Mon, Nov 27, 2023
Maintenance Personnel’s Inadequate Maintenance Of The Magneto, Which Resulted In A Loss Of Engine Ignition
Location: Dallas, Texas Accident Number: CEN22LA344
Date & Time: July 28, 2022, 14:38 Local Registration: N3027J
Aircraft: Piper PA-32RT-300T Aircraft Damage: Substantial
Defining Event: Powerplant sys/comp malf/fail Injuries: 1 Serious
Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General aviation - Personal
Analysis: The pilot declared an emergency to air traffic control after the airplane’s engine began to run rough while en route to the destination airport. He received radar vectors to an alternate airport but was unable to reach that airport. During the subsequent off-airport landing, the airplane impacted trees and sustained substantial damage to the wings and fuselage. Postaccident examination of the airplane revealed the magneto case’s cover screws were loose and there was corrosion present on the magneto housing. The corrosion would have resulted in the magneto’s capacitors not properly grounding to the magneto case due to the corrosion, which also resulted in electrical arcing near the points and melting that was found on the cam follower. Without a proper attachment of the magneto case due to the loose cover screws, there would have been a slight case separation that would result in a simultaneous failure of both magneto sides due to a lack of ground.
A review of airframe logbooks showed that there was no logbook entry, as required by regulation, stating that the magneto was removed and replaced after a 500-hour inspection of the magneto was performed by a repair station. An invoice from a maintenance facility to the pilot stated that the magneto was removed and replaced for a 500-hour inspection. The repair station’s Airworthiness Approval Tag for the magneto stated that the installer of the magneto must comply with the magneto manufacturer’s Service Bulletin SB651, which was not performed based on the corrosion and electrical arching found during the postaccident examination.
Probable Cause and Findings: The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be -- Maintenance personnel’s inadequate maintenance of the magneto, which resulted in a loss of engine ignition, a loss of engine power, and a subsequent forced landing.
More News
Also: Vertical Flight Society, NBAA Maintenance Conference, GA Honored, AMT Scholarship For the first time, students from Embry-Riddle’s Daytona Beach, Florida, campus took t>[...]
Hazardous Weather Information Summary of significant meteorological information (SIGMET/WS), convective significant meteorological information (convective SIGMET/WST), urgent pilot>[...]
"The need for innovation at speed and scale is greater than ever. The X-62A VISTA is a crucial platform in our efforts to develop, test and integrate AI, as well as to establish AI>[...]
(FAA) Inspector Observed That Both Fuel Tanks Were Intact And That Only A Minimal Amount Of Fuel Remained In Each Analysis: According to the pilot, approximately 8 miles from the d>[...]
“Pyka’s Pelican Cargo is unlike any other UAS solution on the market for contested logistics. We assessed a number of leading capabilities and concluded that the Pelica>[...]