Amateur-built ZENITH STOL CH750 accident near Napa, California, August 11, 2018
On August 11, 2018 at about 5:56 pm local time, a 2014 amateur-built ZENITH STOL CH750, registered N328SK, was substantially damaged in an accident during enroute near Napa, California (Napa County airport). It was a personal flight under general aviation rules (Part 91). No one was hurt; 2 people were on board or involved. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The pilot's use of fuel below the required octane rating, which caused engine detonation and damage and subsequently led to oil exhaustion and a total loss of engine power in flight. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's inadequate service/maintenance of the airplane.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- August 11, 2018 · about 5:56 pm local time
- Place
- Napa, California · Napa County · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 2 people were on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Amateur-built ZENITH STOL CH750 No Series, built 2014
- Registration
- N328SK · no longer on the register · serial 75-8975
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Personal flight · general aviation rules (Part 91)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
The pilot/owner was conducting a flight in the experimental amateur-built airplane with a pilot-rated passenger, who was a potential buyer. The pilot reported that they flew in the local area for about 20 minutes, and then smoke entered the cockpit. The pilot declared an emergency and headed toward the departure airport. Within 1-2 minutes, the engine lost all oil pressure and then lost total power. The pilot initially attempted to glide to the airport but, because it was too far away, decided to land on a road atop a nearby levee. The airplane touched down normally, but due to wind, the left wingtip struck the ground; the airplane spun, veered off the levee, and sustained substantial damage to the wing and fuselage. The engine exhibited some impact-related damage but did not exhibit any external evidence of nonimpact-related damage. The engine was devoid of lubricating oil, and significant oil residue was observed on the muffler and the lower fuselage. Postaccident examination indicated that the source of the oil was via the seal for the engine case drive penetration of the starter ring gear, located just above the muffler. The oil exited via this seal and produced smoke when it contacted the hot muffler. The engine control unit (ECU) was removed and shipped to the engine manufacturer's facility, where it was installed on a testbed engine. That engine operated normally with the accident ECU installed. The engine was disassembled and examined in detail. All four pistons displayed evidence of significant erosion damage consistent with detonation, with at least one piston eroded to the point that it could no longer seal against the cylinder wall. A common cause of detonation is using a lower octane fuel than specified by the manufacturer. The damage was consistent with the use of fuel with octane rating(s) significantly below that required for the engine. Although the pilot did not specify the octane rating of the fuel that he used, it is likely that he used fuel below the required octane rating. At least one piston was eroded to the point that it allowed cylinder combustion gasses to enter and pressurize the engine crankcase. This crankcase pressurization forced the engine oil past the starter ring gear drive seal and out of the engine, which resulted in the exhaustion of the engine oil and a subsequent complete loss of engine power. The pilot-provided maintenance records did not include any entries that documented maintenance activities, including oil changes. Had the pilot conducted regular inspections and maintenance, it is possible that the detonation-caused internal engine damage would have been detected before the accident flight.
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
What happened, in order
- Aircraft maintenance event during prior to flight
- Powerplant sys/comp malf/fail during enroute defining event
- Fire/smoke (non-impact) during enroute
- Loss of engine power (total) during enroute
- Off-field or emergency landing during emergency descent
The NTSB's findings
- cause Aircraft › Fluids/misc hardware › Fluids › Fuel › Incorrect use/operation
- cause Personnel issues › Task performance › Use of equip/info › (general) › Pilot
- cause Aircraft › Fluids/misc hardware › Fluids › Oil › Fluid level
- factor Aircraft › Aircraft power plant › Engine fuel and control › (general) › Incorrect service/maintenance
- factor Personnel issues › Task performance › Maintenance › Scheduled/routine maintenance › Owner/builder
Pilot
- Certificate: commercial pilot
- Ratings: single-engine land; instrument: airplane; rotorcraft: helicopter
- Flight time: 7,700 hours in all; 200 in this make and model; 15 in the last 90 days; 5 in the last 30 days; 7,500 as pilot in command
- Last flight review: September 21, 2017
- Medical certificate: BasicMed
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 200 hours
- Last inspection: 100-hour inspection, April 1, 2017
- Seats: 2
- Landing gear: fixed
- Engine: Ulpower 350iS (piston); 0 hours total
The flight
- Departed from: APC Napa CA at 5:30 pm
- Destination: APC Napa CA
- Flight plan: none
- A second pilot was aboard
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 220° at 11 knots
- Visibility: 10 statute miles
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 73°F (23°C), dew point 57°F (14°C)
- Altimeter: 29.97 inHg
- Observation at 5:54 pm from APC, 1 miles away
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 1 | |||
| Passengers | 1 |
Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report
9 documents, released by the NTSB on February 28, 2020. View them here, or download them; the NTSB redacts some personal details before release, and this site shows the NTSB's own titles rather than its file names.
| # | Document | What it is | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pilot/operator Aircraft Accident Report, NTSB Form 6120.1 | PDF, 9 pages | View Download |
| 2 | Metars | PDF, 1 page | View Download |
| 3 | Accident Location | PDF, 1 page | View Download |
| 4 | Record of Communications (Pilot) | PDF, 2 pages | View Download |
| 5 | Airplane Examination | PDF, 7 pages | View Download |
| 6 | Record of Communications (Engine Representative) | PDF, 2 pages | View Download |
| 7 | Engine Examination | PDF, 6 pages | View Download |
| 8 | Ecu Test Information | PDF, 2 pages | View Download |
| 9 | Accident Scene Photographs | PDF, 6 pages | View Download |
The same docket at the NTSB · documents without a copy here are fetched from the NTSB when you open them.
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.
