Las Vegas, NV, USA
N9628R
BEECH B95
The flight instructor and commercial pilot receiving instruction departed on a local instructional flight in the twin-engine airplane. The pilot receiving instruction indicated that each main fuel tank indicated about one-quarter full before departure, and the instructor stated to him that they could "run on the auxiliary tanks." The amount of fuel in the auxiliary tanks could not be recalled. After completing air work, the pilots were conducting an instrument approach to the departure airport when the left engine began to lose power. They continued the approach and shortly thereafter, the right engine also lost power. The instructor performed a forced landing to a golf course fairway, during which the airplane sustained substantial damage to the right wing and came to rest in a small lake. Examination of the airplane revealed that all of the fuel tanks were absent of fuel, and there was no evidence of fuel spillage at the accident site. Examination of the engines revealed no mechanical anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. Given the available information, it is likely that the pilots departed with an inadequate amount of fuel onboard, which resulted in fuel exhaustion and a total loss of power to both engines.
On November 02, 2017, about 1735 Pacific daylight time, a Beech B95, N9628R, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Las Vegas, Nevada. The flight instructor and pilot receiving instruction sustained minor injuries. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91 instructional flight. The flight instructor reported that, before departing on the flight, the fuel quantity gauges indicated that the main fuel tanks were each about two-thirds full. He did not recall the amount of fuel in the auxiliary tanks. The pilot receiving instruction reported that, upon starting the engines before departure, the flight instructor commented, "that’s strange." When he asked, the flight instructor said the main fuel tanks were only one-quarter full. The pilot receiving instruction looked and verified that both gauges indicated about one-quarter full. He stated that the flight instructor said, "we can run on the auxiliary tanks." The pilots departed on the flight and, after performing air work, they initiated an instrument approach. About 10 miles from the airport, the left engine began to lose power. They continued the approach while the instructor attempted to troubleshoot the left engine, until about 6 miles from the airport, when the right engine began to surge, causing a "violent pitching and yawing." The instructor declared an emergency with the tower controller and subsequently chose to land on a golf course fairway. During the landing, the airplane’s right wing struck an obstacle which resulted in substantial damage to the wing. The airplane came to rest in a small lake, submerged in water. The pilots egressed from a rear window and swam to shore. Two Federal Aviation Administration inspectors responded to the accident site and noted no signs of fuel leaking and no fuel slick in the water around the airplane. Following recovery of the airplane the next day, the inspectors confirmed flight control continuity and noted that none of the fuel tanks contained fuel or water. The right main fuel bladder separated from the airplane during the accident sequence; no fuel smell was noted. The airplane was recovered to a secure storage facility for further examination. Both engines were examined, and no mechanical anomalies were noted that would have precluded normal operation.
The flight instructor’s inadequate preflight fuel planning, which resulted in fuel exhaustion, a total loss of power to both engines, and a subsequent forced landing.
Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database
Aviation Accidents App
In-Depth Access to Aviation Accident Reports
