NTSB CAROL · Event
Event WPR14LA071
Aircraft involved
Probable cause & findings
The total loss of engine power during takeoff due to fuel starvation, which resulted from the pilot’s failure to adequately manage the fuel supply.
Factual narrative
HISTORY OF FLIGHTOn December 18, 2013, about 1515 Pacific standard time, a Piper PA-32-301 Saratoga, N8169C, experienced a total loss of engine power and made an off-airport landing in Los Angeles, California. Corrales and Associates INC., was the registered owner, and the passenger was operating the airplane under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91. The private pilot and the pilot-rated passenger were not injured; the airplane sustained substantial damage. The local personal flight departed from Whiteman Airport, Los Angeles about 1500. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and no flight plan had been filed. In telephone conversations and in a written statement, the pilot reported that this was the first flight since the airplane's annual inspection. During the preflight inspection, he noted that the fuel gauges located on the wing tanks indicated each tank contained about 12 gallons of fuel. After performing a run-up inspection, he departed runway 12 and returned, completing a full stop landing. He taxied back to the departure end of the runway and again performed a takeoff with the intention of completing a left traffic pattern and subsequent landing. As the pilot turned onto the crosswind leg of the traffic pattern, the engine performance decreased for about 5 to 10 seconds and then experienced a total loss of power. As the airplane began to lose altitude, the pilot switched the fuel selector from the right tank to the left fuel tank position. The pilot attempted to restart the engine and maneuvered the airplane to a field in an effort to perform an off-airport, emergency landing. While landing, the airplane's landing gear dug into the soft terrain and the nose landing gear collapsed, damaging the firewall. The pilot noted that he did not use the airplane's fuel boost pump during his attempted engine restart. The pilot reported that following the accident, he turned the selector to the "off" position. TESTS AND RESEARCHExamination of the recovered airframe revealed that the left and right wings were separated to facilitate wreckage transport. Maintenance personnel reported that prior to transporting the wreckage to the storage facility they had removed approximately 10 gallons of fuel from the left fuel tank and about a quart from the right fuel tank. During the wreckage examination both fuel tanks were empty and there was no evidence of a fuel system breach or staining that would indicate fuel leakage. The airplane was equipped with a Lycoming IO-540-K1GS engine. The engine remained attached to the engine mount assembly and firewall with minimal damage noted. Examination of the engine revealed that the engine case and all six cylinders were intact. The accessory gear case and associated accessories were present and there was no evidence of oil leakage. The propeller, damaged from the accident, was removed from the engine and a "club" propeller was installed on the engine. The gascolator bowl was removed from its attachment point; it contained blue liquid consistent with 100LL fuel. The gascolator screen was clear of debris. The airplane was secured to a forklift and weighted down. A fuel source was attached to the right inlet fuel line prior to entering the fuel selector. The engine was successfully started and run for over 5 minutes at various power settings from idle to about 2,700 rpm. A magneto check was conducted on the left and right magnetos with a minimal rpm drop on each magneto noted. In addition, the propeller was cycled from low pitch to high pitch to low pitch numerous times with no irregularities noted. The engine was shut down utilizing the mixture control lever. The same test run was performed with the fuel source being plumbed to the left inlet fuel line at the fuel selector, and no anomalies were found. During the engine run, when the fuel selector handle was changed to either the "off" position or the tank that was not connected to the fuel source, the engine would run for about 15 seconds, and then would have a temporary decline in rpm (about 5 seconds) before completely losing power. Activating the boost pump and switching the selector to the tank with the fuel source, would restore the engine power. No mechanical anomalies were noted with the recovered engine or airframe that would have precluded normal operation. The pilot stated that, during the preflight inspection, he noted that the fuel gauges located on the wing tanks indicated that each tank contained about 12 gallons of fuel. After performing a run-up inspection, he completed one takeoff and full-stop landing. After taking off again, the pilot turned the airplane onto the crosswind leg of the traffic pattern, and the engine subsequently experienced a total loss of power. As the airplane began to lose altitude, the pilot switched the fuel selector from the right fuel tank to the left fuel tank position. The pilot unsuccessfully attempted to restart the engine and then maneuvered the airplane to a field to perform an emergency landing. While landing, the airplane's landing gear dug into the soft terrain, and the nose landing gear collapsed, which resulted in damage to the firewall. Maintenance personnel reported that, before transporting the wreckage to a storage facility, they removed about 10 gallons of fuel from the left wing tank and about 1 quart of fuel from the right wing tank; the fuel system was not breached, and no evidence of fuel leakage was found. During the postaccident examination, the engine was successfully started and run for over 5 minutes at various power settings. No mechanical anomalies were noted with the engine or airframe 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
- C Aircraft-Fluids/misc hardware-Fluids-Fuel-Fluid management - C
Verbatim from NTSB's published report. Source file
NTSB_2013_WPR14LA071.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 ↗