Sequim, WA, USA
N5MN
Burnham Avid Flyer
The purpose of the flight was for the student pilot to perform practice maneuvers in a local training area. Witnesses saw the airplane fly low over the residence of the pilot's girlfriend while performing a series of 360-degree turns around the house. On the second turn, the engine experienced a total loss of power. The pilot said he attempted to restart the engine by performing the emergency procedures, but he was unsuccessful. As the airplane descended to 15 feet above ground level (agl), it collided with a guy wire. Following the accident, an examination of the engine was performed by a local electrical engineer. He stated that he inspected the electrical system of the engine and found it to be non-operational because of a failure of the ignition coil that supplies electrical energy to each ignition system.
HISTORY OF FLIGHT On August 10, 2007, about 0730 Pacific daylight time, an experimental Burnham Avid Flyer, N5MN, experienced a loss of engine power and collided with a guy wire in a residential area of Sequim, Washington. The airplane sustained substantial damage during the accident sequence. The student pilot, who was a part owner, was operating the airplane under the provisions of 14 CFR Part 91. The pilot, the sole occupant, sustained minor injuries. The local personal flight departed from Sequim Valley Airport, about 0700. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and a flight plan had not been filed. A sheriff's deputy arrived on scene shortly after the accident. Witnesses interviewed by the responding sheriff's deputy reported that the pilot had told them that the engine had experienced a loss of power. Local residents at the scene reported that the pilot had been circling over his girlfriend’s house. The area surrounding the accident site was comprised of tall trees and houses. The pilot disappeared immediately after the accident. The deputy found him about 5 hours later, and noted that he appeared to be heavily intoxicated at that time. In both a written report and telephone conversations, the pilot stated that the purpose of the flight was for him to perform practice maneuvers in a local training area. After departure, he maneuvered around the area. He began a 360-degree turn and the engine experienced a total loss of power. He lowered the airplane nose and set up in a wings-level configuration. He attempted to restart the engine by performing the emergency procedures to no avail. As the airplane descended to 15 feet above ground level (agl), it collided with a guy wire. The pilot further stated in the telephone conversation that the airplane was 700 feet mean sea level (msl) when the engine failure occurred. A National Transportation Safety Board investigator interviewed a witness following the accident. She stated that she and her daughter live adjacent to the accident site. Her daughter was dating the pilot during the time frame of the accident. The witness was inside her house when she initially heard the sound of an airplane engine. She went outside and observed the airplane make a complete circle around the house. The airplane began to circle again in a low pass and she could no longer discern the engine sound, only hearing the sound of the propeller "swishing" through the air. The airplane descended between power lines and collided with a guy wire. PILOT INFORMATION A review of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airman records revealed that the pilot was issued a student pilot certificate on April 07, 2007, or 127 days prior to the accident. The pilot's most recent medical certificate was issued as a third-class in April 2000. The pilot’s self-reported total flight time was 89 hours, of which 61 hours were accumulated in the same make and model. A review of the pilot’s logbook revealed that a certificated flight instructor (CFI) had endorsed him for solo flight on April 24, 2007; the logbook contained two other solo endorsements that were signed by a different CFI and dated in June and November 2006. TESTS AND RESEARCH Several locals at the airport performed an examination of the engine several days after the accident. One of the people who performed the examination, an electrical engineer by trade, submitted a written report of the findings. He stated that he inspected the electrical system of the accident engine, a Rotax 582, that is designed to supply the ignition spark; he found it to be non-operational. The Ducati dual ignition system failed to produce any spark to either side of the dual ignition. Although he could not verify the origin of the failure, he opined that there was a "Charging Coil" failure. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION According to Federal Aviation Administration FAR Part 61.87, the following is required to qualify as a student pilot: (n) Limitations on student pilots operating an aircraft in solo flight. A student pilot may not operate an aircraft in solo flight unless that student pilot has received: (1) An endorsement from an authorized instructor on his or her student pilot certificate for the specific make and model aircraft to be flown; and (2) An endorsement in the student's logbook for the specific make and model aircraft to be flown by an authorized instructor, who gave the training within the 90 days preceding the date of the flight.
a loss of engine power due to a dual ignition system failure.
Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database
Aviation Accidents App
In-Depth Access to Aviation Accident Reports
