FTW95FA069
1994-12-18 · SAN ANTONIO, Texas, United States · Fatal · 1 aircraft · Status: Completed
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
THE LOSS OF ENGINE POWER FOR UNDETERMINED REASONS. A FACTOR RELATED TO THE ACCIDENT WAS: THE LACK OF A SUITABLE AREA FOR THE FORCED LANDING.
Factual narrative
HISTORY OF FLIGHT
On December 18, 1994, approximately 1550 central standard time, a Piper PA-32RT, N21590, was destroyed during a forced landing near San Antonio, Texas. The private pilot received serious injuries, one pilot-rated passenger was fatally injured and another pilot- rated passenger received minor injuries. No flight plan was filed and visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the personal cross-country flight. The aircraft departed Addison Airport, Dallas, Texas, at 1430 for a visual flight rules (VFR) flight to San Antonio, Texas. The pilot reported that about 20 minutes into the flight, the engine "started to sputter a little" and the "RPMs were varying about 500 RPMs." He further stated that after adjustment of the "mixture knob (which seemed lower than normal), the sputter stopped." Approximately 1549, San Antonio approach control cleared the aircraft to land on runway 12L, at San Antonio International Airport (SAT). The airplane was about 4 miles north of the airport, approximately 1,500 feet above ground level (AGL), when the engine lost power. A restart was attempted but was not successful. The airplane came to rest in a grassy field adjacent to power lines and trees approximately 1 1/2 miles northwest of runway 12L.
PERSONNEL INFORMATION
In a written statement, the pilot and owner of the aircraft reported that two friends accompanied him on the flight to San Antonio. Both were certified flight instructors (CFI); however, in an interview, the pilot reported that the flight was not instructional. During the flight, the pilot occupied the front left seat, performed the takeoff, and flew the aircraft until the loss of engine power. The pilot further reported that after the engine "quit", the pilot-rated passenger (fatally injured), who was seated in the right seat said, "I've got the airplane." In a written statement, the pilot-rated passenger seated in the rear reported that after the "engine failure", the right seat occupant "took control of the yoke" and "a restart was initiated" by the pilot. The pilot stated that the right seat occupant was "at the controls" during the forced landing.
AIRCRAFT INFORMATION
A review of airframe and engine records did not reveal any anomalies or uncorrected maintenance defects. However, the pilot reported that he had an A&P mechanic inspect the engine for an oil leak prior to the flight (on the day of the accident). In an interview, the mechanic stated that he observed that "the engine had oil on it to the point where it was not possible to tell where the leak was coming from." After an engine wash and engine runup, he observed oil "on the forward side of the engine case." He "retorqued the case bolts on the lower front side, and the bolts on the forward side of the oil sump." There was no documentation in the engine log records of the case bolts being retorqued.
WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION
Examination of the airplane and engine did not disclose any structural or mechanical anomalies. Continuity was established to all the cylinders and to the accessory drive. There was compression in all cylinders and the magnetos had impulse. Control cable continuity was established from the cockpit to all control surfaces. The oil filter element was clean and there was no evidence of lack of lubrication or thermal distress within the engine. Detailed examination of the fuel system revealed that the inlet screen to the fuel servo had non-metallic debris in the fitting and the screen was observed to be partially clogged. The left and right wing fuel tank screens and the fuel sump screen were clean. A Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Inspector stated that approximately 20 gallons of fuel was observed in the left wing tank at the accident site. The ruptured right wing tank was observed to have residual fuel; however, a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Inspector reported that there was a fuel spill underneath the right wing. Both front seat shoulder harnesses were in the stowed position.
MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL
An autopsy was performed on the pilot-rated passenger by Robert C. Bux, M.D., at the Forensic Science Center, Bexar County, Texas. Toxicology findings were negative.
TESTS AND RESEARCH
One gallon of fuel was sampled from the left wing sump drain at the accident site for testing. According to Petroleum Specialist Lab, Floresville, Texas, the sample conformed to "standard specifications for aviation gasolines." The engine driven fuel pump accessory, p/n RG908OJ6A, s/n D-733, was tested at Aircraft Fuel Injection Service, Dallas, Texas. The pump produced 25 psi of fuel pressure, and 275 pounds per hour fuel flow at 2600 RPM. During the test, fuel flowed "out the overboard drain fitting at a rate of 1/2 gallon" per minute. Additionally, it was observed that all of the "O" rings inside the pump were "worn" and displayed square cross sections. Fuel stains were observed on the outside of the fuel pump, inside of the fuel servo, and inside the induction pipes. According to the manufacturer, "fuel flowing from the overboard drain fitting indicates leakage past the fuel pump drive shaft seal." The anomalies found during testing of the engine driven fuel pump were inconclusive.
ADDITIONAL DATA
The aircraft was released to the owner's representative. THE AIRCRAFT LOST POWER WHILE DESCENDING APPROXIMATELY 4 MILES NORTH OF SAN ANTONIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (SAT). AFTER THE LOSS OF POWER, THE PILOT-RATED PASSENGER MANIPULATED THE FLIGHT CONTROLS WHILE THE PILOT ATTEMPTED A RESTART THAT WAS UNSUCCESSFUL. THE AIRPLANE CAME TO REST IN A GRASSY FIELD ADJACENT TO POWER LINES AND TREES ABOUT 1 1/2 MILES NORTHWEST OF RUNWAY 12L. EXAMINATION OF THE AIRPLANE AND ENGINE DID NOT REVEAL ANY STRUCTURAL OR MECHANICAL DEFECTS. TESTING OF THE ENGINE DRIVEN FUEL PUMP ACCESSORY REVEALED THAT IT WAS FLOWING FUEL FROM THE OVERBOARD DRAIN AT A RATE OF 1/2 GALLON PER MINUTE; HOWEVER, IT WAS STILL PUMPING FUEL TO THE ENGINE AT 25 PSI AND 275 LBS/HR. ON SITE EXAMINATION OF THE AIRCRAFT REVEALED USABLE FUEL IN BOTH WING TANKS. TEARDOWN OF THE PUMP REVEALED 'O' RINGS THAT WERE WORN AND DISPLAYED SQUARE CROSS SECTIONS. ADDITIONALLY, THE INLET SCREEN TO THE FUEL SERVO HAD NON-METALLIC DEBRIS IN THE FITTING AND THE SCREEN WAS OBSERVED TO BE PARTIALLY CLOGGED. THE ANOMALIES FOUND WITH THE FUEL SYSTEM ACCESSORIES WERE INCONCLUSIVE. THE REASON FOR THE LOSS OF ENGINE POWER COULD NOT BE DETERMINED. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database (Pre-2008 Archive) Retrieved: 2026-02-12
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_1994_FTW95FA069.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 (engine failure, 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…