Piper PA28 accident near Venice, Florida, July 27, 2014

The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record

The private pilot was conducting a short flight from one airport to another airport to obtain fuel for the airplane. The pilot reported that the airplane had been kept in a hangar and had not been flown in the preceding 3 1/2 months. The pilot performed a preflight inspection of the airplane and noted the fuel quantity but he did not sump the fuel tanks. He subsequently performed an engine run-up and departed without incident. He climbed the airplane to about 1,000 ft and, after some maneuvering, eventually flew over the water and paralleled a shoreline toward another airport. The pilot reported that the engine then began to run roughly and that he heard a "missing, knocking, hitting sound" but that neither he nor the pilot-rated passenger noted a decrease in engine rpm. Although the pilot rotated the ignition switch through the various positions and changed fuel tanks, the engine lost power and the propeller began wind-milling. The pilot declared an emergency and angled the descending airplane toward the shoreline. He was concerned that, if he landed in deeper water, the fixed-landing-gear airplane would flip over. The pilot saw a group of people along the beach and attempted to navigate around them. He then aimed for a spot where he thought there were no people, and the airplane touched down in the water near the shoreline and then came to rest on the sand near the water's edge. The pilot exited the airplane and learned that he had struck two people in the water. Postaccident examination of the airframe and engine, which included a successful engine test run using fuel from the airplane's fuel system, did not reveal any evidence of water contamination or mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation. Given this evidence, the loss of engine power was likely a transient condition. Although the condition could have resulted from pilot action, neither the pilot nor the passenger indicated that the pilot took any action that would have resulted in the loss of engine power. Although the airplane was operating in conditions that were conducive to the formation of carburetor ice without the carburetor heat on, the fixed-pitch propeller/engine combination did not gradually lose rpm, which would have occurred if carburetor ice had developed. Therefore, the reason for the loss of engine power could not be determined. The National Transportation Safety Board asked the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to provide information on any policy that addressed protecting people on the ground during a loss of engine power. The FAA responded, in part, "Because of the variety of possible emergency situations, it is impractical to apply a specific policy addressing risks involved between beach landings and ditching. The FAA relies on its requirements for pilot training on aeronautical decision making to compel pilots to pursue courses of action in an emergency which appear to be the safest and most appropriate under the circumstances." Once the engine failed, the pilot chose to land on a shoreline area that he incorrectly believed was unoccupied.

The complete narrative as the NTSB published it. The NTSB's docket holds the report as a PDF and any photographs, statements and other documents from the investigation.