CHI05TA251

Factual narrative

On August 31, 2005, at 1000 central daylight time, a Cessna 182R, N505NR, operated by the State of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, was substantially damaged during a forced landing following a loss of engine power after takeoff from runway 15 (4,401 feet by 75 feet, asphalt) at the New Ulm Municipal Airport (ULM), New Ulm, Minnesota. The state public use flight was being conducted under 14 CFR Part 91 without a flight plan. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed. The pilot and passenger reported no injuries. The pilot reported that during initial climb, approximately 200 feet above ground level, "the engine stopped." His attempts to restore power were unsuccessful. He executed a forced landing in a soybean field southeast of the runway. The pilot added that the landing gear collapsed due to the soft field conditions. The airplane came to rest upright. A Continental IO-470F fuel-injected engine was installed in place of the original Continental O-470 carbureted engine on the accident airplane under Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) SA3825SW. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) form 337, Major Repair and Alteration, dated August 30, 1991, was included in the FAA aircraft records file. The STC installation incorporated a small header fuel tank (approximately 1/3 gallon), which was placed aft of the firewall, near the cabin floor on the centerline of the airplane. Fuel flowed from the main wing tanks and fuel selector to the header tank. The header tank in turn supplied fuel to the engine. A post accident examination of the engine did not reveal any anomalies. Fuel samples were taken from the wing tanks. In addition, the fuel between the fuel selector and the flow divider on the engine, which included the header tank, was drained. No contamination was observed in either sample. The engine fuel strainer was disassembled and no contamination was observed. The engine was subsequently test run at idle power using the aircraft fuel system. No discrepancies were observed during the engine run. Power was not increased above idle power due to concerns about the condition of the propeller. The accident flight was the first flight after maintenance had been performed. According to the mechanic who performed the work, the No. 3 engine cylinder had been removed and the gasket between the cylinder and the crankcase was replaced. The mechanic noted that the engine was run following the maintenance and no problems were noted. The pilot reported that the fuel selector was set to BOTH for takeoff. While troubleshooting the loss of engine power, he selected each fuel tank separately before returning it to the BOTH position. The FAA inspector on-scene reported that the fuel selector was in the OFF position when he first observed it. He stated that the pilot told him the selector was turned off after the forced landing. The airplane was substantially damaged during a forced landing following a loss of engine power. The pilot reported that during initial climb, approximately 200 feet above ground level, "the engine stopped." His attempts to restore power were unsuccessful and he executed a forced landing in a soybean field. The landing gear subsequently collapsed during the emergency landing. A post accident examination of the engine did not reveal any anomalies. Fuel samples taken from airplane's fuel system did not reveal any contamination. The engine was subsequently test run at idle power using the aircraft fuel system. No discrepancies were observed during the engine run. Power was not increased above idle power due to concerns about the condition of the propeller. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database (Pre-2008 Archive) Retrieved: 2026-02-12