Narrative:

The day began and progressed normally. The first 2 loads were flown successfully; and then the plane was refueled. This particular refueling is quite vivid in my mind not only because the engine failure occurred soon afterward; but also because I distinctly recall filling beyond the company's prescribed amount. The 3RD load followed and was successful as usual. The 4TH load was what we call a 'hot turn' meaning the engine still runs while the jumpers board. It was the 2ND of 2 loads before another refueling. During the time the 3 jumpers were boarding; I turned the fuel selector to the right wing tank as usual. We taxied to the runway and took off and departed northbound. Climbing through approximately 700 ft AGL; I noticed the engine power surging slightly and saw that the fuel flow gauge was wavering between 12 and 14 gph. At around 800 ft AGL; I entered a left bank to proceed wbound when the engine failed. Having little time; I checked some vital things including the mixture control; fuel selector; magnetos and master switch; but very immediately concentrated on putting it down on a road. It was what I believe to be successful in that there were no injuries; and zero damage to the aircraft. The landing was quite normal. Mechanics on the scene concluded that the fuel line from the right wing tank suffered momentary cavitation during the bank which ultimately caused the failure. To say the least; this result confused me. Having personally made sure that the fuel was at and even beyond our typical fuel amounts; I didn't understand how the cavitation could have occurred. At the very end of the day; I noticed that the nose strut seemed unusually inflated and asked the manager. He informed me that it had been filled during its 50 hour oil change. At this point; I began to wonder if this had been the cause of a serious fueling miscalculation on account of the plane sitting much more nose pitch up. Myself not being an a&P; I am really at a loss. Ultimately; not much light has been shed into this situation. If the cause was indeed the inflation of the nose strut leading to fuel mismeasurements and the ultimate fuel line cavitation; I should think the lesson would obviously be to make the pilots aware of any and all maintenance performed on the aircraft; especially if the maintenance alters the accuracy of fuel measurements. However; since the nose strut has not been ruled the official cause; this opinion is not worth much.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C206 PILOT REPORTS ENGINE FAILURE AT 800 FEET AGL ON DEPARTURE AND SUCCESSFUL LANDING ON A ROAD.

Narrative: THE DAY BEGAN AND PROGRESSED NORMALLY. THE FIRST 2 LOADS WERE FLOWN SUCCESSFULLY; AND THEN THE PLANE WAS REFUELED. THIS PARTICULAR REFUELING IS QUITE VIVID IN MY MIND NOT ONLY BECAUSE THE ENG FAILURE OCCURRED SOON AFTERWARD; BUT ALSO BECAUSE I DISTINCTLY RECALL FILLING BEYOND THE COMPANY'S PRESCRIBED AMOUNT. THE 3RD LOAD FOLLOWED AND WAS SUCCESSFUL AS USUAL. THE 4TH LOAD WAS WHAT WE CALL A 'HOT TURN' MEANING THE ENG STILL RUNS WHILE THE JUMPERS BOARD. IT WAS THE 2ND OF 2 LOADS BEFORE ANOTHER REFUELING. DURING THE TIME THE 3 JUMPERS WERE BOARDING; I TURNED THE FUEL SELECTOR TO THE R WING TANK AS USUAL. WE TAXIED TO THE RWY AND TOOK OFF AND DEPARTED NBOUND. CLBING THROUGH APPROX 700 FT AGL; I NOTICED THE ENG PWR SURGING SLIGHTLY AND SAW THAT THE FUEL FLOW GAUGE WAS WAVERING BTWN 12 AND 14 GPH. AT AROUND 800 FT AGL; I ENTERED A L BANK TO PROCEED WBOUND WHEN THE ENG FAILED. HAVING LITTLE TIME; I CHKED SOME VITAL THINGS INCLUDING THE MIXTURE CTL; FUEL SELECTOR; MAGNETOS AND MASTER SWITCH; BUT VERY IMMEDIATELY CONCENTRATED ON PUTTING IT DOWN ON A ROAD. IT WAS WHAT I BELIEVE TO BE SUCCESSFUL IN THAT THERE WERE NO INJURIES; AND ZERO DAMAGE TO THE ACFT. THE LNDG WAS QUITE NORMAL. MECHS ON THE SCENE CONCLUDED THAT THE FUEL LINE FROM THE R WING TANK SUFFERED MOMENTARY CAVITATION DURING THE BANK WHICH ULTIMATELY CAUSED THE FAILURE. TO SAY THE LEAST; THIS RESULT CONFUSED ME. HAVING PERSONALLY MADE SURE THAT THE FUEL WAS AT AND EVEN BEYOND OUR TYPICAL FUEL AMOUNTS; I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND HOW THE CAVITATION COULD HAVE OCCURRED. AT THE VERY END OF THE DAY; I NOTICED THAT THE NOSE STRUT SEEMED UNUSUALLY INFLATED AND ASKED THE MGR. HE INFORMED ME THAT IT HAD BEEN FILLED DURING ITS 50 HR OIL CHANGE. AT THIS POINT; I BEGAN TO WONDER IF THIS HAD BEEN THE CAUSE OF A SERIOUS FUELING MISCALCULATION ON ACCOUNT OF THE PLANE SITTING MUCH MORE NOSE PITCH UP. MYSELF NOT BEING AN A&P; I AM REALLY AT A LOSS. ULTIMATELY; NOT MUCH LIGHT HAS BEEN SHED INTO THIS SITUATION. IF THE CAUSE WAS INDEED THE INFLATION OF THE NOSE STRUT LEADING TO FUEL MISMEASUREMENTS AND THE ULTIMATE FUEL LINE CAVITATION; I SHOULD THINK THE LESSON WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE TO MAKE THE PLTS AWARE OF ANY AND ALL MAINT PERFORMED ON THE ACFT; ESPECIALLY IF THE MAINT ALTERS THE ACCURACY OF FUEL MEASUREMENTS. HOWEVER; SINCE THE NOSE STRUT HAS NOT BEEN RULED THE OFFICIAL CAUSE; THIS OPINION IS NOT WORTH MUCH.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.