ERA22LA265 · Piper PA-23 180

The pilot had recently purchased the twin-engine airplane, and before the accident flight had completed a preflight inspection, which included sampling fuel from both main fuel tanks and cross feed lines. He started both engines and noted no anomalies during the run-up. During the initial climb the airplane started to yaw to the right and shake. He subsequently transferred control of the airplane to the pilot-rated passenger, who was the previous owner of the airplane. The pilot-rated passenger told the pilot to secure the right engine, which he did. The pilot-rated passenger then attempted to return to the airport but the airplane struck trees, resulting in substantial damage to the fuselage, both wings, the tail, and serious injuries to both occupants. Postaccident examination of both engines found no evidence of a preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. The airplane’s fuel tanks were breached during the accident sequence, and the quantity and condition of the fuel onboard the airplane could not be confirmed. The pilot reported obtaining fuel before the flight, and a witness reported smelling a fuel-like odor when he arrived at the accident site immediately after the accident. The fueler reported that the fuel supply had been tested twice with negative results for water contamination. While the temperature and dewpoint at the time of the accident were favorable for the formation of carburetor ice at glide [idle] engine power settings, given that the airplane was taking off when the loss of engine power to one engine occurred, it is not likely that carburetor icing played a role in the loss of engine power. Based on available information, the reason for the total loss of engine power for the right engine could not be determined.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset