What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
On August 24, 2023, a flight instructor and a student pilot planned on a flight under 14 CFR § 61. The flight instructor stated the plan for the flight was to conduct training for the student pilot. The flight instructor stated he briefed the student pilot on the lesson and pre-flighted the airplane. The flight instructor stated that the airplane was operating within normal limitations during the engine run-up check. The flight instructor stated the initial climb out seemed normal, maybe a little slower, this was attributed to a high-density altitude. The flight instructor stated once in cruise flight the tachometer was indicating ~2000 RPM at full throttle. The flight instructor stated he leaned the mixture resulting in the tachometer increasing to 2,400 RPM. Then the flight instructor stated he saw the RPM dropping and he turned on the carburetor heat as he suspected carburetor icing. The flight instructor stated this resulted in a further drop of RPM and the engine began to sputter. The flight instructor stated he took control from the student and turned towards the nearest airport, then the engine stopped operating. The flight instructor stated due to obstructions that he felt could not be cleared on the approach to the airport, he turned towards an open field while accomplishing the engine troubleshooting checklist. The flight instructor stated that as the engine was still not producing power, he completed the engine securing checklist. The flight instructor stated he landed the airplane in the field without injury to persons or any damage to the airplane. A certificated airframe and powerplant mechanic with an inspection authorization stated he was called to inspect and troubleshoot the engine failure. He stated that he had determined that the airplane had a dual magneto unit failure.
As the FAA filed it
ON AUGUST 24, 2023, A FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR AND A STUDENT PILOT PLANNED ON A FLIGHT UNDER 14 CFR § 61. THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR STATED THE PLAN FOR THE FLIGHT WAS TO CONDUCT TRAINING FOR THE STUDENT PILOT. THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR STATED HE BRIEFED THE STUDENT PILOT ON THE LESSON AND PRE-FLIGHTED THE AIRPLANE. THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR STATED THAT THE AIRPLANE WAS OPERATING WITHIN NORMAL LIMITATIONS DURING THE ENGINE RUN-UP CHECK. THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR STATED THE INITIAL CLIMB OUT SEEMED NORMAL, MAYBE A LITTLE SLOWER, THIS WAS ATTRIBUTED TO A HIGH-DENSITY ALTITUDE. THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR STATED ONCE IN CRUISE FLIGHT THE TACHOMETER WAS INDICATING ~2000 RPM AT FULL THROTTLE. THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR STATED HE LEANED THE MIXTURE RESULTING IN THE TACHOMETER INCREASING TO 2,400 RPM. THEN THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR STATED HE SAW THE RPM DROPPING AND HE TURNED ON THE CARBURETOR HEAT AS HE SUSPECTED CARBURETOR ICING. THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR STATED THIS RESULTED IN A FURTHER DROP OF RPM AND THE ENGINE BEGAN TO SPUTTER. THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR STATED HE TOOK CONTROL FROM THE STUDENT AND TURNED TOWARDS THE NEAREST AIRPORT, THEN THE ENGINE STOPPED OPERATING. THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR STATED DUE TO OBSTRUCTIONS THAT HE FELT COULD NOT BE CLEARED ON THE APPROACH TO THE AIRPORT, HE TURNED TOWARDS AN OPEN FIELD WHILE ACCOMPLISHING THE ENGINE TROUBLESHOOTING CHECKLIST. THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR STATED THAT AS THE ENGINE WAS STILL NOT PRODUCING POWER, HE COMPLETED THE ENGINE SECURING CHECKLIST. THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR STATED HE LANDED THE AIRPLANE IN THE FIELD WITHOUT INJURY TO PERSONS OR ANY DAMAGE TO THE AIRPLANE. A CERTIFICATED AIRFRAME AND POWERPLANT MECHANIC WITH AN INSPECTION AUTHORIZATION STATED HE WAS CALLED TO INSPECT AND TROUBLESHOOT THE ENGINE FAILURE. HE STATED THAT HE HAD DETERMINED THAT THE AIRPLANE HAD A DUAL MAGNETO UNIT FAILURE.
Other reports on N6196D · 1
Matched to the same aircraft by N-number and date.