NTSB CAROL · Event
Event WPR11LA451
Registry · N2WL
FAA Aircraft Registry record.
Make / Model
LAND PETER A WHITE LIGHTNING
Year of manufacture
1990 · 21 years old at event
Engine
CONT MOTOR IO-360 SER (300 hp)
Seats / Engines
4 seats · 1 engine
Last airworthiness date
19910101
ADS-B equipped
Yes — Mode-S A18F50
Registrant of record
ALCES AIRCRAFT LLC
Source: FAA Aircraft Registry (releasable master file).
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
A total loss of engine power during the landing approach due to fuel starvation. Contributing to the accident was the airplane’s inaccurate fuel indicator.
Factual narrative
HISTORY OF FLIGHT
On September 12, 2011, about 0850 Pacific daylight time, an experimental amateur built White Lightning, N2WL, lost engine power while on approach for landing at General William J. Fox Field Airport (WJF), Lancaster, California. The pilot operated the airplane under the provision of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 as a personal flight. The pilot was not injured. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the lower fuselage structure after making a gear-up, forced landing onto a road adjacent to the airport. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the local flight that departed the Rosamond Skypark Airport (L00), Rosamond, California, about 0845. The pilot initially reported during an interview with an NTSB investigator that he was repositioning the airplane to Fox Field for a conditional inspection, the last of which had occurred in 2009. While on the base to final turn, the engine lost all power. The airplane was unable to reach the runway, and the pilot performed a forced landing onto an adjacent road. Recovery personnel, who arrived at the site shortly after the accident, observed fuel leaking from a wing fuel tank vent port. The pilot reported that the fuel tanks contained about 9 gallons of fuel at takeoff. The airplane was recovered, and subsequently examined by the NTSB investigator-in-charge, and an inspector from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The airplane was equipped with two fuel tanks within each wing. The tanks were positioned along the main spar and leading edge, and notated as “edge” and “spar” tanks. The tanks were interconnected by a series of fuel lines, which passed through the cabin. A fuel selector valve was located on the forward mounting channel below the pilot seat, and out of the pilot’s direct view. The valve had three selectable positions, “off,” “edge,” and “spar.” Examination of the fuel supply system revealed that the fuel selector valve was set to the “edge” fuel tank position. Fuel was not present in the fuel lines from the fuel selector valve to the engine fuel control unit; all lines were free of obstruction. The gascolator was about 1/3 full with blue colored fuel. An automotive fuel filter, which was installed between the electrically driven fuel pump and the fuel control unit, was about 1/5th full. The fuel was tested for the presence of water utilizing SAR-GEL water detecting paste; no water was present. The paper fuel filter element was free of debris. Fluid could be heard sloshing within the fuel tanks; however, no fuel was present at the sump drains. The airplane’s design was such that the fuel filler necks were positioned at the wingtips, preventing a visual assessment of fuel quantity. The airplane’s master power switch was turned on, and the fuel quantity gauge indications were documented. The edge tank gauge indicated that it was empty, and the spar tank gauge indicated it was filled to just under 1/4 of its capacity. The electrically driven fuel pump was turned on, and audible operation was confirmed. The airplane was equipped with a fuel-injected, six-cylinder Continental Motors, Inc., IO-360 engine, serial number 350082. The engine sustained no obvious indications of damage. The top spark plugs were removed and examined. Their electrodes remained mechanically undamaged, coated in light grey deposits, and displayed normal wear signatures when compared with the Champion Spark Plugs AV-27 Check-A-Plug chart. The exhaust pipes exhibited light grey deposits, and were free of oil residue. The crankshaft turned freely when rotated by hand utilizing the propeller, and “thumb” compression was observed on all cylinders. Mechanical continuity was established throughout the rotating group, valve train, and accessory section. Sparks were observed at the termination of each top spark plug electrode. No anomalies were noted to the engine that would have precluded normal operation. The pilot completed the NTSB Form 6120.1 Pilot/Operator Aircraft Accident/Incident Report, but did not respond to multiple subsequent requests for further information regarding the accident circumstances. The submitted 6120.1 did not document the date of the airplane’s most recent annual inspection, and the maintenance logbooks were not made available for examination. The FAA inspector reported that there were no records indicating the airplane had been issued a ferry permit. The pilot was repositioning the experimental airplane for a conditional inspection when, on final approach to land, the engine lost all power. He subsequently performed a forced gear-up landing onto a road adjacent to the destination airport and the airplane sustained substantial damage. The airplane was equipped with two fuel tanks within each wing. Because fuel leaked from each of the tanks after the accident, an exact determination of fuel quantity could not be confirmed. A fuel selector valve was located on the forward mounting channel below the pilot's seat and out of the pilot’s direct view. Subsequent examination revealed that both tanks contained only residual quantities of fuel and that the supply lines from the fuel selector to the fuel pump and engine were empty, indicative of fuel starvation. One of the fuel tank gauges erroneously indicated a tank quantity of just under 1/4 full when no fuel was actually present in the tank. No mechanical anomalies were noted to the engine that would have precluded normal operation. 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 level - C
- C Personnel issues-Task performance-Planning/preparation-Fuel planning-Pilot - C
- F Aircraft-Aircraft systems-Fuel system-Fuel quantity indicator-Malfunction - F
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2011_WPR11LA451.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 (stall, fuel starvation, maintenance). Sourced from NASA NTRS, NTSB Safety Studies, FAA CAMI, AOPA Air Safety Institute, Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons, arXiv, and the Semantic Scholar academic graph.
- Embry-Riddle Scholarly Commons 2023 · Conference paper
The Value of Strong Partnerships to Build a Successful Aviation Maintenance Career Pathway Program for Transitioning Military Service Members
The aerospace industry is competing with other industries for a qualified workforce, and many of those competing industries are investing heavily in creating workforce development pipelines.
- 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…
- 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 …
- 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.
- 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…
- 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.
Browse the full corpus — academia portal ↗