avall.mdb.
Full investigation docket on
data.ntsb.gov ↗.
Search this event elsewhere
External sources are reported, not agency: signal that something happened, not fact about what happened.
- TallyAero Live Wire Aviation press
- NTSB CAROL Agency ↗
- NTSB Docket Agency ↗
- Aviation Safety Network Aviation press ↗
- Kathryn's Report Aviation press ↗
- Aviation Herald Aviation press ↗
- AVweb Aviation press ↗
- Pilots of America Community ↗
- Reddit /r/flying Community ↗
- FlightAware Aviation press ↗
- AOPA accident database Aviation press ↗
- Google News News ↗
- DuckDuckGo News ↗
Related research
Matched on aircraft type or causal vocabulary (fuel exhaustion, maintenance). All research papers
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2026 · Journal article (IJAAA) From Reactive to Predictive: A hybrid Trust-Mediated Adoption Framework for Data-Driven Maintenance in Distributed-Authority Aviation Environments
Modern aviation maintenance operates within increasingly data-intensive technological environments, yet the operational integration of predictive maintenance into routine decision-making remains incon…
- Semantic Scholar 2026 · Article (Reliability Engineering & System Safety) Understanding human error in military aviation maintenance: The role of Performance shaping factors, cognitive workload and error orientation
- Semantic Scholar 2025 · Article (Applied Sciences) Decision-Making Framework for Aviation Safety in Predictive Maintenance Strategies
The implementation of predictive maintenance (PM) in aviation presents unique challenges due to strict safety requirements, complex operational environments, and regulatory constraints.
- Semantic Scholar 2024 · Article (Defence Science Journal) Modelling of Human Factors in Aviation Maintenance Using HFACS ME Human Factors Analysis and Classification System Maintenance Extension and Bayesian Network
Aircraft maintenance is a complex task involving a skilled human workforce, spare parts, and various other resources. Human factors are an inherent element of the human workforce.
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2024 · Journal article (JAAER) A New Trajectory in UAV Safety: Leveraging Reinforcement Learning for Distance Maintenance Under Wind Variations
In the field of aviation, safety is a critical cornerstone, and the operation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) systems is deeply connected with this principle.
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2024 · Journal article (JAAER) Low-Resource Automatic Speech Recognition Domain Adaptation – A Case-Study in Aviation Maintenance
With timeliness and efficiency being critical in the aviation maintenance industry, the need has been growing for smart technological solutions that optimize and streamline the different underlying ta…