ERA09LA310 · Cessna 172M

About 7 months before the accident, the carburetor was overhauled, but after installation, the engine could not be restarted when it was hot, and lost power one time in flight. The carburetor was returned to the overhaul facility, repaired, and re-installed a second time. According to the pilot-rated co-owner/passenger, the engine ran "fine" during a test flight, and no flights were conducted between the test flight and the accident flight. Estimates by the pilot and passenger indicated that the accident flight departure fuel quantity was between 26 and 32 gallons. The pilot and passenger departed their home airport for another airport approximately 20 miles away, conducted two touch-and-go landings, and began the return leg to their home airport. While in cruise at 1,100 feet, the engine ran roughly for a brief period of time, and then lost all power. The pilot attempted to restart the engine, but was unsuccessful. The airplane struck trees, and came to rest approximately 25 feet above the ground, suspended by the trees. Based on the pilot's account of the departure fuel quantity and the duration of the flight, the airplane manufacturer's fuel consumption rates did not support the case for fuel exhaustion, but neither the pre-flight nor post- accident fuel quantities were able to be accurately determined. The engine was operated successfully in a post-accident ground test, and subsequent examination and test of the carburetor did not reveal any anomalies. When the intersection of the local temperature and dew point values was located on a chart that depicted carburetor ice envelopes, the point was in the envelope entitled "Serious Icing at Glide Power," near the boundary of the envelope entitled "Icing - Glide and Cruise Power."

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset