Piper PA-23-250 accident near Seligman, Arizona, May 14, 2005
On May 14, 2005 at about 7:00 pm local time, a Piper PA-23-250, registered N30YC, was substantially damaged in an accident near Seligman, Arizona. It was a personal flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). No one was hurt; 3 people were on board or involved. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
the pilot's fuel system mismanagement that led to a fuel starvation induced loss of power in the left engine. Also causal was the pilot's improper use of the emergency landing gear extension system.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- May 14, 2005 · about 7:00 pm local time
- Place
- Seligman, Arizona · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 3 people were on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Piper PA-23-250 · all PA-23-250s on the register
- Registration
- N30YC · registry record · serial 27-2526
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The left engine lost power during cruise, and the pilot made a forced landing in an open field with rough uneven terrain. About 45 minutes into the flight, the left engine started to sputter. The pilot attempted to restart the engine. When the engine did not restart, he secured it and then flew towards an alternate airport. Prior to reaching the airport, he attempted to lower the landing gear by placing the landing gear handle in the DOWN position. The landing gear did not extend, so he tried to lower the landing gear via the primary emergency landing gear system (hand pump). When that did not work, he activated the secondary emergency extension system (CO2 blow down tank) by pulling the emergency gear extension ring. The CO2 tank discharged; however, only the right main landing gear extended. The pilot said that with the drag from the partially extended gear they were not going to make the airport, and he made a forced landing in a rough open field. The pilot reported that he believed he had 30 gallons of fuel in each fuel tank. Recovery personnel indicated that the fuel cells had not been breached during the accident, the fuel lines were intact, and they did not see any fuel on the ground surrounding the airplane. They recovered 15 gallons of fuel from right outboard fuel tank, and 15 gallons of fuel from the right inboard fuel tank. Thirty gallons of fuel were drained from the left wing outboard fuel tank. No fuel was found in the left wing inboard fuel tank. The manufacturer's owner's manual for the airplane indicates that if the left engine fails the hydraulic pump will not function (the single system pump is on the left engine), and the emergency landing gear extension system has to be used. The pilot also has to place the landing gear lever in the DOWN position, fully extend the hand pump handle, and then pump the emergency gear handle up and down 30-40 strokes in order to get the landing gear to lower. The pilot can also utilize the CO2 tank for emergency landing gear extension; however, the landing gear selector has to be in the DOWN position for the gas to be correctly ported to the down side of the hydraulic actuators. The airframe, left engine, and landing gear were inspected. The fuel injector manifold was removed and disassembled, with no fuel observed. No fuel was found in the fuel lines from the left wing to the left engine. No discrepancies were found with the left engine's internal mechanical continuity. Investigators noted that the emergency gear handle was pulled out about 2 inches and not fully extended, and the emergency gear extender ring for the CO2 system appeared to be pulled out. The hydraulic system lines were intact. Clean hydraulic fluid was found in the power pack and the hydraulic system filter was clean.
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.
The factual record from the NTSB's investigation tables, in plain English
Pilot
- Certificate: private
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 168 hours in all; 55 in this make and model; 26 in the last 90 days; 6 in the last 30 days; 96 as pilot in command
- Last flight review: February 1, 2005
- Medical certificate: Class 1
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 11,531.9 hours
- Last inspection: annual inspection, May 1, 2004; 55.2 hours since
- Maximum gross weight: 4,800 lb
- Seats: 6
- Landing gear: retractable
- Engine 1: Lycoming IO-540-C4B5 (piston); 0 hours total
- Engine 2: Lycoming IO-540-C4B5 (piston); 0 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: T03 Tuba City AZ at 6:15 pm
- Destination: HII Lake Havasu AZ
- Flight plan: none
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 350° at 7 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 75°F (24°C), dew point 36°F (2°C)
- Altimeter: 30.09 inHg
- Observation at 6:53 pm from PRC, 47 miles away
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crew | 1 | |||
| Passengers | 2 |
Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report
The docket, the folder of records gathered during an investigation (maintenance records, photographs, witness statements, examinations), has not been read from the NTSB for this case yet; the list appears here once it has. Open the docket at the NTSB.
Other NTSB records under N30YC the same tail number, which may have belonged to a different aircraft at the time
Everything on this page comes from the NTSB's public records. The narrative, probable cause and findings are the NTSB's own words; the coded tables behind the report are written out in plain English, with pilots' ages, home towns and medical details left out. The documents and photographs are the NTSB's docket, shown as the NTSB released them. This site's own text never names anyone involved. A preliminary report can change; the final report usually follows one to two years later, and the page is refreshed when it does.