Narrative:

Returning from a fly-in in greenville, sc, (donaldson airport) I was cruising at 2500' MSL (1500' AGL) along with another experimental of the same type. The engine started losing power (loss of RPM) with a few surges and in about 15 second it stopped running. Attempts to restart were unsuccessful. Engine starter would hardly turn engine over. I had approximately 3 mins to locate a suitable landing spot. Nearest airport was ben epps field in athens, GA, (about 10 NM). I did not have sufficient altitude to reach that airport. I picked a clear pasture and set up for approach. Just prior to T/D I realized that the field was terraced. I missed the first terrace but struck the second terrace which sheared off the single center main landing gear. The aircraft then skidded to a stop about 50' from the point of first contact. There was no damage to the propeller and some cosmetic damage to the left wing. There is some damage to the seat pan from the main landing gear being bent back but the fuselage structure appears to be ok. I currently suspect an internal failure of the engine, specifically the crankshaft. In 4 1/2 yrs of flying this aircraft I have experienced one crankshaft failure at 30 hours tt (caused by a propeller strike). I had a second crankshaft failure at 185 hours tt cause unknown. Think crankshaft was then replaced with one off of a used engine with an unknown past. It failed after only 9 hours of use. The fourth and final crankshaft is a unit which was sent to an authorized repair center for replacement or repair of its center section and alignment. This one broke after 20 hours of use, again for no apparent reason. It is my opinion that this engine is unsuitable for use on this aircraft. I believed (wanted to believe) that the crank failures were isolated events. I believe that continued flight of this aircraft type with the current engine is simply an accident waiting to happen. I was fortunate that I had only minor damage done and was able to find a suitable landing spot. Earlier attempts to confront the engine mfr on this problem have only shown that they deny there is any problem. To my knowledge, 380 plans/kits of this aircraft were sold. All pwred by the same engine. I do not know how many of these aircraft are currently flying. My human performance consideration was that I denied to myself that there was an inherent problem with the engine. Not having an alternative power plant to choose from forced me to rationalize the problems and believe that this time the engine was ok. Now I know that any aircraft pwred by a (engine) is a (type aircraft) waiting for a dead-stick landing somewhere.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: EXPERIMENTAL ACFT REPORTER LOST POWER AND MADE AN UNSCHEDULED LNDG IN A FIELD DOING DAMAGE TO THE ACFT.

Narrative: RETURNING FROM A FLY-IN IN GREENVILLE, SC, (DONALDSON ARPT) I WAS CRUISING AT 2500' MSL (1500' AGL) ALONG WITH ANOTHER EXPERIMENTAL OF THE SAME TYPE. THE ENG STARTED LOSING PWR (LOSS OF RPM) WITH A FEW SURGES AND IN ABOUT 15 SEC IT STOPPED RUNNING. ATTEMPTS TO RESTART WERE UNSUCCESSFUL. ENG STARTER WOULD HARDLY TURN ENG OVER. I HAD APPROX 3 MINS TO LOCATE A SUITABLE LNDG SPOT. NEAREST ARPT WAS BEN EPPS FIELD IN ATHENS, GA, (ABOUT 10 NM). I DID NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT ALT TO REACH THAT ARPT. I PICKED A CLR PASTURE AND SET UP FOR APCH. JUST PRIOR TO T/D I REALIZED THAT THE FIELD WAS TERRACED. I MISSED THE FIRST TERRACE BUT STRUCK THE SEC TERRACE WHICH SHEARED OFF THE SINGLE CTR MAIN LNDG GEAR. THE ACFT THEN SKIDDED TO A STOP ABOUT 50' FROM THE POINT OF FIRST CONTACT. THERE WAS NO DAMAGE TO THE PROP AND SOME COSMETIC DAMAGE TO THE L WING. THERE IS SOME DAMAGE TO THE SEAT PAN FROM THE MAIN LNDG GEAR BEING BENT BACK BUT THE FUSELAGE STRUCTURE APPEARS TO BE OK. I CURRENTLY SUSPECT AN INTERNAL FAILURE OF THE ENG, SPECIFICALLY THE CRANKSHAFT. IN 4 1/2 YRS OF FLYING THIS ACFT I HAVE EXPERIENCED ONE CRANKSHAFT FAILURE AT 30 HRS TT (CAUSED BY A PROP STRIKE). I HAD A SEC CRANKSHAFT FAILURE AT 185 HRS TT CAUSE UNKNOWN. THINK CRANKSHAFT WAS THEN REPLACED WITH ONE OFF OF A USED ENG WITH AN UNKNOWN PAST. IT FAILED AFTER ONLY 9 HRS OF USE. THE FOURTH AND FINAL CRANKSHAFT IS A UNIT WHICH WAS SENT TO AN AUTHORIZED REPAIR CTR FOR REPLACEMENT OR REPAIR OF ITS CTR SECTION AND ALIGNMENT. THIS ONE BROKE AFTER 20 HRS OF USE, AGAIN FOR NO APPARENT REASON. IT IS MY OPINION THAT THIS ENG IS UNSUITABLE FOR USE ON THIS ACFT. I BELIEVED (WANTED TO BELIEVE) THAT THE CRANK FAILURES WERE ISOLATED EVENTS. I BELIEVE THAT CONTINUED FLT OF THIS ACFT TYPE WITH THE CURRENT ENG IS SIMPLY AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN. I WAS FORTUNATE THAT I HAD ONLY MINOR DAMAGE DONE AND WAS ABLE TO FIND A SUITABLE LNDG SPOT. EARLIER ATTEMPTS TO CONFRONT THE ENG MFR ON THIS PROB HAVE ONLY SHOWN THAT THEY DENY THERE IS ANY PROB. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, 380 PLANS/KITS OF THIS ACFT WERE SOLD. ALL PWRED BY THE SAME ENG. I DO NOT KNOW HOW MANY OF THESE ACFT ARE CURRENTLY FLYING. MY HUMAN PERFORMANCE CONSIDERATION WAS THAT I DENIED TO MYSELF THAT THERE WAS AN INHERENT PROB WITH THE ENG. NOT HAVING AN ALTERNATIVE PWR PLANT TO CHOOSE FROM FORCED ME TO RATIONALIZE THE PROBS AND BELIEVE THAT THIS TIME THE ENG WAS OK. NOW I KNOW THAT ANY ACFT PWRED BY A (ENG) IS A (TYPE ACFT) WAITING FOR A DEAD-STICK LNDG SOMEWHERE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.