CESSNA P210N — Detroit, MI

What happened

As the pilot approached his destination after a cross-country flight, the airplane's landing gear did not fully extend. Over the next 7 minutes, the pilot attempted to troubleshoot the landing gear in the airport traffic pattern before he reported to the tower controller, "Well, I just burnt outta fuel, we're totally out bud." The tower controller immediately cleared the pilot to land; however, there were no additional communications from the pilot and the final radar return was recorded about 180 ft above ground level and about a mile northwest of the runway. The airplane impacted trees and an electricity service line in an urban residential area.

A postcrash fire destroyed most of the forward fuselage and cockpit. The landing gear motor/pump assembly and the hydraulic fluid lines were damaged during impact and the fire, which precluded comprehensive testing of the landing gear extension/retraction system. The landing gear selector handle and the emergency extension handle were destroyed during the fire. The nose and right main landing gear were found fully extended and secured by their respective downlocks. The left main landing gear was found fully retracted in the wheel well and secured by its uplock. There were small tree branches and leaves observed in the wheel well between the left landing gear leg and the fuselage, indicating that the left landing gear was partially extended and was pushed up into the wheel well during the accident. Both main landing gear moved freely by hand between the retracted and extended positions without any anomalies, and their respective up- and down lock assemblies secured both landing gear as designed. All three landing gear actuators functioned normally when hydraulic pressure was applied using a hand-actuated pump. The extensive impact and fire damage to the landing gear extension/retraction components precluded determination of why the landing gear did not fully extend during the flight. A postaccident engine examination did not reveal any evidence of mechanical malfunction that would have precluded normal operation during the flight.

Although the pilot had departed on the flight with enough fuel to reach his intended destination, he did not have enough fuel remaining to adequately address the landing gear malfunction before the airplane had a total loss of engine power due to fuel exhaustion. Federal regulations stipulate that daytime flights under visual flight rules depart with enough fuel to reach the intended destination plus at least 30 minutes of flight at a normal cruising speed. Based on the recorded transmissions between the pilot and the tower controller, the airplane only had about 7 minutes of fuel remaining when the pilot first reported the landing gear malfunction to the tower controller. The pilot should have diverted earlier in the flight to another airport to ensure that the airplane had an adequate fuel reserve.

An editorial "what led to it / how to avoid it" analysis for this accident is generated separately and will appear here.