Narrative:

I noticed that my student, spi, was not returned from practice area. I called the aircraft rental and talked to one of the employees there. He told me that spi made a forced landing in the edwards air force base that afternoon. Before I hung up, I asked him whether or not the plane that spi was flying was fixed before being rented to my student. He replied that the owner would know about it. Because I remembered having problems with the same plane the night before. I could not start the engine for the lack of battery charge, hence I decided to cancel the flight that night. However, I found out from lieutenant who was in charge of the operations at the edwards north field, during a telephone conversation that according to their technician the airplane was running on a bad alternator, a bad regulator, and juiceless battery. The lieutenant mentioned that due to all these problems with the electrical components the radio would not work, thus he could not permit a departure without having them fixed by the owner. After I hung up with the lieutenant I called the owner of aircraft at home and mentioned to him that that was an existing problem with the plane the night before and given my written report about the electrical short-out in the squawk sheet and a verbal explanation of that over telephone to one of his staff leaves me with a great surprise that he rented the plane to my student pilot without a thorough inspection of the aircraft. Owner mentioned that he was ill and resting at home and that he had no comment at the time. After I hung up with him, I called lieutenant and explained the situation. Since there was no way for me to fly to edwards, I sincerely asked the lieutenant to make arrangements for spi staying over night. He said that spi had already been taken to a nearby motel. I appreciated his cooperation and got the name and the phone number where spi was staying. Later, I called. He said that while performing some airwork over the newhall practice area, he got alarmed by the illumination of the alternator red light. He tried the VOR, but it was intermittent. He tried the vny tower and took a chance with FSS 121.5, but received no response. Eventually got lost over the lancaster area and landed at the edwards base where he assumed to be cal city. He also mentioned that when the air force authorities finally gave him permission to depart, he had trouble with radio and during his second attempt he could not start the engine at all. Spi has a total of 67 hours flight time including some 15 hours of solo (traffic pattern) time. At the time of this occurrence he was overly panicked. The electrical problem drew his attention away from the outside for a short period of time thus causing him to distract from terrain orientation. Considering the fact given in my statement above, I request your special attention and your superior judgement to evaluate this occurrence which ended up to the far violations by my student. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter was allied due to his assumption that ASRS would be judging and evaluating his student. He has not been contacted by FAA, but the student was called in for review. He attended with his lawyer and nothing more has happened.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: INSTRUCTOR RPT REGARDING SPI ON PRACTICE FLT DISORIENTED LAND AT MIL FIELD. ACFT EQUIP PROB.

Narrative: I NOTICED THAT MY STUDENT, SPI, WAS NOT RETURNED FROM PRACTICE AREA. I CALLED THE ACFT RENTAL AND TALKED TO ONE OF THE EMPLOYEES THERE. HE TOLD ME THAT SPI MADE A FORCED LNDG IN THE EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE THAT AFTERNOON. BEFORE I HUNG UP, I ASKED HIM WHETHER OR NOT THE PLANE THAT SPI WAS FLYING WAS FIXED BEFORE BEING RENTED TO MY STUDENT. HE REPLIED THAT THE OWNER WOULD KNOW ABOUT IT. BECAUSE I REMEMBERED HAVING PROBS WITH THE SAME PLANE THE NIGHT BEFORE. I COULD NOT START THE ENG FOR THE LACK OF BATTERY CHARGE, HENCE I DECIDED TO CANCEL THE FLT THAT NIGHT. HOWEVER, I FOUND OUT FROM LIEUTENANT WHO WAS IN CHARGE OF THE OPS AT THE EDWARDS NORTH FIELD, DURING A TELEPHONE CONVERSATION THAT ACCORDING TO THEIR TECHNICIAN THE AIRPLANE WAS RUNNING ON A BAD ALTERNATOR, A BAD REGULATOR, AND JUICELESS BATTERY. THE LIEUTENANT MENTIONED THAT DUE TO ALL THESE PROBS WITH THE ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS THE RADIO WOULD NOT WORK, THUS HE COULD NOT PERMIT A DEP WITHOUT HAVING THEM FIXED BY THE OWNER. AFTER I HUNG UP WITH THE LIEUTENANT I CALLED THE OWNER OF ACFT AT HOME AND MENTIONED TO HIM THAT THAT WAS AN EXISTING PROB WITH THE PLANE THE NIGHT BEFORE AND GIVEN MY WRITTEN RPT ABOUT THE ELECTRICAL SHORT-OUT IN THE SQUAWK SHEET AND A VERBAL EXPLANATION OF THAT OVER TELEPHONE TO ONE OF HIS STAFF LEAVES ME WITH A GREAT SURPRISE THAT HE RENTED THE PLANE TO MY STUDENT PLT WITHOUT A THOROUGH INSPECTION OF THE ACFT. OWNER MENTIONED THAT HE WAS ILL AND RESTING AT HOME AND THAT HE HAD NO COMMENT AT THE TIME. AFTER I HUNG UP WITH HIM, I CALLED LIEUTENANT AND EXPLAINED THE SIT. SINCE THERE WAS NO WAY FOR ME TO FLY TO EDWARDS, I SINCERELY ASKED THE LIEUTENANT TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS FOR SPI STAYING OVER NIGHT. HE SAID THAT SPI HAD ALREADY BEEN TAKEN TO A NEARBY MOTEL. I APPRECIATED HIS COOPERATION AND GOT THE NAME AND THE PHONE NUMBER WHERE SPI WAS STAYING. LATER, I CALLED. HE SAID THAT WHILE PERFORMING SOME AIRWORK OVER THE NEWHALL PRACTICE AREA, HE GOT ALARMED BY THE ILLUMINATION OF THE ALTERNATOR RED LIGHT. HE TRIED THE VOR, BUT IT WAS INTERMITTENT. HE TRIED THE VNY TWR AND TOOK A CHANCE WITH FSS 121.5, BUT RECEIVED NO RESPONSE. EVENTUALLY GOT LOST OVER THE LANCASTER AREA AND LANDED AT THE EDWARDS BASE WHERE HE ASSUMED TO BE CAL CITY. HE ALSO MENTIONED THAT WHEN THE AIR FORCE AUTHORITIES FINALLY GAVE HIM PERMISSION TO DEPART, HE HAD TROUBLE WITH RADIO AND DURING HIS SECOND ATTEMPT HE COULD NOT START THE ENG AT ALL. SPI HAS A TOTAL OF 67 HRS FLT TIME INCLUDING SOME 15 HRS OF SOLO (TFC PATTERN) TIME. AT THE TIME OF THIS OCCURRENCE HE WAS OVERLY PANICKED. THE ELECTRICAL PROB DREW HIS ATTN AWAY FROM THE OUTSIDE FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME THUS CAUSING HIM TO DISTRACT FROM TERRAIN ORIENTATION. CONSIDERING THE FACT GIVEN IN MY STATEMENT ABOVE, I REQUEST YOUR SPECIAL ATTN AND YOUR SUPERIOR JUDGEMENT TO EVALUATE THIS OCCURRENCE WHICH ENDED UP TO THE FAR VIOLATIONS BY MY STUDENT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR WAS ALLIED DUE TO HIS ASSUMPTION THAT ASRS WOULD BE JUDGING AND EVALUATING HIS STUDENT. HE HAS NOT BEEN CONTACTED BY FAA, BUT THE STUDENT WAS CALLED IN FOR REVIEW. HE ATTENDED WITH HIS LAWYER AND NOTHING MORE HAS HAPPENED.

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.