Cloverdale, IN, USA
N64MF
Mueller Stewart Headwind B
The experimental amateur-built airplane sustained substantial damage on impact with terrain during a forced landing following an in-flight loss of engine power on initial climb. The pilot stated, "At [approximately] 250 [feet above ground level] on the climb and over the departure end of the runway, the engine cut out. I immediately leveled off, applied carb heat [and] reduced throttle; the engine 'caught' and I began a left bank turn to provide room for a right turn to land back on our strip; simultaneously, I attempted to gain altitude; the engine cut out again. ... I had insufficient altitude and airspeed to make it over the sign and could not increase my right bank angle, so I went to the left (north) of the sign and impacted the ground at minimum airspeed next to the sign." The engine was test run and no pre-impact anomalies were found with the engine or airframe. The pilot's safety recommendation stated, "This [aircraft] was a recently purchased 'experimental' [aircraft]. During the investigation, we discovered the fuel tanks had only one outlet - in the center on the end of each tank, meaning 1/2 fuel level or less was insufficient in a climb or glide attitude. Had that info been available, the accident could have been avoided!"
On June 30, 2005, about 1915 central daylight time, an experimental amateur-built Mueller Stewart Headwind B airplane, N64MF, piloted by an airline transport pilot, sustained substantial damage on impact with terrain during a forced landing following an in-flight loss of engine power on initial climb from the Clover Knoll Airport, near Cloverdale, Indiana. The personal flight was operating under 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident. No flight plan was on file. The pilot reported that he sustained minor injuries. The local flight was originating at the time of the engine power loss. The pilot's accident report stated: At [approximately] 250 [feet above ground level] on the climb and over the departure end of the runway, the engine cut out. I immediately leveled off, applied carb heat [and] reduced throttle; the engine 'caught' and I began a left bank turn to provide room for a right turn to land back on our strip; simultaneously, I attempted to gain altitude; the engine cut out again. I entered a right gliding turn attempting to make the strip: the engine briefly 'caught' again but immediately began running rough in the glide and quit 1/2 to 3/4 of the way around the turn. I had overshot runway centerline which put a large advertising billboard (my strip is adjacent to and parallels I-70) between my glide path and the runway; I had insufficient altitude and airspeed to make it over the sign and could not increase my right bank angle, so I went to the left (north) of the sign and impacted the ground at minimum airspeed next to the sign. [Aircraft] nosed over on its back; I immediately exited the [aircraft] A Federal Aviation Administration inspector examined the wreckage. The engine was test run. No pre-impact anomalies were found with the engine or airframe. The pilot's safety recommendation stated: This [aircraft] was a recently purchased 'experimental' [aircraft]. During the investigation, we discovered the fuel tanks had only one outlet - in the center on the end of each tank, meaning 1/2 fuel level or less was insufficient in a climb or glide attitude. Had that info been available, the accident could have been avoided!
The fuel starvation leading to the loss of engine power during takeoff. Factors were the pilot's insufficient information on the fuel system and the sign that had to be circumnavigated during the forced landing.
Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database
Aviation Accidents App
In-Depth Access to Aviation Accident Reports
