18 Apr 2024, 08:15 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: PA-46TP engine failures Posted: 18 Jan 2022, 16:42 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/27/09 Posts: 980 Post Likes: +508 Location: Knoxville TN
Aircraft: C150J
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I read an interesting statistic that the piston powered Pa-46 has a lower accident rate from engine failure than the turbine over the 10 year period that was reviewed. These are fairly recent numbers and the rate for both was very low and I am sure there are many variables but just throwing that out there. Can you provide a source for this?
No link but recall it was aviation consumer.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: PA-46TP engine failures Posted: 18 Jan 2022, 22:22 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/10/10 Posts: 46 Post Likes: +13 Location: KNQA
Aircraft: TBM910, PA18
|
|
Username Protected wrote: MOR=Manual OverRide.
SETPs have this lever, which I have used in training many times. Manually controls the system in case of a rollback where the engine remains on but the throttle control doesn’t work. I’m being very general here for the sake of simplicity. That’s why Pratt doesn’t count it as a “failure” and I agree with them. You still have ITT, NG, etc. Torque goes down. If you look at the gauges and that’s what you see, engage the MOR. If you look at the gauges and you don’t have ITT/NG, you’re a glider unless you can restart.
PT6 accessories occasionally fail on all these aircraft, like the prop governor sensor which happened to me - everything was running fine on takeoff and initial climb into the Houston Bravo, but the prop RPM indicator bounced around wildly then went to zero and I got the CAS message. Plane was humming along fine. After stopping my climb to investigate, I did a non-emergency RTB with ATC and we got the part shipped out by fedex and fixed on my field.
Our M600 has the original FCU. Never had an issue with it. Start temps definitely higher than the Woodward but I don’t believe you can swap one for the other… there is a six-year overhaul period for the FCU, which we will get to within a year or so. If not this annual, then the next one.
I have literally never worried about engine failure in our airplane. I practice the MOR in case of a rollback and have landed using the MOR several times as well has done air work with it. And as Chuck says, these airplanes are great gliders. It takes a heck of a lot to stop a PT6 once it starts … and the MOR is your insurance policy. I have not lost a wink of sleep about this issue.
I don’t know that the PA46 turbines are any different than the other SETPs with Pratts, other than the FCU choice but I have not done any incident research either. I worry more about getting contaminated JetA somewhere than a rollback…
Cheers
PS: Our recurrent is coming up next month and I’m sure I will get another chance at the MOR - it’s actually kind of fun flying the plane with it! What type of contamination are you concerned with? The PT6 burns 100LL no problem and it would take a boatload of water to flameout.
Last edited on 18 Jan 2022, 22:23, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: PA-46TP engine failures Posted: 18 Jan 2022, 22:58 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/01/16 Posts: 453 Post Likes: +340 Location: Citrus County Florida
Aircraft: Shopping
|
|
I have done a fair amount of work with Woodward. When I had my TBM it had a Woodward FCU and prop governor. Every time I flew that airframe I was wondering which one was going to try and kill me. Let’s just say if you saw what I did you would not be so trusting of their products.
My MOR lever was supposed to max out at 85% torque, but at initial and recurrent everyone was very adamant about moving that lever slowly and deliberately. It was not linear and depending on what configuration you were in it could exceed 100% torque or 800 itt. It was not a good choice low and slow is what I was taught.
_________________ Anthony Dennis
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: PA-46TP engine failures Posted: 18 Jan 2022, 23:32 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/28/13 Posts: 6048 Post Likes: +4018 Location: Indiana
Aircraft: C195, D17S, M20TN
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have done a fair amount of work with Woodward. When I had my TBM it had a Woodward FCU and prop governor. Every time I flew that airframe I was wondering which one was going to try and kill me. Let’s just say if you saw what I did you would not be so trusting of their products.
My MOR lever was supposed to max out at 85% torque, but at initial and recurrent everyone was very adamant about moving that lever slowly and deliberately. It was not linear and depending on what configuration you were in it could exceed 100% torque or 800 itt. It was not a good choice low and slow is what I was taught. TBM: Anthony I don’t remember anyone ever saying that the MOR maxed out. If it max’s out how could you over TQ or temp? John Elford trained me and practiced landing with the MOR. It is seat tightening but easy enough. If I was down low and had the presence of mind and quickness to unlatch and move the lever I don’t care if the engine OT’s or over TQ’d if it helps me get to the RWY safely. It’s the insurance companies. Flew mine 6+ years(~860 hours), zero issues with FCU or prop governor. Sorry you did. Best traveling machine I was privileged to fly. Good luck with your search.
_________________ Chuck KEVV
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: PA-46TP engine failures Posted: 19 Jan 2022, 07:18 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/09/13 Posts: 174 Post Likes: +79 Location: Camarillo, Ca.
Aircraft: 2005 Meridian
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have done a fair amount of work with Woodward. When I had my TBM it had a Woodward FCU and prop governor. Every time I flew that airframe I was wondering which one was going to try and kill me. Let’s just say if you saw what I did you would not be so trusting of their products.
My MOR lever was supposed to max out at 85% torque, but at initial and recurrent everyone was very adamant about moving that lever slowly and deliberately. It was not linear and depending on what configuration you were in it could exceed 100% torque or 800 itt. It was not a good choice low and slow is what I was taught. Low and slow is exactly when you want to use the MOR if you have a power failure. I say MOR on the takeoff every time to remind myself that it is there. I have not heard of a roll back in a long time but if it happens we have a fix that is really easy if it is practiced.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: PA-46TP engine failures Posted: 19 Jan 2022, 15:23 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/01/16 Posts: 453 Post Likes: +340 Location: Citrus County Florida
Aircraft: Shopping
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have done a fair amount of work with Woodward. When I had my TBM it had a Woodward FCU and prop governor. Every time I flew that airframe I was wondering which one was going to try and kill me. Let’s just say if you saw what I did you would not be so trusting of their products.
My MOR lever was supposed to max out at 85% torque, but at initial and recurrent everyone was very adamant about moving that lever slowly and deliberately. It was not linear and depending on what configuration you were in it could exceed 100% torque or 800 itt. It was not a good choice low and slow is what I was taught. TBM: Anthony I don’t remember anyone ever saying that the MOR maxed out. If it max’s out how could you over TQ or temp? John Elford trained me and practiced landing with the MOR. It is seat tightening but easy enough. If I was down low and had the presence of mind and quickness to unlatch and move the lever I don’t care if the engine OT’s or over TQ’d if it helps me get to the RWY safely. It’s the insurance companies. Flew mine 6+ years(~860 hours), zero issues with FCU or prop governor. Sorry you did. Best traveling machine I was privileged to fly. Good luck with your search.
I too used John and i also used the mor lever. I said it was supposed to max out at 85% tongue, it didn't. I was not worried about the airframe, as you said it was the insurance companies, but unless John taught different people different ways he was always adamant about moving it slowly. To each his own, you can have your opinion, I worked with Woodward, i was not impressed.
_________________ Anthony Dennis
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: PA-46TP engine failures Posted: 19 Jan 2022, 19:53 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/30/17 Posts: 198 Post Likes: +159
|
|
To Tyler: I was thinking of DEF contamination in the JetA. Not water in 100LL.
Cheers
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: PA-46TP engine failures Posted: 19 Jan 2022, 23:01 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/14/09 Posts: 817 Post Likes: +312 Location: Boise, ID
Aircraft: 06 Meridian,SuperCub
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have done a fair amount of work with Woodward. When I had my TBM it had a Woodward FCU and prop governor. Every time I flew that airframe I was wondering which one was going to try and kill me. Let’s just say if you saw what I did you would not be so trusting of their products.
My MOR lever was supposed to max out at 85% torque, but at initial and recurrent everyone was very adamant about moving that lever slowly and deliberately. It was not linear and depending on what configuration you were in it could exceed 100% torque or 800 itt. It was not a good choice low and slow is what I was taught. Low and slow is exactly when you want to use the MOR if you have a power failure. I say MOR on the takeoff every time to remind myself that it is there. I have not heard of a roll back in a long time but if it happens we have a fix that is really easy if it is practiced. I had a rollback at takeoff 2 years ago. I’ll respectfully disagree that you’ll instantly engage the MOR. You’ll look at gauges first, then oh shxx, then jockey the throttle. Gear up or down? Pitch? Then you’ll carefully engage the MOR, right? All at 200-300 AGL feet on a 6k runway. If you do, and it works, you’re a better pilot than I. I have yet to hear of anyone successfully engaging the MOR lever at gear up and saving the plane and engine. The MOR will only work if it’s an FCU failure. My FCU was torn down with no issues found. Fuel/oil heat exchanger is another possibility for rollback and there is an SB for that. Your MOR engagement would have yielded no results in that case. By then, you’re likely on the ground, hopefully not stalled. FYI, on the Meridian, there are two SBs on the Honeywell FCU. One from Honeywell, which as Chuck pointed out, is voluntary. The other is from Pratt and is a category 5 SB. You cannot do engine work with them without complying with that SB or you’ll have to sign a waiver. Ask me how I know.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: PA-46TP engine failures Posted: 20 Jan 2022, 10:28 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 19252 Post Likes: +23622 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Not sure how you can have a roll back (engine running at idle but running) without an FCU issue. Anything that constricts fuel flow, say blocked fuel filter or plugged fuel line or weak fuel pump. That could result in fuel flow effectively around idle give or take. If it gets less, you could flame out, gets more, you get some power. The MOR lever won't fix any of those issues. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024
|
|
|
|