Jesup-Wayne County

The airplane was dispatched on an emergency medical services flight. While being vectored for an instrument approach, the pilot declared an emergency and reported that the airplane was out of fuel. He said the airplane lost engine power and that he was heading toward the destination airport. The airplane descended through clouds and impacted trees and terrain short of its destination. No preimpact anomalies were found during a postaccident examination. The postaccident examination revealed about 1.5 ounces of a liquid consistent with avgas within the airplane fuel system. Based on the three previous flight legs and refueling receipts, postaccident calculations indicated that the airplane was consuming fuel at a higher rate than referenced in the airplane flight manual. Based on this consumption rate, the airplane did not have enough fuel to reach the destination airport; however, a 20-knot tailwind was predicted, so it is likely that the pilot was relying on this to help the airplane reach the airport. Regardless, he would have been flying with less than the 45-minute fuel reserve that is required for an instrument flight rules flight. The pilot failed to recognize and compensate for the airplane’s high fuel consumption rate during the accident flight. It is likely that had the pilot monitored the gauges and the consumption rate for the flight he would have determined that he did not have adequate fuel to complete the flight. Toxicology tests showed the pilot had tetrahydrocannabinol and tetrahydrocannabinol carboxylic acid (marijuana) in his system; however, the level of impairment could not be determined based on the information available. However, marijuana use can impair the ability to concentrate and maintain vigilance and can distort the perception of time and distance. As a professional pilot, the use of marijuana prior to the flight raises questions about the pilot’s decision-making. The investigation also identified several issues that were not causal to the accident but nevertheless raised concerns about the company’s operational control of the flight. The operator had instituted a fuel log, but it was not regularly monitored. The recovered load manifest showed the pilot had been on duty for more than 15 hours, which exceeded the maximum of 14 hours for a regularly assigned duty period per 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 135. The operator stated that it was aware of the pilot’s two driving while under the influence of alcohol convictions, but the operator did not request a background report on the pilot before he was hired. Further, the operator did not list the pilot-rated passenger as a member of the flight crew, yet he had flown previous positioning legs on the dispatched EMS mission as the pilot-in-command.

The airplane was equipped with two experimental Engine AIR Power Systems TSIVD-427, 500-horsepower, liquid-cooled, turbocharged, V8 engines. During previous flights, the right engine lost boost then overboosted intermittently, and attempted repairs were unsuccessful. The pilot elected to fly the airplane to its home base for further troubleshooting. During cruise flight, the pilot reported an engine was surging, declared an emergency, and received vectors toward the airport. The airplane collided into a field beside the airport runway and caught fire. The airplane had a total of 8 to 10 hours of flight time at the time of the accident. Records revealed that two days after the airplane's first test flight, the pilot flew the airplane from Melbourne, Florida, to an airport 336 nm miles away, then flew it to Canada to display it at a fly-in.The FAA operating limitations for the airplane restricted its operation to flight test only, which was proposed to consist of 100 flight hours, since the installation of the modified engines. No single-engine performance data was available for this airplane. Examination of the engines and accessories revealed extensive fire and impact damage. Continuity of the crankshaft, valves, rods, and pistons was established for the right engine by manually rotating the propeller reduction control unit.

After reaching a cruise altitude of 9500 feet the pilot noticed smoke coming out of the left engine cowling. He then proceeded to reduce the left throttle but was unable to move the lever. According to the pilot the fire was extinguished when the left fuel selector was turned off but relit about 3 minutes later. During the emergency descent that followed all electrical power was lost and the copilot was instructed to crank down the landing gear. During landing roll the left gear collapsed as the wing continued to burn. Engine examination revealed that the fuel pressure return line located on the firewall was finger tight. The other fitting was secure and the maintenance manual call for 30-40 inch-pounds of torque on that fitting. The pilot did not follow approved emergency procedures for an inflight wing or engine fire.