DEN01LA093
2001-04-27 · St. George, Utah, United States · None · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Airport SGU
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
the pilot's failure to sump all the fuel drains during preflight and the subsequent loss of power in the right engine during takeoff, the pilot feathering the wrong engine's propeller during the forced landing, the pilot improperly raising the landing gear with usable runway in front of him, and lack of suitable terrain for the forced landing. Contributing factors were the water in the fuel, the terrain induced turbulent cross wind condition, and the mountainous/hilly terrain for the forced landing.
Factual narrative
On April 27, 2001, at 1722 mountain daylight time, a Piper PA-31-350, N27367, was substantially damaged when it landed gear up following a loss of engine power on takeoff from St. George Municipal Airport, St. George, Utah. The airline transport pilot, the sole occupant in the airplane, was not injured. The airplane was being operated by American Aviation, Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah, under Title 14 CFR Part 135. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the cross-country cargo flight, which was originating at the time of the accident. A company VFR flight plan had been filed. According to the pilot's written statement, he took off on runway 16 with full power and a "strong left crosswind." After liftoff, the right engine failed. The pilot said "with the gear up the airplane would not accelerate and began to sink." He made a gear up landing, and the airplane slid to a stop approximately 100 feet off the right side of the runway. The pilot turned off all switches and evacuated the airplane through the left cockpit door. The right main wing spar was bent, the underside of the fuselage was damaged, and the propellers were damaged. A Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Aviation Safety Inspector said that the pilot told him that he lost an engine on takeoff, and he "thought" he feathered an engine (the left engine's propeller was found feathered). Post impact examination of both engines revealed no anomalies which might have affected their performance. Recovery personnel reported that both propellers were "dramatically" bent in the opposite direction of rotation suggesting that there was power on the engines at the time of ground contact. They further stated that the right main fuel tank sump valve (in the wing root) could not be manipulated (opened) because of its orientation in its cavity. They said that during a normal preflight it could not have been sumped. When they removed the valve and sumped the tank, they got 25 percent water. The airplane's Information Manual (Navajo Chieftain) performance section indicates that the airplane's single engine climb rate (estimated weight of 6,500 pounds; inoperative engine propeller feathered) should have been 225 feet per minutes with the existing metrological conditions. The Information Manual also states that an airplane must be preflight checked before every flight. Normal preflight of the airplane includes sumping all seven fuel system sumps. The FAA Advisory Circular 61-21A, Flight Training Handbook states that "the landing gear may be raised as soon as practicable but not before reaching the point from which a safe landing can no longer be made on the remaining portion of the runway." The St. George Municipal Airport sits on a narrow mesa, which drops off 300 feet on one side and 350 feet on the other. The winds reported at the airport's automated weather observation station at 1735 were 130 degrees at 21 gusting to 31 knots. A wind components chart indicated that with a wind 30 degrees left of the runway heading, (using the maximum gusting wind) would have been 16 knots crosswind. The airplane's Information Manual indicates that the maximum demonstrated crosswind velocity was 20 knots. The airport manger said that because of the airport's geographic location, when the wind is 10 to 15 knots, it becomes progressively more turbulent with the wind "spilling" over the mesa. He said that pilots have reported very unusual turbulent wind during some crosswind operations. The pilot departed on runway 16, which is located on a narrow mesa (the surrounding terrain is 300 to 350 feet below). He said that immediately after takeoff, he experienced a loss of power on the right engine. The pilot feathered the propeller on the left engine and performed a forced landing. He had raised the landing gear with runway left to land on. The FAA Advisory Circular 61-21A, Flight Training Handbook states that the landing gear should not be raised until a safe landing can no longer be made on the remaining portion of the runway. Postaccident examination of both engines revealed no mechanical anomalies which might have affected their performance. Recovery personnel reported that both propellers were "dramatically" bent in the opposite direction of rotation. Additionally they found that the right wing root fuel sump valve was installed improperly, and was impossible to sump. When they removed the valve, they found that the fuel sample was approximately 25% water. The wind, at the time of the attempted takeoff, was 130 degrees at 21 gusting to 31 knots. The direct crosswind was calculated to be 16 knots, which was within the airplane's demonstrated crosswind limit of 20 knots. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database (Pre-2008 Archive) Retrieved: 2026-02-12
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2001_DEN01LA093.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 (stall). All research papers
- NASA NTRS 2026 · Conference Paper Computational Analysis of Steady State Aerodynamics of Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Configuration in Deep Stall
This study presents a computational investigation of steady state aerodynamics of the Subsonic Ultra-Green Aircraft Research (SUGAR) Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) configuration over a wide range …
- arXiv 2023 · arXiv preprint Automating Bird Diverter Installation through Multi-Aerial Robots and Signal Temporal Logic Specifications
This paper tackles the task assignment and trajectory generation problem for bird diverter installation using a fleet of multi-rotors.
- arXiv 2023 · arXiv preprint Variation of Critical Crystallization Pressure for the Formation of Square Ice in Graphene Nanocapillaries
Two-dimensional square ice in graphene nanocapillaries at room temperature is a fascinating phenomenon and has been confirmed experimentally.
- arXiv 2023 · arXiv preprint Polycrystallinity enhances stress build-up around ice
Damage caused by freezing wet, porous materials is a widespread problem, but is hard to predict or control. Here, we show that polycrystallinity makes a great difference to the stress build-up process…
- arXiv 2022 · arXiv preprint Enhanced Prediction of Three-dimensional Finite Iced Wing Separated Flow Near Stall
Icing on three-dimensional wings causes severe flow separation near stall. Standard improved delayed detached eddy simulation (IDDES) is unable to correctly predict the separating reattaching flow due…
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2021 · Journal article (JAAER) Analysis on the Negative Emotional, Physiological, and Cognitive Responses Elicited from of the Activation of a Stall Alarm
Failing to identify an aerodynamic stall can lead to the inability of an aircraft to sustain flight. To warn pilots of an impending or fully-developed stall, many aircraft have safety devices installe…