N989SRPiper PA-32R-301T · 2002

On February 10, 2024, about 1430 mountain standard time, a Piper PA-32R-301T, N989SR, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Spanish Fork, Utah. The pilot and passenger sustained minor injuries. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight.

The pilot reported that he planned on conducting two flights on the day of the accident. Upon arrival at Spanish Fork Municipal Airport/Woodhouse Field (SPK), Spanish Fork, Utah, he conducted a preflight inspection of the accident airplane. According to the airplane’s fuel totalizer, the airplane had about 47 gallons of fuel, which he visually confirmed. The pilot reported that, during the local flight, he switched fuel tanks several times. While descending toward the airport’s traffic pattern for landing at the conclusion of the flight, the pilot completed the before-landing checklist, switched fuel tanks, and turned on the electric fuel pump. While on the left downwind leg for runway 30, he conducted the landing checklist and switched to the fullest fuel tank; however, he did not recall if the fuel selector lever was rotated and placed in the detent of the fuel tank selected. While abeam the runway threshold, the engine lost partial power. The pilot attempted to troubleshoot by switching the fuel selector lever to the opposite fuel tank and cycled the electric fuel pump off and back on. Despite his attempts to troubleshoot, the engine lost total power.

The pilot turned toward the runway and transmitted a mayday call on the airport’s common traffic advisory frequency. He realized that the airplane would not reach the runway and initiated a forced landing to an open field. During the landing, the airplane impacted power lines and terrain before it came to rest upright.

Postaccident examination of the airplane identified crushing of the forward fuselage. Flight control continuity was established from all primary flight control surfaces to the cockpit controls. All areas of separation within the flight control cables were consistent with overload or separation by recovery personnel.

According to the airport manager, when he arrived at the accident location, the left wing was partially separated from the fuselage at the wing root due to impacting a tree. Fuel was observed leaking from the left wing fuel tank. Several large bags of fuel absorbent were utilized to contain the leaking fuel. When cleared to relocate the airplane, onto airport property, the left wing was separated and substantial amounts of fuel began leaking. He estimated the tank in the left wing was about 1/4 to 1/2 full.

Wreckage recovery personnel reported that about 15 gallons of fuel was drained from the right wing.

Examination of the recovered airframe and engine revealed no preaccident mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. Fuel system continuity was established from the main fuel tanks throughout the system to the fuel servo. All areas of separations within the fuel system were consistent with impact separation or separation by recovery personnel. The fuel selector valve appeared undamaged and functioned normally when rotated. A small amount of fuel was observed in the airframe fuel strainer. An external fuel tank was attached to the electric fuel pump inlet port. The engine started during the initial attempt. Due to the engine instruments being removed, the engine rpm was not observed. The engine ran throughout various power settings uneventfully for about five minutes. A functional check was conducted of the magnetos, and a change in engine in noise was noted during the left and right magneto checks. Due to the damage to the propeller, the throttle was not advanced to the full forward position.

The airplane was equipped with a J. P. Instruments EDM-930 engine monitor. The engine monitor was removed and sent to the National Transportation Safety Board Vehicle Recorder Laboratory. Examination of the engine monitor revealed no visible damage to the exterior of the unit. The device powered on normally and data was extracted using the manufacturer’s procedures. The data revealed that, about 1429, the fuel flow decreased from about 15 gallons per hour to 0 gallons per hour, with corresponding reductions of engine rpm, horsepower, oil pressure, and oil temperature values.