NTSB CAROL · Event
Event LAX07LA220
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
a fuel starvation induced loss of engine power due to inadequate fuel system pressure. A factor in the accident was the pilot/builder's failure to adequately adjust the fuel system pressure.
Factual narrative
On July 13, 2007, at 2045 eastern daylight time, an experimental Sopwith F1, N6338, experienced a loss of engine power and collided with terrain during a go-around at Greenville Municipal Airport, Greenville, Pennsylvania. The pilot, who was the owner and builder, was operating the airplane under the provisions of 14 CFR Part 91. The private pilot, the sole occupant, sustained serious injuries. The airplane sustained substantial damage. The local area personal flight departed Greenville about 2000. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed; no flight plan had been filed. In a telephone interview with a National Transportation Safety Board investigator, the pilot stated that on the day of the accident the airplane fuel tanks were approximately 1/4 full. He departed Greenville for a pleasure flight, and on returning to the airport attempted a landing. During the approach he elected to perform a go-around. He applied full power, but the engine did not respond; he pumped the manual fuel pressure handle a few times and the engine regained power for approximately 10 seconds, but then lost all power. The airplane collided with terrain in a corn field. The pilot stated that both an engine driven pump and a fuel tank air pressurization system maintain fuel pressure for the Gnome 9N engine. A small propeller driven air pump, mounted on the right wing strut, maintains air pressure in the tank. A pressure relief valve is integrated into the propeller-pump, and is set to maintain a system pressure of 1.5 psi. During ground operations, a pilot operated hand pump maintains pressure. The pilot stated that during previous flights he was concerned that the fuel system may not be able to provide enough fuel pressure to supply the engine. He performed flight tests in various phases, including go-around, and at various flight attitudes. He reported being able to achieve dependable engine performance. He noted that during these tests the fuel tank was full prior to flight. The pilot surmised, that on the day of the accident, the 1/4 tank of fuel onboard did not provide the head pressure that existed on previous flights. He also stated that the pressure relief valve should be adjusted so that greater pressure can be maintained in the fuel system. He stated that he designed the fuel system to replicate the original Sopwith F1 Airplane, using limited historical documentation. According to Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular AC 20-27F, Certification and Operation of Amateur-Built Aircraft, "Amateur builders are free to develop their own designs or build from existing designs. We do not approve these designs and it would be impractical to develop design standards for the wide variety of design configurations, created by designers, kit manufacturers, and amateur builders." The amateur-built replica airplane was in the initial test flight stage and had only 3 hours total time. The pilot was returning to the airport with only 1/4 tank of fuel to attempt a landing. During the approach, he applied full power to perform a go-around, but the engine did not respond. He pumped the manual fuel pressure handle a few times, and the engine regained power, but then lost all power. The airplane then collided with terrain in a corn field. The pilot said he designed the fuel system to replicate the original, but only had limited historical documentation to work from. The system utilized both an engine driven fuel pump, and a separate wing strut mounted propeller driven air pump that pressurizes the fuel tank to maintain fuel pressure for the engine. On previous flights the fuel tank was full or nearly so during the landings. The pilot surmised that on the day of the accident, the 1/4 tank of fuel onboard did not provide the head pressure that existed on previous flights. He also stated that the system fuel pressure should have been increased by adjusting the strut mounted relief valve on the air pump. Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database (Pre-2008 Archive) Retrieved: 2026-02-12
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2007_LAX07LA220.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 ↗