What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
PIC was in a hold southeast of pabe, awaiting svfr to return due to low weather.
PIC stated that engine started to quit and they switched fuel tanks and used the boost pump and "high boost" setting. They were not able to restart the engine and made a forced landing in on the snow-covered frozen river. The nose gear was sheared off. No injuries.
Post-incident inspection found l/h wing tank full, r/h wing tank ~1.5G of fuel. AFM states that approximately 3.5G of fuel is unusable in each tank (7 total) for both standard and long-range tanks. The engine was ran off of the r/h wing tank after the incident by adding fuel to the tank, the post-incident engine run did not experience any failure from l/h or r/h fuel tanks when adequate fuel was present.
Due to no mechanical abnormalities, the probable cause is the pilot's failure to select the fullest fuel tank.
As the FAA filed it
PIC WAS IN A HOLD SOUTHEAST OF PABE, AWAITING SVFR TO RETURN DUE TO LOW WEATHER.
PIC STATED THAT ENGINE STARTED TO QUIT AND THEY SWITCHED FUEL TANKS AND USED THE BOOST PUMP AND "HIGH BOOST" SETTING. THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO RESTART THE ENGINE AND MADE A FORCED LANDING IN ON THE SNOW-COVERED FROZEN RIVER. THE NOSE GEAR WAS SHEARED OFF. NO INJURIES.
POST-INCIDENT INSPECTION FOUND L/H WING TANK FULL, R/H WING TANK ~1.5G OF FUEL. AFM STATES THAT APPROXIMATELY 3.5G OF FUEL IS UNUSABLE IN EACH TANK (7 TOTAL) FOR BOTH STANDARD AND LONG-RANGE TANKS. THE ENGINE WAS RAN OFF OF THE R/H WING TANK AFTER THE INCIDENT BY ADDING FUEL TO THE TANK, THE POST-INCIDENT ENGINE RUN DID NOT EXPERIENCE ANY FAILURE FROM L/H OR R/H FUEL TANKS WHEN ADEQUATE FUEL WAS PRESENT.
DUE TO NO MECHANICAL ABNORMALITIES, THE PROBABLE CAUSE IS THE PILOT'S FAILURE TO SELECT THE FULLEST FUEL TANK.
Other reports on N327CT · 2
Matched to the same aircraft by N-number and date.