Piper PA 32R-300 N5605V

Summary

On 14 October 2013 at about 22:00 local time, a Piper PA 32R-300 registered N5605V, operated by Baxter Flying Inc, was involved in an accident near Hector, Arkansas, United States. 4 people were on board and 2 had minor injuries. The aircraft was substantially damaged. The NTSB has published a probable cause for this accident; it is quoted in full below.

Date

14 October 2013 at 22:00

Classification

Accident

Location

Hector, Arkansas, United States

Coordinates

35.4631, -92.9792

Aircraft

Piper PA 32R-300

Registration

N5605V

Category

Airplane

Year built

1977

Engines

1

Operator

Baxter Flying Inc

Operating rule

Part 91: General Aviation

Purpose of flight

Personal

Phase of flight

Not recorded

Route

Fayetteville → Tunica

Aircraft damage

Substantial

Weather

VMC

Light

Day

NTSB number

CEN14LA030

2 people had minor injuries.

An engine failure due to crankshaft fatigue cracking for reasons that could not be determined based on the available evidence.

Quoted verbatim from the NTSB record. This site does not paraphrase or interpret it.

Read the full NTSB narrative

The pilot reported that, during climbout, he noticed that the engine was vibrating. After leveling off the airplane, the vibration worsened, and the engine subsequently experienced a total loss of power. The pilot executed a forced landing onto a road, and the airplane impacted a fence post. Examination of the engine revealed that the crankshaft was fractured through the No. 8 cheek position between the Nos. 5 and 6 pistons. Fatigue cracking emanated from the connecting rod journal where the No. 5 connecting rod mates. The No. 6 piston cooling nozzle was not found in its position, and its pieces were found in the bottom of the sump; the pieces were more intact than would be expected if they had been ground between the crankshaft and connecting rod for an appreciable amount of time. Also, there was no evidence of a gouge or other mechanical damage on the No. 5 connecting rod journal. Based on this evidence, it is unlikely that the fatigue cracking was initiated by the No. 6 cooling nozzle being lodged against the crankshaft after falling out of position. About 18 months before the accident, the engine was repaired and overhauled due to a propeller strike. Further, about 4 months before the accident, maintenance personnel performed a top overhaul of the engine, and, about 1 month before the accident, maintenance personnel replaced the No. 2 cylinder. The timing of the failure suggests that an imbalance could have been introduced to the engine during one or both of the maintenance procedures, which could have resulted in the initiation of the fatigue cracking and the subsequent falling out of the No. 6 cooling nozzle; however, the exact cause of the crankshaft fatigue cracking could not be determined.

Quoted verbatim from the NTSB record.