FLIGHT FINDINGSAVIATION OCCURRENCE MAP
Back to map

ERA19LA085 · Piper PA24 250

3 Jan 2019 · Wilkes-Barre, PA, United States Possible conflict

Piper PA24 250 · Accident: fuel related on approach

From Bradford County Airport (N27) to Wilkes Barre Wyoming Valley Airport (WBW)

Report a problem

Narrative check · The NTSB narrative appears to contradict this record's location. Values are shown as recorded, not corrected; compare with the narrative.

Event

NTSB case
ERA19LA085
Event typeAccident: someone killed or seriously injured, or the aircraft substantially damaged (NTSB definition). Incident: an occurrence that affected or could have affected safety, short of that. Glossary
Accident
InvestigationHow far the investigation had got when the record was published: preliminary, ongoing, final or completed. Unknown where the source does not say. Glossary
Completed
API-reported fatalities
0 · all aircraft and ground
Ground fatalities
Unknown
OperationWhat kind of flying it was, grouped by the rules it flew under: airline (US Part 121), air taxi and commuter (Part 135), general aviation (Part 91 and similar), military or government. Glossary
General aviation
WeatherVisual meteorological conditions (VMC): good enough to fly by looking outside. Instrument conditions (IMC): cloud or low visibility, flying by instruments. Glossary
Visual Meteorological Cond

Piper PA24 250

Aircraft type
Piper PA24
Category
Airplane
RegistrationThe aircraft's tail number, such as N12345 or G-ABCD. Registrations are reissued, so the same one years apart can be a different aircraft. Glossary
N6872P
Operator
Unknown
Onboard fatalities
Unknown
Route
From Bradford County Airport (N27), Towanda, PATo Wilkes Barre Wyoming Valley Airport (WBW), Wilkes-Barre, PA
Aircraft age
About 59 years (built 1960)
Flight rulesThe regulations the flight operated under: in the US, Part 91 (general aviation), Part 121 (airlines), Part 135 (air taxi and commuter) and others; for flights abroad, the NTSB's coarser commercial or non-commercial code. Glossary
Part 91: General Aviation
Phase of flightThe stage of the flight when things started to go wrong: standing, taxi, takeoff, initial climb, en route, maneuvering, approach or landing. Glossary
Approach · VFR pattern base
Defining eventThe single coded event the NTSB judges best describes what happened (records from 2008 on). Older records name the first occurrence in the sequence instead. Glossary
Fuel related
DamageDestroyed: beyond practical repair. Substantial: damage that affects the structure, performance or handling and normally needs major repair. Minor: less than that. Glossary
Substantial

Cause areas

  • Aircraft › Aircraft power plant
  • Aircraft › Aircraft systems
  • Personnel issues › Task performance

Approximate · Coordinates as recorded by the NTSB; no uncertainty radius is established.

NTSB narrative

The pilot, who was an airframe and powerplant mechanic, and the flight instructor both reported that, after turning onto the base leg at the end of the instructional flight, the pilot extended the landing gear in preparation to land; however, the gear did not fully extend, and the engine stopped producing power. The pilots made a forced landing to a soccer field short of the runway, during which the airplane struck a ditch and sustained substantial damage to the airframe. A postaccident examination of the airplane and engine revealed no obvious preimpact mechanical anomalies with the landing gear system or the engine. However, the pilot later stated that he had opened the engine cowling after the forced landing and saw the mixture cable was caught in the nose gear assembly. The pilot said he then unsnagged the cable, so it was not immediately obvious to investigators. He said that the mixture cable had gotten caught on the nosewheel assembly when it was trying to extend, which had caused the mixture control arm on the carburetor to move to the lean position.

The pilot had performed maintenance on the landing gear a few weeks before the accident. He used plastic tie-wraps to ensure the throttle/mixture/carburetor heat cables were positioned away from the nose gear, which does not have a protected well on this make/model airplane. He then flew the airplane and placed it back in his hangar until the accident flight. The pilot said there were a lot of mice in his hangar, and he thought a mouse got up in the engine and chewed off the plastic tie-wraps, which allowed the mixture cable to come loose. However, there was no evidence to support this theory.

A review of the airplane's Illustrated Parts Catalogue showed the mixture, throttle, and carburetor heat cables routed and secured away from the nose landing gear via metal clamps. Additional research of the Federal Aviation Administration Service Difficulty Reports (SDRs) revealed only one reported instance in which the mixture control cable got caught in the nose landing gear on this make/model airplane. The December 2003 report stated that, due to the mixture control cable not being properly secured or routed, it encountered the nose gear assembly during extension and fuel to the engine was shut off. The mechanic who submitted the SDR corrected the situation by properly routing and securing the mixture control cable.

Given the available evidence, the mixture control cable in the accident airplane was not properly installed/secured. As a result, the cable caught on the nose landing gear assembly when the landing gear were extended and subsequently pulled the mixture control arm on the carburetor, thus shutting off fuel to the engine.

Probable cause

The pilot/mechanic's improper installation and securing of the mixture control cable, which led to a simultaneous loss of total engine power and failure of the nose landing gear to fully extend when the cable caught on the nose landing gear assembly.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset

Sources

NTSB record ERA19LA085
Event ID
20190104X82250
Case number
ERA19LA085
Dataset
full-current
Source SHA-256
5cf380f0061817c0331a6b2d8cc7e0ee3a79bea469a1001dc5c10e56f35f5ab3
Source notes (4)
  • Unreviewed is an editorial label, not an investigation status. API-sourced is not report-checked or human-reviewed. Explicit event totals are used without summing aircraft injury tables; onboard allocation is withheld. Unknown values remain unknown. The operation category is mapped from the NTSB-reported FAR part and has not been reviewed.
  • Filled from the NTSB case API where the bulk record had no value: investigation status. Values present in the bulk record are kept.
  • The date is the local date, which is the same as the UTC date the NTSB stores.
  • API snapshot SHA-256: 3fcb4608ee56b16d0c914c74824a44b6896274b93cd4c0516aa283fd316312b9; retrieved 2026-09-16T08:31:49.941Z.