CEN21LA323 · Cessna P210N

The pilot and passenger were conducting a business cross-country flight. During cruise climb, they began to smell an odor in the cabin and eventually saw smoke emanate from the center control console. The pilot declared an emergency with the air traffic controller and asked to land at the nearest airport.

While the pilot diverted to the nearest airport, he was unable to extend the landing gear using the landing gear hydraulic power pack. He concluded that the source of the odor and smoke was likely from a hydraulic power pack motor failure and proceeded to extend the landing gear using the emergency landing gear extension procedure. However, after numerous pumps, the green landing gear down and locked position indicator did not illuminate on the instrument panel. The pilot reported that both main landing gear were extended and, as such, he concluded that the nose landing gear was likely not fully extended.

The pilot reported that the airplane landed on the runway centerline and that he kept the nose landing gear off the runway as long as possible, but when the nose gear contacted the runway the airplane veered right and off the runway. The airplane then continued to roll and skid several hundred feet until it nosed over. The fuselage, both wings, and empennage were substantially damaged during the accident.

Based on wheel marks on the runway and grass easement and the overall distance the airplane traveled during the landing roll before the nose gear separated, it is likely the landing gear were fully extended with their respective down locks engaged during the landing roll. The nose landing gear separation was likely due to excessive forces generated while the airplane continued the landing roll in the grass easement adjacent to the runway.

The circuit breaker for the hydraulic power pack was found tripped/pulled. Although the green position indicator light did not initially illuminate when electric power was turned on, it illuminated after the bulb assembly was unscrewed and reinstalled.

Examination of the hydraulic power pack fluid reservoir revealed that the fluid level was below the ADD level as indicated by the reservoir dip stick. Further examination of the hydraulic system did not reveal any evidence of a leak. It is likely the electric motor that powered the hydraulic power pack overheated and failed due to its continuous operation while the hydraulic power pack attempted to maintain hydraulic system pressure with a low fluid level. When tested after the accident, the landing gear extended into a down and locked position using the emergency landing gear extension hand pump.

Based on available weather data and performance calculations using automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) track data, the pilot landed with a left quartering tailwind. The calculated tailwind component during landing was at least 12 knots.

It is likely the pilot did not maintain directional control of the airplane during the landing roll with a tailwind. Additionally, based on the postaccident examination, although the hydraulic power pack was not working, the landing gear was likely down and locked and, thus, did not contribute to the pilot’s loss of directional control during the landing roll.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset