Fire over the Sound

AuntPeggy

Final Approach
PoA Supporter
Joined
May 23, 2006
Messages
8,479
Location
Oklahoma
Display Name

Display name:
Namaste
Read the NTSB report: http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20140818X83335&key=1
View the flight plan, flight path: http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N292LC

[EDIT: After reviewing this with my original source, I've made some edits to this post and added corrections and clarifications.]


Two of our friends were out for a jaunt in their C-182 a few weeks ago. Hubby has flown with both of them, giving one a BFR and primary training for the other one. The pilot in this flight is one of those by-the-book kind of guys who keeps his airplane maintained superbly and keeps his skills honed. You know the kind, he files IFR for a 1/2 hour flight when it is 'severe clear' to fly over a stretch of water. He has fuel pressure and fuel flow instruments and he monitors them.

As they leveled off after takeoff, the pilot noted that his fuel flow had reached 50 gph, which is considerably more than a C-182 ought to burn, and fuel pressure was zero. He figured he was having some sort of instrument problem and decided to abort the flight. Turning back, he informed Departure that he was returning to Farmingdale. Both men started to smell burning insulation and the pilot radioed that they were probably having an electrical fire.

Now, the passenger, as mentioned earlier, was previously one of Hubby's primary students. He is also a volunteer fireman and EMT. And, although he has survived cancer twice, he never really knew how he would react in a situation where the immediate outcome would probably be death. Put to the test, he took an instant to think, "This is how I'm going to die." Then just focused moment by moment on staying alive as long as possible and keeping the number of other people killed to a minimum.

During training flights, when the ritual emergency procedures were stated, he would always say to Hubby, "In case of fire, you fly the plane and I'll fight the fire." That certainly made sense to them both. But in this case, the fire extinguisher was in the back and unreachable.

Because it was an electrical fire, they turned off the master electrical switch after getting clearance to land on any runway. Both men were cooperating in discussing all the possibilities and the actions to take. Whatever the pilot did, the passenger was watching and double-checking. He saw flames playing behind the rudder pedals on the pilot side. The pilot continued to fly as his feet threatened to cook. They discussed whether to open the vents or the windows as the cabin began to fill with smoke and then decided to leave them shut. In retrospect, that was the right decision.

The decision was made to stay high and descend only after the field was made. They decided to leave the fuel flowing because the engine seemed to be operating normally and because they were over a highly dense population with no place to land except the airport. It turns out that this was also a good decision.

Unheard in the cockpit, where the radios were turned off, the tower radioed that the aircraft was in flames and was cleared to land. At the very last minute, they turned the master back on, hoped for the best, and dropped the landing gear. It worked. Spotting fire engines waiting at the first turn-off, they landed, turned, stopped, jumped out, and ran.

They were lightly singed. The plane was engulfed in flames. Two waiting fire trucks emptied all their foam and a third, directing all of their foam at the engine, nearly ran dry.

There is a FSDO on the field, so FAA officials were all over the accident quickly. They were delighted. So often the result of such a fire is fatal. In this case, both passengers were unhurt and the airplane, although totaled, is in one piece. They will be learning a lot about an in-flight fire from the wreckage.

CORRECTIONS and CLARIFICATIONS:

1) Cancer survivor once, not twice.

2) He said, "I wish I were so heroic as to expect to die and then just put the thought aside, but that isn't the way it was. I truly expected to survive all the way to the end. There was no doubt in my mind. It was just a matter of doing what needed to be done to get there." He went on to say he had (and has) great confidence in the pilot.

3) The fire extinguisher was in its proper place. It was not used for a number of reasons. First, flames did not appear from inside the airplane until possibly 90 seconds before they landed. They were at about 2200 feet at the time. Second, the (fire fighter) passenger was worried that the pilot would need to bail into the rear seat if the flames got worse and the passenger would need to complete the landing and at the same time manage a wildly fluctuating center of gravity. He was mentally prepared to do this and could have. Third, it wouldn't have helped anyway.

4) The pilot had the presence of mind to swing onto the taxiway instead of stopping straight ahead on the runway because he wanted the wind to blow the flames away from the cockpit instead of toward it as they exited the plane. Even so, it was incredibly hot as they got out.
 
Last edited:
Wow, very scary. Sounds like they handled it like pros, and it does not suprise me this happened with a Cessna retract.
 
Wow, very scary. Sounds like they handled it like pros, and it does not suprise me this happened with a Cessna retract.

That was my first thought, but it was not an electrical fire and it was not in the gear. It was the carburetor.

"According to the responding Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspector, the AN911-2D nipple fitting that connected the fuel line Tee AN917-2D to the carburetor was found separated, which allowed fuel to be pumped into the engine bay."
 
I never really understand why engine components are usually all connected via ALUMINUM fittings, but GA aircraft are LOADED with them.

Not all that long ago there was Lycoming AD involving pretty much every 4 banger (maybe even 6ers) equipped with a constant speed propeller, and the issue was aluminum fittings at the back of the engine that carried high pressure oil outside of the engine in a tube that runs underneath the cylinders which fed back into another fitting on the front of the engine for the constant speed propeller.

Those fittings failed and the prop governor quickly pumped the engine oil overboard.
 
where was the fire extinguisher?

I have a halon one under my seat easily reachable. Always current and in time.
 
where was the fire extinguisher?

I have a halon one under my seat easily reachable. Always current and in time.

Good question. I asked that one, too. Turns out it was in the back and unreachable. Probably would not have helped anyway.

[EDIT: The fire extinguisher was in its proper place, in reach of the pilot and passenger, but since they were within a few seconds of landing when flames were spotted, they did not distract from the landing to use it. Probably would not have helped anyway.]
 
Last edited:
where was the fire extinguisher?

I have a halon one under my seat easily reachable. Always current and in time.

Wouldn't have done any good, the fire was on the outside. The fire inside would rekindle once the Halon dissipated.
 
Wow, that's Jeff's plane! Norm, I guess you knew about this?

Glad he's safe. Jeff's one of the good guys.

And when Aunt Peggy said he's meticulous...that doesn't even begin to describe Jeff. Anal retentive is his confirmation name.
 
"The decision was made to stay high and descend only after the field was made. They decided to leave the fuel flowing because the engine seemed to be operating normally and because they were over a highly dense population with no place to land except the airport. It turns out that this was also a good decision."

Glad they made it!

I too have a fuel flow transducer and anything over 27 gph(IO-540) gets an alarm. Also if there is a fire, I have a temp limit switch set at 230F to illuminate an LED right in front of me. If I see high fuel flow OR high cowl exit temp, not as worrisome. If I see both...FUEL valve is going OFF, emergency descent and I am going to be landing on one of those three highways or those crop fields north of FRG. I know my plane is toast either way but I'd rather get on the ground sooner. Thankfully they did not have much farther to go. They got TWO indications initially that there was a serious problem...High fuel flow and low fuel pressure. A quick 360 turn can also verify you have a fire as most planes don't trail black smoke behind them. My cabin pressure is always negative with all vents closed. With an EXTERNAL cabin fire, I will open my four ram air vents to pressurize the cabin.

I have a very nice friend that had a fuel line leak just before the mechanical pump and after electric boost pump. Engine ran rough, mix rich, boost pump on, engine smoothed out. The fuel ran down ss firewall and burnt through the .040" alum bottom skin. The fire then burnt through the brake lines, insulation and started burning him. The cabin was smoked up, he used the halon, shut off the fuel and popped the gull wing door off to breath and see to land in a field. I was very happy to hear his voice before seeing it on the evening news.

Know your systems well and try to have a plan for every scenario that you can possibly think of. Also ensure that you do not have aluminum fittings supporting flex hoses that will fatigue the fittings over time.
 
Last edited:
Questions from a neophyte...

Do GA planes have a firewall between the engine compartment and the cabin that would prevent flames from coming through?

Are engine bay fire suppression systems available for GA planes, and if so, are they even effective? Are they available for singles as well as twins?

EDIT: Forgot to add...so glad your friends are safe!
 
Questions from a neophyte...

Do GA planes have a firewall between the engine compartment and the cabin that would prevent flames from coming through?

Are engine bay fire suppression systems available for GA planes, and if so, are they even effective? Are they available for singles as well as twins?

EDIT: Forgot to add...so glad your friends are safe!

Yes, there is a firewall. It is stainless steel and will last a few minutes against a fuel fire. The firewall penetrations or aluminum cabin floor (where the flames impinge as they billow out of the engine compartment) may not last as long.

I'm sure there is an exception, but there are no commonly installed fire suppression systems in GA types.

If you have a fire, it is important to ID the cause. These folks mis-identified it and lived to tell about it. If I had an under-cowl fuel fire, and recognized it, I'd shut off the fuel valve in the cockpit unless I was over the pits of Hell.
 
A few things this brings to my mind.

(1) Going to get a fire extinguisher for the 150 now. Not sure how I, a firefighter/emt for 13 years, didn't notice that. And mounting in reach!!! I agree it wouldn't have helped them in this case, but the next one might.

(2) Given fire + high fuel flow, I would make that a 2+2=4 scenario and cut the fuel. I'm familiar with the FRG area and I know it isn't a delightful prospect. But a highway is better than burning alive in a comet.
 
I found the incident on Live ATC. I edited the audio file down to about 5 minutes. Things start getting interesting around 1:30. At 3:20, the tower controller is getting everyone else out of the way and you hear other controllers in the tower talking in the background. They're clearly looking at him through binoculars, seeing the smoke and fire. They radio ARFF and tell them the aircraft is indeed on fire.
 

Attachments

  • FRG Fire.mp3
    4.7 MB · Views: 58
Questions from a neophyte...

Do GA planes have a firewall between the engine compartment and the cabin that would prevent flames from coming through?

Are engine bay fire suppression systems available for GA planes, and if so, are they even effective? Are they available for singles as well as twins?

EDIT: Forgot to add...so glad your friends are safe!

Yes, there's a stainless sheet, seems about 18ga, that also has some penetrations. However in most planes (there are exceptions) the air comes in on top of the cylinders, passes down between them for cooling, and exits out the bottom of the cowl, so fire will pass down the SS plate and back the bottom of the plane, which typically has a film of oil on it, and expose the aluminum to the fire, and if there is 50gph of fuel pouring out, that fire is tracking a long way across the bottom and aluminum is no where near as heat resistant as SS.

The smallest planes I have come across with built in fire suppression system in the cowl are the 400 series Twin Cessna's like the 421. I think you can buy a 150 these days for the price of that damned bottle.:eek:
 
A few things this brings to my mind.

(1) Going to get a fire extinguisher for the 150 now. Not sure how I, a firefighter/emt for 13 years, didn't notice that. And mounting in reach!!! I agree it wouldn't have helped them in this case, but the next one might.

(2) Given fire + high fuel flow, I would make that a 2+2=4 scenario and cut the fuel. I'm familiar with the FRG area and I know it isn't a delightful prospect. But a highway is better than burning alive in a comet.

I think (2) is a good idea, especially if you have a bit of altitude. Kill the fuel flow, fire goes out while you glide, need power, turn on fuel, climb until fire reignites, repeat as required.
 
Suggestions for type? My inclination is C02 or halon. The dry chem is effective but the dust could post a visibility and choking problem.
 
Suggestions for type? My inclination is C02 or halon. The dry chem is effective but the dust could post a visibility and choking problem.

Interior, Halon without a doubt, you can breath Halon without risking unconsciousness, CO2 has more hazard. When Halon first came out, DuPont used to run a demo at trade shows where they would have the rep go in a plexiglass box and they would close it and he would light a cigarette with a Zippo lighter and leave it lit. Then they would discharge the Halon in the box and the lighter and cig would go out, but he was completely fine. It was an extremely effective demo.
 
I think (2) is a good idea, especially if you have a bit of altitude. Kill the fuel flow, fire goes out while you glide, need power, turn on fuel, climb until fire reignites, repeat as required.

The combination of a high fuel flow reading plus a zero pressure would indicate a fuel leak, not an electrical issue. Assuming both gauges have an electric transducer, I'd expect both to go to zero if an electrical file had occurred.

I like the idea of turning the fuel selector to off. Better to fly an intact glider than a burning powered aircraft.
 
The combination of a high fuel flow reading plus a zero pressure would indicate a fuel leak, not an electrical issue. Assuming both gauges have an electric transducer, I'd expect both to go to zero if an electrical file had occurred.

Hmmm, analogue fuel "flow" meters are really just pressure gauges in our spam cans. Without an electronic flow meter, all I'd see in the 'kota is no fuel flow...which leads to a good question for oral exams...
 
Well I think the key is you'd have an indication that a remarkable quantity of fuel is going somewhere other than out the tailpipe of the engine. Whether the engine is still running or not.

In the case of this accident, hindsight is 20/20. It's very easy for me to sit here at my desk and say "well obviously this is a fuel leak related fire because that's what all the combined symptoms add up to." I'm sure in the air, it was not nearly as simple. These guys are obvious smart guys, and had a very small amount time to deal with a very serious emergency. From the sounds of it, they probably had only seconds left to live. Hopefully others learn from it too.
 
Suggestions for type? My inclination is C02 or halon. The dry chem is effective but the dust could post a visibility and choking problem.
Dry chem would be a very bad choice for in-cockpit use. Halon is best.
 
Here is a prior R182 in-flight fire to learn from...

This gentleman survived too. It appears he did not have fuel flow instrumentation, did not turn off fuel either and opted to land in a plowed field gear up.

Don't be afraid to declare or turn power/fuel off. It will still fly. A good reason to practice without airspeed indication occassionally, with a safety pilot or CFI observing the airspeed if at low altitude.

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief2.aspx?ev_id=20040226X00243&ntsbno=CHI04LA078&akey=1
 
The combination of a high fuel flow reading plus a zero pressure would indicate a fuel leak, not an electrical issue.

If you had instruments you could rely on...yes.

But, if you knew the history of this pilot and plane then you'd know that Jeff has had issues with his JPI monitor(s) for a long time and that he has told numerous stories over the years about his attempts to fix issues and JPI's horrid customer service as he was trying to ferret through things.

So, during this event, he likely said to himself "there goes that f****** JPI monitor again." ("again" being the operative word here).

The moral of this story is not to second guess the PIC but rather to ensure that you have instruments and monitors in your plane that you have faith in. Jeff lost faith in JPI a long time ago on numerous fronts and, if he was made of money, likely would've replaced all their junk in his airplane long ago.

Buy quality instruments from a company that (most importantly) has great customer service.

And that ain't JPI.

IMO...this story is a testament that, in aviation, sh*tty customer service can kill people.

(all the above is just my opinion of course).

As an aside, they didn't have any visible smoke until they were on right base.
 
Last edited:
Yes, there's a stainless sheet, seems about 18ga, that also has some penetrations. However in most planes (there are exceptions) the air comes in on top of the cylinders, passes down between them for cooling, and exits out the bottom of the cowl, so fire will pass down the SS plate and back the bottom of the plane, which typically has a film of oil on it, and expose the aluminum to the fire, and if there is 50gph of fuel pouring out, that fire is tracking a long way across the bottom and aluminum is no where near as heat resistant as SS.

The smallest planes I have come across with built in fire suppression system in the cowl are the 400 series Twin Cessna's like the 421. I think you can buy a 150 these days for the price of that damned bottle.:eek:

it'd be a bad deal in my Flybaby. Bottom of the plane is fabric, wood, and coated with some oil. If there were a fire and I were high I would just jump out. Down low I would land immediately regardless of what was below me...

Fire and airplanes is some scary ****.
 
CORRECTIONS and CLARIFICATIONS:

1) Cancer survivor once, not twice.

2) He said, "I wish I were so heroic as to expect to die and then just put the thought aside, but that isn't the way it was. I truly expected to survive all the way to the end. There was no doubt in my mind. It was just a matter of doing what needed to be done to get there." He went on to say he had (and has) great confidence in the pilot.

3) The fire extinguisher was in its proper place. It was not used for a number of reasons. First, flames did not appear from inside the airplane until possibly 90 seconds before they landed. They were at about 2200 feet at the time. Second, the (fire fighter) passenger was worried that the pilot would need to bail into the rear seat if the flames got worse and the passenger would need to complete the landing and at the same time manage a wildly fluctuating center of gravity. He was mentally prepared to do this and could have. Third, it wouldn't have helped anyway.

4) The pilot had the presence of mind to swing onto the taxiway instead of stopping straight ahead on the runway because he wanted the wind to blow the flames away from the cockpit instead of toward it as they exited the plane. Even so, it was incredibly hot as they got out.
 
If you had instruments you could rely on...yes.

So, during this event, he likely said to himself "there goes that f****** JPI monitor again." ("again" being the operative word here).

<snip>

if he was made of money, likely would've replaced all their junk in his airplane long ago.

Actually, after talking with Jeff, I discovered that he did indeed replace his JPI equipment with EI two years ago. And his EI equipment has been working flawlessly.

But unfortunately, because of his past experiences with faulty JPI equipment, he was still predisposed to think of engine monitor anomalies as monitor or sender problems instead of real problems.

He likely won't do that again.
 
it'd be a bad deal in my Flybaby. Bottom of the plane is fabric, wood, and coated with some oil. If there were a fire and I were high I would just jump out. Down low I would land immediately regardless of what was below me...

Fire and airplanes is some scary ****.

Agreed. Maybe find the nearest body of water, get low and slow over it, and jump and hope for the best.
 
This is exactly what I was getting at regarding hindsight being 20/20, but likely not nearly that cut and dry while in the sky. And likely even less cut and dry with flames coming up faster than the airplane is going down to the runway. I can only imagine what this sight must have looked like from the tower on final....
 
Back
Top