Plane CRASHES due to FUEL EXHAUSTION near Modesto, CA
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 มี.ค. 2024
- A Mooney M20K aircraft (N38RK) with two occupants requested a slow descent into Oakdale Airport. The pilot declared an emergency due to low fuel. ATC offered guidance to nearby airports (Oakdale and Stockton) and potential emergency landing options on highways. Unfortunately, N38RK lost radar contact and reported they were going down.
Later, communication was established with a Piper Malibu (N431ET). They relayed that two occupants were okay, but the plane had crash-landed. ATC then provided a phone number for the pilot.
Join this channel to get access to the perks:
/ @the_flight_records
#aviation #realatc #avgeek
____________________________
IMPORTANT:
This video is all about education. It's designed to give aspiring pilots and air traffic controllers a taste of real-world situations through example scenarios and helpful info. But that's not all! Current pilots and controllers can also benefit by listening to real radio communications from around the globe. This helps them stay sharp and think about how they might handle similar situations in the future.
To create these videos, I keep my ear to the ground on major aviation news and events. I check the dates and time zones to see if I can find recordings of the radio conversations. Then, I become a bit of a broken record myself, listening to them repeatedly to create subtitles and identify key moments. Finally, I whip up some animations (or grab them from ADS-B websites) and pull it all together into a neat package.
____________________________
► e-mail: theflightrecords@gmail.com
Radio conversations: www.liveatc.net/
Map: www.google.com/maps/
From Auburn to Modesto, and not enough fuel, amazing.
no kidding must have launched with 1/4 tank or something or massive leak.
Besides! it was down hill.!
@@jlh9910
They thought the aircraft was an electric.
Reminds me of the firefighter's comment on arriving at a crashed airplane that had landed short due to fuel starvation. "Boy, that pilot was lucky there wasn't any fuel on that aircraft."
"Let's see, where did I put that pen?" he says surrounded by his wrecked plane.
😂😂😂
😂
LOL!
It was probably behind his ear in his rectum.
I'm just a low-time, commercially certificated, instrument rated pilot who's made a couple mistakes in my 320 hours that could've cost me my life. Fuel exhaustion, however, is not one of them! I have _always_ calculated fuel needs plus reserve no matter how short the flight, then visually confirmed fuel supply & _never_ trusted the gauges completely. For a Mooney pilot on such a short flight this is almost inexcusable! Glad nobody was hurt. Hope he learns from this!
The stupidity of some people just amazes me
Are you talking about YT comments?
Omg YES!😞
Not me. Joe Biden IS president after all.
Fuel is cheaper at Oakdale............apparently.
In California maybe $10/gallon now.
But the crash plane was more costly.
The pilots voice said it all.
How so?
@@RLTtizME Old timer... and asking for clearance descend when VFR? Weird... When you're VFR and on flight following you simply tell the controller you're going to do that and then they'll let you know if it's not okay.
bet he hasn't had a flight review in about 15 years... lol
This is the type of GA pilot who always says airline pilots are not "real pilots" and they don't know how to do real flying.
I live in an area with a huge population of boomers with brain rot. It’s eye opening just watching them shopping in a store let alone the bonkers things I see them do behind the wheel. I saw one the other day driving on a flat. People tried to signal her but she waved everyone off and soon the tire shredded, flung off, and she kept driving on the rim with sparks flying.
Any Slingblade fans here?
"It ain't got no gas in it!"
Oakdale was off his left side, not right side. He said that wrong twice.
I'm so confused. He barely made it halfway. Did he take off without enough fuel or fail to switch a tank or something?
Too bad - I'm glad they landed safely but this was completely on the PIC:
FAR 91.151 Fuel Requirements for VFR Flight
If you are operating an airplane, you are required to ensure that you have ENOUGH FUEL TO FLY to your airport of intended landing and assume normal cruise speed for another 30 minutes during the day, and 45 minutes at night.
There may be another reason earlier in the flight. You do not know. Fuel leak? Excessive ATC delays? Anything!
@@malahammer that’s why you budget as per FAR 91.151. Look at the reg.
@@TrueSight_333 If you have a fuel leak, then your budget my go out of the plane very quickly.
@@alukata9763 that is true, however, the pilot said nothing about a fuel leak or any other abnormality, which is usually something they will add to the record when they declare minimum fuel or a fuel emergency. This acts as a CYA of sorts for the debrief they're going to get afterward. We’ll see what the NTSB has to say about it when the time comes.
We believed you without the research.
How is this even possible? During my flight training, my flight instructor drilled into my head to pick identifiable landmarks on the ground for fuel, time & distance to destination calculations along the route of flight. This isn't a car you can simply pull over to the side of the road. There are day and night VFR fuel regulations put in place for a reason. You as the PIC are also responsible for other lives on board your plane. Let this be a lesson to all pilots who keep up with these clearly avoidable crashes. Be safe everyone!
Unless there was a fuel leak this is on the pilot.
Even if it’s a leak, your flight planner log gives fuel burned and remaining on each checkpoint. Verify your fuel qty as such, if it’s way off, consider a leak.
@@love2fly558This is great advice, didn’t really consider this during training, thanks for putting that out there!
Did pilot forget to " get gas?"
he said they kept him up there for a while....
@@watchgooseWho kept him up there? He's flying VFR...
Good luck getting insurance after a stunt like that. At least they walked away from it.
Are you not aware that planes sometimes run out of fuel due to things beyond the pilots control?
@@cruisinguy6024 Rarely. The fact he was asking for a special descent says he was aware of his fuel state. And the flight was very short. Fuel starvation accidents are 10% mechanical and 90% pilot error.
Is the fuel issue all on the pilot? Early in the conversation, he says "well, we've been kept here, so I just wanted to make sure". And he sounded pretty unhappy about it. Why were they "kept up here"? And for how long? Granted, pilot should've factored in a safety margin on fuel, but was he kept in some crazy holding patterns for way too long?
That seems to refer to an altitude restriction. He was VFR on flight following, so he was likely issued something like “maintain at or above 6,500” and didn’t like that. But that would help his fuel burn, not hurt it (unless there’s some crazy headwinds).
Even if he was given some delay, it’s his responsibility to advise ATC and get down on the ground. If he has only a few gallons remaining, he needs to use his PIC authority, so blame to ATC seems unfair.
He's flying VFR with "flight following" meaning ATC just advises of traffic. ATC said altitude is at "your discretion" which means "you do you" He was not under control of ATC. He could fly VFR in that area without talking to anybody if he wanted to, so it is all on him. He sounded like an old guy who probably shouldn't be flying honestly.
Isn’t this the second Mooney aircraft that has gone down lately? Glad they made it safely .
Guy should lose his license wtf no question put another person in jeopardy like that
He’ll probably have to do a 709 ride where that will be a possibility. Not probable, but a possibility.
Back in the day it almost happened to me in a C-150 on a very long solo cross country but only once. Pilots must factor in ground speed not airspeed for the next scheduled airport refueling stop especially with strong headwinds. My calculated ground speed was 60 mph.
That and look at the fuel gauges and tach time.
@@AvgDudeBelieve me when you're fuel is low you can't take your eyes off the fuel gauge.
@@user-sc7py7ut3q I fly a 150, and if I land with under half a tank, I’m putting gas in. If I ever got low on gas at an airport with outrageous fuel prices, I’d put enough in at least to ensure I could make it to an airport with cheaper gas. This guy must’ve taken off with little measurable gas in the tanks counting on luck to make it. That’s just insane gambling with your life to save a few bucks. And now his insurance company likely won’t pay off.
@@AvgDudeBy putting enough in how can you insure you're going to make it to the next airport with cheaper gas if the weather changes dramatically??
@@user-sc7py7ut3q If the weather is iffy, then don’t fly.
There is no "range" , as in distance capabilities, on an aircraft; there is only, ONLY "endurance", as in time capable. The engine is only going to run for so many hours and minutes. How far you travel in that amount of time is left up to constantly changing variables. Don't put your trust in any pilot who boasts ranges.
My biggest fear is running out of fuel.
The only time I ever ran out of gas is when I was driving a vehicle not my own and it had a bad gas gauge that read more than 1/4 full when it was actually empty. What was his excuse?
I live in Oakdale. I wonder why I haven’t heard about this until watching this video?
Because you’re not watching the news and you don’t listen to the radio you’re fixated on TikTok and you spend most of your time on the phone or playing video games in the dark.
Let’s hope it was a system failure and not simple stupidity
A lot of people quick to assume here. Yes, if this pilot took off with less 30 minutes of fuel (from an airport with fuel service) that's a huge blunder on his part. However, it could also be that there was a fuel leak somewhere, we don't know. All that said, it seems likely from his request for a "slow descent" that he knew he was tight on fuel. Assuming that's true, that is the time to let ATC know you have a problem. I don't understand the unwillingness of pilots to admit there's an issue until things have gone critical mass.
When you admit there's a issue, you get the bureaucrats involved . . .which is rarely a good thing.
The real stupid part was to start a descent and give up altitude when he knew he was low on fuel. Sheer idiocy.
@@gawebmNo. Descending means reducing power, thus trading altitude for distance while stretching fuel.
Went past Lodi too.
Well. In his defense, th fuel in Lodi is also too expensive
I knew a guy whose mother was killed by his step father because of the cost of gas. Was about 1/4 mile short. @@jaykay6412
I knew a guy whose step father was saving a few bucks, and crashed 1/4 mile short of Hayward. He survived, but my friend's mom did not.
Why he didn’t re fuel or stop earlier ?
You were supposed to put the moonshine in the tank!
Likely fuel STARVATION versus EXHAUSTION.
Registered to a 68yr old Private Pilot (issued 2009) lawyer with basic med. How he didn't know VFR is descent is at his discretion... "Kept up here..." Mmmmkay, he never was above 5,000.
I'm guessing ATC had previously issued an altitude restriction
If he was using ATC Flight Following, all he needed to do was cancel and continue VFR and do what he wanted. However, there was no airport along his route between his departure of Auburn and Oakdale (but for private field Farmington/CN29) anyway. So, why was he descending - esp if fuel was actually an issue - so far out? He was literally halfway on a 75nm mi flight.
Some folks just shouldn't have a pilot's licence.
Sounds like some piss poor planning by a weekend warrior.
According to SkyVector it looks like he overflew a whole bunch of airports / airfields before this clip started.. why did he not land and take on fuel?? poor decision making. Lucky to walk away from it.
Copy a phone number < get the hell away from the wrecked plane
fuel exhaustion ? The fuel got TIRED ?
Well I think I'll just stick to motorcycles
How many airports did they overfly trying to get to Oakdale? Didn’t have enough fuel to fly 80 miles? Probably one the worst cases of “gethomeitis” ever. Some folks shouldn’t be flying. Anything.
Gandolf? 90yrs old?
"you shall not copy!?"
It should be an automatic suspension with mandatory retraining if you run out of fuel due to incompetence. Also insurance company shouldn't pay either. We have a 6/260 with mains and tips and have a system on how to switch between all 4 selectors and also minimums on which we will not go over! These people are the reason your insurance in through the roof.
Yet "318 Recent Fuel Exhaustion and Fuel Starvation Accidents" just came out on the Av News Talk Podcast. I am betting more than likely starvation.
Why the hell did he start a descent if he was low on fuel??? The stupidity is hard to comprehend. He should not be flying an airplane.
Kinda hard to stay airborne when you run out of fuel.
Oakdale gas must be 0.50 dollar cheaper.....
No idea what the cause of this is, but for all of you ground-gripping aviation experts, let me mention that the FARs have only ONE requirement for fuel gauge accuracy: They must show empty when the tank is empty. They don't have to show actual fuel quantity. It's possible to see a much higher level than is actually aboard (which is why it's important to STICK the tanks, not just make sure that the caps are tight).
You can, of course, cite the regulation that requires a fuel gauge to only be accurate when the tank is empty...
@@s_m_v Until the 2017 update, FAR 23.1337(b)(1) was used, which stated simply that "each fuel quantity indicator must be calibrated to read ‘zero’ during level flight when the quantity of fuel remaining in the tank is equal to the unusable fuel supply."
"Unusable fuel supply" is bureaucratese for "empty."
N38RK got its latest certificate in 2010, thus operated under the pre-2017 rule (as do the vast majority of aircraft).
The update rewrote this, with a requirement that it show "quantity of usable fuel" -- but does NOT specify an accuracy standard, other than that it show zero when the tank is empty. They really CAN'T, due to the laws of physics regarding such things as ullage, instrument reaction times, etc. -- a little turbulence can slosh fuel back and forth like the surf coming in at Waimea, alternately driving the sensor float up and down across half a tank worth of readings.
This means that the earlier standard is STILL the only specific level that the gauge has to show.
@@SoloPilot6 ...and of course your interpretation of this is official FAA guidance.
@@s_m_v No, I'm reporting official FAA regulation, go look it up. Feel free to provide text of a regulation which includes any other specific standard.
Regulations are minimum standards. A healthy sense of self preservation is often of more value.
oops
Ole Joe would not ever to be able to do the job of an ATC.
Bit harsh to give him a “number”😮
He wasn't able to talk with him over the radio, he had to get in touch with him somehow.
It wasn't a deviation, it was for Search and Rescue purposes
@@malahammer yep I was trying to be funny …. Soz
Yeah, a phone call is the least of his concerns. Now he’s gotta deal with insurance and if the FAA is in a bad mood, a 709 ride.
No excuse for that. None.
Fuel leak. Faulty instruments. There are other POSSIBLE reasons. Stop clucking.
@@RLTtizME You should always check the fuel visually in pre-flight. Any leaks will be apparent then too. This was almost assuredly negligence or carelessness.
@@AvgDude You are most assuredly a BarcaLounger aviation second guesser.
@@RLTtizME Oh fk off. I own my own plane with over 320 hours of solo cross country to over 75 different airports in the past three years. Fuel management is definitely something I know how to do, Taking off with a questionable fuel supply is a mistake of complacency and relying too much on luck.
@@AvgDude GFYFB.
If this was fuel exhaustion (as compared to starvation), that phone call won't be pleasant and I "feel" there might be a 709 ride in this pilot's future. Or maybe he will decide that this was the last straw and will hang it up. At least he's alive to talk about it!
I have 3000+ hrs in GA without a IFR ticket and I was never disappointed with anticipation of how dumb and assuming most GA pilots are.
Plane: *crash*
ATC: Please advise when you're ready to copy a number, possible pilot deviation.
Wasn't a deviation, he was trying to get in contact with him so get could send help
@@TaliyahP Aware. Was making a joke.
Fuel minimums should be at least 1hr
I was on that airplane and nothing like that happened. I will make a video of it someday. It will be shocking!
Insurance fraud comes to mind!.the pilot sounded pretty calm and nonchalant for an emergency!😊
You're the guy who says every fire video is arson. LOL.
TBH you want a pilot who can remain calm and collective during an emergency.
But...If I was a betting man I would say this was due to controlled fuel-exhaustion.
He said "out of fuel" but I am betting on fuel starvation.
@@Molon_Labe1776 Collected, also.
Sounds like cognitive issues…
Lots of things not going right…
Typical of CO poisoning or lack of O2…
😃