NTSB CAROL · Event
Event CEN14LA393
Registry · N72CW
FAA Aircraft Registry record.
Make / Model
VAN'S AIRCRAFT RV-6
Year of manufacture
2020
Engine
LYCOMING IO-360-C1E6 (200 hp)
Seats / Engines
2 seats · 1 engine
Last airworthiness date
20201008
ADS-B equipped
Yes — Mode-S A9A17A
Registrant of record
WALSH CHRIS
Source: FAA Aircraft Registry (releasable master file).
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
A total loss of engine power due to fuel starvation, which resulted from the pilot’s improper fuel management and resulted in a forced landing on unsuitable terrain.
Factual narrative
On July 27, 2014, at 0917 mountain daylight time, a Beech 35-C33A airplane, N72CW, impacted terrain short of runway 8L at Pueblo Memorial Airport (KPUB), Pueblo, Colorado. The pilot was not injured, but his passenger sustained serious injuries. The airplane was substantially damaged. The airplane was registered to and operated by Henke Petroleum Corporation of Shawnee, Oklahoma, under the provisions of 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 had been filed. The flight originated from Shawnee Regional Airport (KSNL), Shawnee, Oklahoma, about 0725 central daylight time. According to the pilot's accident report, he was cleared to land on runway 8L at PUB. On final approach with the engine idling, he advanced the mixture control to FULL RICH and the propeller control to HIGH RPM in case he had to make a go-around. The engine immediately lost power and the airplane started losing altitude. The pilot saw a ravine ahead. He turned south to avoid the ravine and made a forced landing on rough terrain. On August13, 2014, the engine and airframe were examined at Beegles Aircraft Service in Greeley, Colorado. No airframe anomalies were found. Flight control continuity was established. The elevator trim indicator read 5 units UP. The left and right elevator trim actuator extensions were approximately 1 11/16 inches, equivalent to approximately 15° trim tab down (nose up). Both flap actuator extensions were measured and found to be about 1 9/16 inches, equivalent to approximately 0°, or flaps up. The landing gear switch was down and the landing gear actuator was extended. The Hobbs meter read 149.3 hours and the tachometer recorder read 976.29 hours. The fuel selector was found positioned on the left main fuel tank. A clear rudder tube was inserted into the left wing fuel pipe. Air was blown into the clear tube and fuel ejected from the fuel pipe. The fuel selector handle was rotated to the right main tank and the procedure was repeated. Fuel ejected from the fuel pipe. The left and right wing bladder fuel tanks were intact. The recovery crew stated that about 25 gallons of fuel was drained from the right wing, and about ½ gallon of fuel was drained from the left wing. The top spark plugs were removed and examined. When compared to the Champion Check-A-Plug chart, the color and wear patterns were consistent with a normal condition. The cylinders were examined using a lighted borescope. All cylinders were intact, undamaged, and appeared dry. They exhibited normal heat signatures with normal combustion deposits. The engine driven fuel pump drive coupling was examined and found intact. The pump was free to rotate by hand without restriction. The engine was shipped to Continental Motors in Mobile, Alabama, where, on October 30, 2014, it was functionally tested in a test stand. The engine was operated to full power and no anomalies were noted. There was, however, a small leak in the metering unit due to impact damage. The Continental Motors representative was asked to calculate to fuel consumed and the following is what he reported. The straight line distance from Shawnee, OK, to Pueblo, CO, is 464 nautical miles. At an average cruising speed of 160 knots, it would take about 2.9 hours to travel this distance. The IO-550 will burn about 16 gallons per hour (gph) in cruise flight. Thus, 46.4 gallons would be consumed in this time period. Subtracting 46.4 gallons from the 74 gallons useable would leave approximately 27.6 gallons. Subtracting 25 gallons that was recovered by the salvage crew from the right wing leaves 2.5 gallons, which is the amount estimated to have remained in the left tank. These calculations do not take into account winds aloft or the fuel consumed for takeoff (approximately 26 gph ), maneuvering after departure or upon arrival, and entering the traffic pattern. The pilot reported that, while on final approach with the engine idling, he advanced the mixture control to the "full rich" position and the propeller control to the "high rpm" position in case he had to perform a go-around. The engine immediately lost power, and the airplane started to lose altitude. The pilot turned the airplane to avoid a ravine ahead and subsequently made a forced landing on rough terrain. The engine was functionally tested in a test cell to full power, and no anomalies were noted. About 25 gallons of usable fuel were found in the right fuel tank. However, the fuel tank selector was found positioned to the left fuel tank, and only 1/2 gallon of fuel was found in the left tank; therefore, it is likely the engine was starved of available fuel. If the pilot had been monitoring the fuel in flight and switched the fuel tank selector to the right fuel tank, the engine likely would not have been starved of fuel. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database Retrieved: 2026-02-12
NTSB Findings
Hierarchical cause / factor breakdown from the FAA bulk avdata database. Each finding tagged C (Cause) or F (Factor).
- C Aircraft-Fluids/misc hardware-Fluids-Fuel-Fluid management - C
- C Personnel issues-Task performance-Planning/preparation-Fuel planning-Pilot - C
- C Personnel issues-Action/decision-Action-Lack of action-Pilot - C
- — Environmental issues-Physical environment-Terrain-Rough terrain-Contributed to outcome
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2014_CEN14LA393.txt.
Findings + structured fields enriched from FAA avall.mdb.
Full investigation docket on
data.ntsb.gov ↗.
Beyond the agency record
Search this event elsewhere.
Pre-filled searches into the sources where news + community discussion of aviation events lives. External sources are reported, not agency. Treat them as signal that something happened, not as fact about what happened.
Entity-clustered aviation events in the press — last 24 hr + 30-day archive.
Official agency record + docket.
Investigative docket: factual reports, photos, transcripts.
Long-running aviation incident database (Flight Safety Foundation).
Community NTSB synthesis blog — often has photos and witness reports.
Gold-standard aviation incident blog.
Aviation industry news search.
GA pilot forum — informed but rumor-prone.
GA pilot subreddit search.
Tail-number page — flight history (free tier limited).
AOPA Air Safety Institute search.
Mainstream press coverage. Recent events only.
Privacy-preserving news search.
External links open in a new tab. We don't ingest their content; we deep-link search queries.
Related research
What the literature says.
Academic papers and agency reports matching this event's aircraft type or causal vocabulary (fuel starvation, go-around). Sourced from NASA NTRS, NTSB Safety Studies, FAA CAMI, AOPA Air Safety Institute, Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons, arXiv, and the Semantic Scholar academic graph.
- NASA NTRS 2025 · Conference Paper
A Training Study to Improve Monitoring During A Go-Around
As part of an FAA program to improve go-around (GA) safety, we were asked to determine if we could improve the performance of the Pilot Monitoring (PM) during a GA maneuver.
- Flight Safety Foundation 2024 · FSF / AeroSafety World
Go-Around Safety Forum Findings
Foundation Go-Around Safety Forum technical findings — examines why pilots fail to execute go-arounds when criteria are met (stabilized approach gate not met, energy state out of envelope, traffic con…
- Semantic Scholar 2022 · Article (Journal of Safety Research)
Go-around accidents and general aviation safety.
INTRODUCTION Changes in General Aviation (GA) accident rates, specifically in the go-around phase, are examined by comparing the number of accidents, the proportion of fatal accidents, and the proport…
- Semantic Scholar 2021 · Article (Aerospace)
Classification and Analysis of Go-Arounds in Commercial Aviation Using ADS-B Data
Go-arounds are a necessary aspect of commercial aviation and are conducted after a landing attempt has been aborted. It is necessary to conduct go-arounds in the safest possible manner, as go-arounds …
- NASA NTRS 2021 · Accepted Manuscript (Version with final changes)
Go-Around Criteria Refinement for Transport Category Aircraft
Presently, airline pilots are trained to go around if, when lower than 500 ft above the ground, they are outside of a handful of parameters such as airspeed, position, and rate of descent.
- NASA NTRS 2019 · Conference Paper
Validation of Proposed Go-Around Criteria Under Various Environmental Conditions
This paper evaluates the effects of environmental conditions on touchdown performance under varying approach states and validates proposed go-around criteria developed using data from a previously con…
Browse the full corpus — academia portal ↗