Page 1 of 1

Sonex N91922 NTSB factual report

PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2017 10:19 pm
by WaiexN143NM
Hi all ,
Reading avbl for this crash out of Big Bear CA. In 2014. Www.kathrynsreport.com. Feb 12 2017.
RIP Mr. Lutton.

WaiexN143NM
Michael

Re: Sonex N91922 NTSB factual report

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2017 12:21 am
by OneTallShort
Here's the direct link to the report:
http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2017/02/s ... urred.html

Re: Sonex N91922 NTSB factual report

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:52 am
by OneTallShort
In looking through the data on this accident, it appears that the factual report has an error.

According to the engine logbook, the engine was a Volkswagon 2180 Aerovee, serial number
270, rated at 80 horsepower. The last maintenance recorded was an oil change on October 18,
2014, at a total time of 11.2 hours.


In looking at the engine logbook, I don't ever see an engine change, and the total time at the last oil change record was 111.2 hours.

One other little curiosity I noted was that according to the Airframe Log it appears that the plane left phase 1 testing after 5.5 hours. That doesn't quite seem right.

https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms/search/docu ... mkey=90275

Short summary: New owner on ferry flight home from CA to OH, flew out of an 8K plus DA strip after taking on fuel. Aborted first takeoff. #3 cylinder head found likely fouled. No fairings or wheel pants on a tri-gear didn't help. Couldn't maintain positive rate of climb (maybe overheating/ warning lights going off), stalled/spun it into a dried lake bed.

Gregg Short

Re: Sonex N91922 NTSB factual report

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:29 pm
by MichaelFarley56
Gregg,

While I wish I knew what happened to Clare (he was a friend), I do remember that this particular Sonex was one of the few certified as E-LSA, hence the 5 hour Phase 1 as opposed to the normal 40 hour Phase 1 for an E-AB example.

Just an FYI...

Re: Sonex N91922 NTSB factual report

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2017 9:50 pm
by OneTallShort
Mike,

Sorry for the loss of a friend and fellow Ohioan. Kinda hits closer to home too. I was wondering if an E-LSA registration wasn't the cause/ solution to the short test period, but I couldn't find anything in the paperwork to confirm it...but that makes some sense.

Gregg Short
Burbank, OH

Re: Sonex N91922 NTSB factual report

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2017 10:05 am
by fastj22
This is looking like a typical high DA accident. At KFLY we seem to have a lot of them, usually from transients who refuel while doing a cross country. They are near gross, take on full fuel and have trouble getting out of ground effect and don't recognize the dramatic performance decrease in time. An 80HP Sonex running too rich would be a real challenge.