Cessna 172 — Rhome, TX

What happened

The commercial pilot was taking family members for rides in his airplane; the accident flight was the third flight of the evening. After the second flight, the pilot landed and taxied the airplane back to his property, where three family members boarded the airplane while the engine continued to run. The pilot taxied back to the runway and departed. A pilot-rated witness stated that the takeoff roll was longer than expected, and, once airborne, the airplane pitched "very high" nose-up to about 50 ft above ground level (agl), then the nose came back down. The airplane appeared to accelerate down the runway until it climbed to about 300 ft agl, then made a left turn and descended out of view. The airplane impacted several trees and continued into a field, where it came to rest inverted. Damage to the propeller was consistent with a lack of engine power at the time of impact.Examination of the airplane revealed evidence of a longstanding pattern of inadequate maintenance, including a rodent's nest in the leading edge of the left wing, a large mud dauber nest on the oil cooler, and cobwebs in the engine compartment. An automotive hydraulic hose was used in place of the main fuel line from the gascolator to the carburetor. The gascolator fuel strainer contained 3 large pieces of organic debris similar to insect cocoons, which were the same size as the hydraulic hose and associated fuel fitting. It is likely that the fuel line was removed for an extended period of time and eventually replaced with the automotive hydraulic hose, during which time the fuel system was exposed, which allowed insects to nest inside; because there were no maintenance records associated with the airplane, it could not be determined when the hose was replaced. During the accident flight, it is likely that the organic material became dislodged and restricted fuel to the carburetor, which subsequently starved the engine of available fuel and resulted in a total loss of engine power.

The autopsy of the pilot revealed evidence of hypertension and coronary artery disease; however, it is unlikely that these conditions contributed to the accident. Toxicological testing indicated that the pilot had been using alcohol before the accident and had levels considered impairing; it is likely that alcohol impaired the pilot's decision making and his ability to operate the airplane. Toxicological testing also revealed evidence that the pilot had used marijuana before the accident; however, it could not be determined if the concentrations would have been impairing or would have affected his performance.

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