N912GR is a 2022 David A Weaver PULSAR SUPER 100. It is a fixed-wing single-engine aircraft with 2 seats, powered by a Ulpower UL350IS rated at 130 horsepower. The registration is active, with the registrant based in Campton Hills, IL. Its experimental airworthiness certificate was issued in Sep 2022. It has been registered to its current owner since Apr 2019. This page also carries 2 NTSB events.
- 4 years old
2022
2019
That's everything on file so far — TailWiki checks the FAA registry daily and adds new entries as N912GR's record changes.
On May 25, 2024, about 0645 central daylight time, an experimental Pulsar Super 100 airplane, N912GR, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Rochelle, Illinois. The pilot was not injured. The airplane was operated under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 as a personal flight.
The pilot stated that, during the initial climb, the engine began to lose partial power. About 800 ft above ground level, he turned onto the left crosswind leg of the traffic pattern with the intent of returning to land. Shortly after turning onto final approach, the airplane contacted the ground about 15 ft before the runway and 25 ft left of the runway centerline. The airplane impacted two runway lights, then skidded about 100 ft down the left side of the runway. The nose landing gear assembly separated from the airplane and the fuselage sustained substantial damage.
The airframe and flight controls were examined after the accident and no anomalies were found.
The responding FAA inspector completed an initial examination of the engine and found that the spark plug electrodes were dark grey in color. Compression and suction were attained on all four cylinders when the crankshaft was rotated by hand, and internal continuity was confirmed. None of the engine components examined exhibited any anomalies. Due to the damage, the inspector was unable to functionally test the ECU and associated sensors.
About 12 gallons of fuel was recovered from the airplane. No water was present in the fuel when tested with water-finding paste. The fuel tank vents were clear of debris. Fuel system continuity from the fuel tanks to the engine was established using low pressure air. Both electric fuel pumps were functionally tested with no anomalies noted.
The memory card from the Electronic Flight Instrument System (EFIS) was downloaded but contained no data relevant to the accident flight. The nonvolatile data from the ECU was downloaded and functionally tested by the engine manufacturer, ULPower. The ECU stored engine data from the previous 20 minutes (or 20 sessions). A session (or log) starts to record when the rpm of the engine is above 71.59. Examination of the ECU revealed that the engine was started and warmed up. Coil 2 was then switched off three times, consistent with a preflight check. About 5.5 minutes after engine start, the throttle position increased to wide open throttle, and the engine rpm increased to maximum, consistent with takeoff power. About one minute later, the throttle was set to a constant parameter, and the rpm dropped accordingly, consistent with a cruise power setting. About 7 minutes and 20 seconds after the recording began, and again at 8 minutes 10 seconds, a significant drop in rpm was noted; however, the rpm recovered and all other parameters remained constant. The engine stopped at 8 minutes, 25 seconds. During the recorded data, the engine check light was not activated, indicating that there were no sensor failures.
The pilot reported that, while making a straight-in approach to a private airport just after dusk, but before dark, he attempted to activate the pilot controlled lighting (PCL), but was unsuccessful. He added that he continued toward the airport, and while maneuvering for landing he lost sight of the airport. The pilot did not regain visual reference of the airport during the landing descent, and the airplane impacted a fence adjacent to the runway.
The airplane sustained substantial damage to the fuselage.
The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
The airport owner reported that the PCL antenna requires line-of-sight with the aircraft to operate the PCL system. Presently, due to the antenna's position and hangars on the airport, the antenna does not receive signals from the southeast, the direction from which the accident airplane was approaching. He added that, since the airport was private, he could not issue Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs) to describe the operation of the runway lights.
No photos yet. Sign in to add the first one.