PC-12 Engine Shut Down

[bob sacamano]

Not sure what's worse, losing your only engine in NW Ontario, or ending up in Led Rake...

[Bushav8er]

Cessna 185 or DHC2 Beaver = VFR float planes mostly
PC12 = IFR wheels

There's a big difference between the two. The big argument here is SEIFR a good idea.

I'd rather be IFR wheels at 250 then very marginal VFR at tree top with floats - and I've been both and would do it all again - but I always have an out.

The real point is; training, procedures and risk management. I really don't think that anyone whose had a engine fail on a single ever though "gee, wish I had another engine". They were working the problem.

[Invertago]

TC should add this one to the decision making simulator... after the story is forgotten.

[yfly]

huh?

ESL?[/quote]

i was going to ask you the same thing. wouldn't an aircraft always be within gliding distance to land as long as they weren't over water?[/quote]

mattedfred, the opening post asked a question regarding what would have happened hed they been over Lake Superior. Last I checked, it was water, thus my comment.

[Flybaby]

I lost an engine in a single, and the entire time I limped her back to the runway I thought, I wish I was in a twin, that and if it dies before I have the field made, where am I going to crash.

[Flybaby]

Matt Butler

"I feel a lot safer in a PC-12 than in a twin," says PC-12 operator and pilot Matt Butler, of Butler Machinery, the Caterpillar dealer for North and South Dakota. In fact, he quit flying twins years ago, though he still flies the company PC-12.

With more than 7,000 hours logged, including over 4,000 in piston and turboprop twins, he didn’t quit flying twins for lack of experience. And with a twin available as the other half of the fleet, he didn’t quit for lack of access. Matt quit flying twins, he says, because “I just didn’t want to lose an engine someday and then try to keep it flying. In my opinion, the PC-12 is a lot safer than a multi-engine airplane.”

http://www.pilatus-aircraft.com/html/en ... L6ID=0&L=4

What a load of bullshit.
I think this hazardous attitude is called resignation.

5. Resignation ("What's the use?") - I really can't make a difference. It's going to happen anyway, why bother? Leave actions to others.

http://www.geocities.com/cfidarren/r-hazatt.htm

[Cat Driver]

http://www.pilatus-aircraft.com/html/en ... L6ID=0&L=4

What a load of bullshit.

True.

I think this hazardous attitude is called resignation.

I think it is real slick advertising by Palatus

[E-Flyer]

Wonder what the outcome would have been if it had been over Lake Superior or north of YTL? What if it had been painted ORNGE?

The pilot would have joined Sully for a beer fest at the Cafe Hudsons.

[oldncold]

Well i am not a pc12 guru for what iti s worth/ my thought on the series 9 pc12


4500 hrs pic> no engine shutdown 2 electical malfunctions ( a gen 1 and a hydraulic pressure switch )

900,000 miles a lot of jet A-1 and more cups of timmys than i can count.

in all a good bird the king air is too so lets not go there eh> it is just in this case the 12 has the stage length to hold legal alternates ALONG AWAYS APART.

[C206Pilot]

I wonder if they wished they had another PT6 hanging on the airplane during the time they were waiting to get it on a runway?

But then again they were probably not pussies they would have been real men and they would have no fear of anything.

Absolutely, single engine IFR experience will never get them into the airlines!

omg, great response dude....

1. not every pilots dream is to fly the 'airlines' - some of the f**king coolest guys/girls i've ever met have no desire whatsoever to go to the coveted airlines....and

2. i got into the airlines with no multi experience, only PC12 time.

anything else you got your majesty?

[yfly]

What a great irony though, when single engine aircraft are required to remain within gliding distance to shore and a twin jet flying over land has to make an emergency landing in the water.

[No Conflict]

Not sure what's worse, losing your only engine in NW Ontario, or ending up in Led Rake...

LMAO!!!!

[Cat Driver]

omg, great response dude....

1. not every pilots dream is to fly the 'airlines' - some of the f**king coolest guys/girls i've ever met have no desire whatsoever to go to the coveted airlines....and

2. i got into the airlines with no multi experience, only PC12 time.

anything else you got your majesty?

C206Pilot you should seek an anger management program before one of your colleagues punches your lights out.

[Just another canuck]

Repeating the question, is the PC-12 exempt from any rules of single engine operation? One of you Pilatus drivers must know....

[ipilot54]

C206Pilot you should seek an anger management program...

Can’t agree more cat.

Personally, I can remember two occasions when I had to shut down an engine (turbine) due to oil loss. One was over Lake Superior about 14 years ago. It was REAL nice to have another fan to keep me cool; not to mention the fact I did not have to keep “it running” while it chewed the gearbox up with no oil.

After landing….maintenance replaced an oil line and off I went again. The engine was not damaged so it did not need a overhaul.

[Tim]

dont the pt6's have a failure rate of something like less than 1 per every million hours flown?

[Cat Driver]

dont the pt6's have a failure rate of something like less than 1 per every million hours flown?

They might but I have had two quit on me so I must be very unlucky.

[Bushav8er]

I'm curious Cat...how many failures with the R-1830 on the Cats? No comparison intended, just curious.

[baby_fly]

What a great irony though, when single engine aircraft are required to remain within gliding distance to shore and a twin jet flying over land has to make an emergency landing in the water.

Single engine aircraft are not required to remain within gliding distance of shore. CAR 602.62 (1) states "No person shall conduct a take-off or a landing on water in an aircraft or operate an aircraft over water beyond a point where the aircraft could reach shore in the event of an engine failure, unless a life preserver, individual flotation device or personal flotation device is carried for each person on board." In addition, if operating single engine more than 100 nm from shore, CAR 602.63(1) states that life rafts must be carried.

[Cat Driver]

I'm curious Cat...how many failures with the R-1830 on the Cats? No comparison intended, just curious.

I have had two catastrophic failures on the Cats, both were kind of expected and both were on engines that we had serious mechanical problems with.

The first was in Gander on an engine we had just changed four cylinders on because it had been overboosted and logged as such.

The second was in The Pas with an engine that had a supercharger problem, that one really came apart just like I told the company it would..the supercharger came apart and turned the engine into a boat anchor.

I have shut down a few P&W 1830's for various reasons and finished the flights on the other one.

Turbines are far more reliable than piston pounders....my position is any engine can fail and I like having another one to get me to a safe landing surface.....it's just a personal quirk I have.

[ScudRunner]

I have had two catastrophic failures on the Cats, both were kind of expected and both were on engines that we had serious mechanical problems with.

Please tell me this is one of your I was young and dumb and learned from it stories?

Most times when I think somethings going to go bang in a bad way I usually don't take it flying, it's just a personal quirk I have.

[mrsbitchy]

I believe it is 1 per 100,000 hours to get SEIFR approval. The C208 is close to losing their certification, if I'm not mistaken. The PC12 has had 3 in Canada that I know of, but I do not know total hours flown.

[Cat Driver]

Please tell me this is one of your I was young and dumb and learned from it stories?

No I was not young and dumb I was the chief pilot for the company and also involved in the mechanical work done on said engine. The cylinders were changed because they were below what we felt to be to the standard we wanted. We found the four weak cylinders during the trouble shooting process we followed using the P&W engine repair manual. The original problem that started the process was because after changing the engine that failed I had a situation where the engine started to run rough on the descent into Cartwright when I left cruise altitude, then when I started the descent back at Gander the same problem occurred. The maintenance department first decided to change the AMC and while waiting for the unit to come from Montreal we went through the cause checks as outlined in the P&W manual. It was during this process we found the weak cylinders and changed them.

The engine failed on the test flight at the airport.

I fail to see how this event was anything out of the normal procedures used when trouble shooting engine problems, therefore it was not a when I was young and dumb event.

Most times when I think somethings going to go bang in a bad way I usually don't take it flying, it's just a personal quirk I have

You would not test fly aircraft that maintenance had released for a test flight after being worked on?

If you have any credible reasons to question my decision making when flying or agreeing to flying aircraft . feel free to do so, but I would appreciate it if you get the facts straight before you do it on a public forum.

Or do you feel I should not answer questions regarding things that happened during my career?

[teacher]

Simply put if we were to ban SEIFR in factory built aircraft in commercial service due to the risk we would have to ban float flying. There is NO comparison when it comes to risk and loss of life. There is a huge difference in the type of operation but risk and safety are the same regardless.

Why this debate is going on is beyond me. It's the stupidest debate that's been raging for years and the proof is in the stats. Flying in it's self has all sorts of risks, calculated risks. If you don't wanna fly single engine turbine IFR than don't. Maybe we should ban departures during migration season as well, look at what happened in NY.

[ScudRunner]

Oh Dear I made an "Avcanada Faux Pas" I questioned Cat.

Lets go over the timeline again here for folks watching at home

You said:

I have had two catastrophic failures on the Cats, both were kind of expected and both were on engines that we had serious mechanical problems with.

The first was in Gander on an engine we had just changed four cylinders on because it had been overboosted and logged as such.

The second was in The Pas with an engine that had a supercharger problem, that one really came apart just like I told the company it would..the supercharger came apart and turned the engine into a boat anchor.

So I say :

Please tell me this is one of your I was young and dumb and learned from it stories?

Most times when I think somethings going to go bang in a bad way I usually don't take it flying, it's just a personal quirk I have

So as I read your tale, I'm questioning the fact you would fly something that you knew was going to go Bang. thus the young and dumb remark. Your story mentioned nothing about a Maintenance Flight or Test Flight

Ok you with me so far folks?

You would not test fly aircraft that maintenance had released for a test flight after being worked on?

Refer to above comment about not mentioning a test flight.

If you have any credible reasons to question my decision making when flying or agreeing to flying aircraft . feel free to do so, but I would appreciate it if you get the facts straight before you do it on a public forum.

Thats what I was doing trying to get the facts of the story now we all have the fact that you where on a test flight ahhhhhhhhhhh its clear now I get why you where flying a plane you knew was going to go bang any second. Is that a credible enough reason to question it?

Or do you feel I should not answer questions regarding things that happened during my career?

where the fack did that come from?

coles notes

Cat:
I knew the engine was going to go bang!
..:
You flew a plane that you knew was going to go bang?
Cat:
its was a test flight don't question me
..:
Ok then it was a test flight I get it.
Cat:
Meow
..:
I need to get back to the thread about the 18 year olds