2 engines still making same mistakes

[201er]

What’s the point of having 2 engines if you forget to have fuel going through them?

https://www.wesh.com/article/small-aircraft-crash-i-95-brevard-county/69665707
 

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/563147

[Schllc]

Did they say somewhere it was fuel exhaustion?  The car looks like the prop cut it up, and the blades are curled like a gear up. 
strange….

[Shadrach]

Neither engine feathered. Master still on.

These guys did a great job…

I have two kids. My son sits right behind me on the driver’s side. I hate to think of the outcome if there had been a passenger in the rear seat of that Toyota.

[0TreeLemur]

Just watched this.   Here's one of the comments on Reddit: 

My first thought was the car driver might have died. Pilot should have avoided car better, even at risk to themselves. I am concerned that was their point, though. BMW of the skies. “I’ll just land on one of the peasants.”  

I for one believe that it is our duty to not aim for other people when we are in trouble, even if it costs us our lives.   Some smiling face on a Florida billboard is going to make a $hit ton of money off this one.    Luckily, the driver of the car escaped decapitation by inches.

This makes me sick.

[Hank]

4 hours ago, Schllc said:

Did they say somewhere it was fuel exhaustion?  The car looks like the prop cut it up, and the blades are curled like a gear up. 
strange….

One engine only bent the single blade pointing at the ground (left side?) backwards, while all three blades on the other side bent backwards. In gear up landings with power, the blade tips bend forward.

So dual engine failure. No mention was made of fuel, only that the plane went down after about an hour's worth of local area flying.

[201er]

 

[toto]

2 minutes ago, 201er said:

 

Remarkable dashcam. I wonder why the pilot decided to land squarely on top of the car instead of offsetting to the side. Maybe the car hit the brakes unexpectedly? Definitely looks like the plane was under control. 

[N201MKTurbo]

I would land in the grass in the middle.

 

[toto]

4 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I would land in the grass in the middle.

 

It’s possible that it’s a lot darker out than it looks. Since the cars all have headlights on, the pilot might not have been able to see beyond the pavement. Dunno 

[N201MKTurbo]

1 minute ago, toto said:

It’s possible that it’s a lot darker out than it looks. Since the cars all have headlights on, the pilot might not have been able to see beyond the pavement. Dunno 

We always make better decisions sitting on the couch. Do we really know what we would do if we were there. We can only hope we would do the right thing.

[toto]

5 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

We always make better decisions sitting on the couch. Do we really know what we would do if we were there. We can only hope we would do the right thing.

No doubt 

[Hank]

17 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I would land in the grass in the middle.

 

The airplane stopped sideways, tail high, resting on the concrete barrier down the middle. What grassy median did you see???

[varlajo]

No chance in hell he could see the car he had collided with. It was always under the belly and nose.

Looks like both engines were running. 

[N201MKTurbo]

44 minutes ago, Hank said:

The airplane stopped sideways, tail high, resting on the concrete barrier down the middle. What grassy median did you see???

I guess you were right. It looked like a divided highway at first. My mistake.

[cbarry]

I sure hope we don’t find out the cause to be a simple miscalculation of fuel remaining.  IMO, although not knowing the equipment on board, even the most basic fuel totalizer still needs human input—which is where the reliability/predictability can wane.

[Yetti]

Looks like left engine stopped on first contact.  The shoulder might have been better aiming point, but there might have been lots of signs.   The signs are supposed to have soft bolts. 

[Jackk]

It’s always interesting to hear how a pilot was a hero for avoiding someone, or why did he land on a car,  it’s like listening to a small child try to explain something well beyond their grasp.

 

 He didn’t PLAN on hitting the car or PLAN on avoiding the car, his functioning IQ was probably cut in half when whatever happened to that plane happened, he was simply trying to go to the best spot he could see (in low light) in what little time he had, good chance he didn’t hit his target point anyway, presuming his target point didn’t change or was as he saw it first, which it probably wasn’t.

 

 Guy got dealt a bad hand, this just as easily could have been one of the ones where there was zero damage because it was in the day and early and the same people would be like “gee that’s a nice landing”

 

 There is only so much you have control of in life.

 

 Time will tell the cause of the issues on that plane 

Edited December 10 by Jackk

[skykrawler]

"On December 10, 2025, the NTSB added the event on their database as a class 4 investigation and assigned the "defining event" as "fuel starvation." "

 

"An NTSB Class 4 investigation is a focused, often remote, review to determine the cause of an accident, common in general aviation (like agricultural aviation), led by an Investigator-in-Charge (IIC) who gathers facts for a final report, but typically doesn't involve extensive on-site teams or lengthy public hearings like major air carrier crashes"

 

[N201MKTurbo]

It seems strange that all four tanks would run dry at the same time. Maybe his AUX tanks were empty when he took off. Both engines will rarely run out at the same time. He was never more that about 20 miles from the airport. If he ran one side dry, he could cross feed or fly on one engine. He would only need a couple of minutes. If he did have one side on cross feed, he could have had both quit at the same time.

The NTSB is saying fuel starvation, not fuel exhaustion. That suggests the pilot didn’t know how to work the fuel system.

[toto]

19 hours ago, varlajo said:

No chance in hell he could see the car he had collided with. It was always under the belly and nose.

That’s probably true at the moment of impact, but presumably he was headed for the road when he was a mile away from the car. 

Anyway, one of the worst scenarios any of us can find ourselves in is an engine out landing at night where the only visible landing spot is a busy road. It’s hard to pass up the road for complete darkness and unknown obstacles, but a busy road means potential injury to innocent motorists. It’s just a sh*tty situation all around, and there’s no good decision.

[Shadrach]

9 hours ago, Jackk said:

It’s always interesting to hear how a pilot was a hero for avoiding someone, or why did he land on a car,  it’s like listening to a small child try to explain something well beyond their grasp.

 

 He didn’t PLAN on hitting the car or PLAN on avoiding the car, his functioning IQ was probably cut in half when whatever happened to that plane happened, he was simply trying to go to the best spot he could see (in low light) in what little time he had, good chance he didn’t hit his target point anyway, presuming his target point didn’t change or was as he saw it first, which it probably wasn’t.

 

 Guy got dealt a bad hand, this just as easily could have been one of the ones where there was zero damage because it was in the day and early and the same people would be like “gee that’s a nice landing”

 

 There is only so much you have control of in life.

 

 Time will tell the cause of the issues on that plane 

1) Presumably, if you’re trained to fly a multi engine aircraft, you feather the prop when you lose an engine.

2) Presumably if you’ve been checked out in a Baron, you should know how to access the fuel in the tanks.

3) I think it unlikely that he did not see the car that he hit. I think it’s likely that he was simply hoping that traffic would pull away from him as he slowed in the flare.

Fuel contamination would qualify as being dealt a bad hand. If this was fuel mismanagement followed by not completing basic procedures, followed by landing on a car, I will struggle to sympathize. If you look at the altitude fluctuations in flight it looks like he was maneuvering and practicing stalls. 
 

This segment of Flight data looks particularly interesting:
 

[Jackk]

30 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

1) Presumably, if you’re trained to fly a multi engine aircraft, you feather the prop when you lose an engine.

2) Presumably if you’ve been checked out in a Baron, you should know how to access the fuel in the tanks.

3) I think it unlikely that he did not see the car that he hit. I think it’s likely that he was simply hoping that traffic would pull away from him as he slowed in the flare.

Fuel contamination would qualify as being dealt a bad hand. If this was fuel mismanagement followed by not completing basic procedures, followed by landing on a car, I will struggle to sympathize. If you look at the altitude fluctuations in flight it looks like he was maneuvering and practicing stalls. 
 

This segment of Flight data looks particularly interesting:
 

 ADSB pings?  Meh

 

 Lots of speculation

 

 But thinking he was analyzing traffic patterns of individual cars during a “oh crap” moment is not likely 

 Have you had a forced off field landing?

 

 Dirty truth, low level short time to do anything failure in the wild, when it comes down to it, it’s more improv than following a script, for better or worse depending on the airman 

Edited December 11 by Jackk

[Shadrach]

2 minutes ago, Jackk said:

 ADSB pings?  Meh

 

 Lots of speculation

 

 But thinking he was analyzing traffic patterns of individual cars during a “oh crap” moment is not likely 

 Have you had a forced off field landing?

 

 Dirty truth, when it comes down to it, it’s more improv than following a script, for better or worse depending on the airman 

 

I know that you think this is a really insightful comment but it’s well understood by anyone that’s been flying long enough to have experienced the uncomfortable position of being behind an airplane. 

I have never had a forced off field landing, but I do have first hand experience with the site picture out of a B55.

 

 

 

[MikeOH]

3 hours ago, toto said:

Anyway, one of the worst scenarios any of us can find ourselves in is an engine out landing at night where the only visible landing spot is a busy road. It’s hard to pass up the road for complete darkness and unknown obstacles, but a busy road means potential injury to innocent motorists. It’s just a sh*tty situation all around, and there’s no good decision.

I am NOT judging others but, for me, THIS is exactly why I do not fly at night.

I want to be able to SEE my landing spot!

[Fritz1]

friend of mine had both engines go out in a C-340, avgas ground tank at airport had been replenished with jet fuel