PA46: "Engine Torque Setting Problem"

[Foxy Loxy]

Hi all,

I am going to start by stating that I am an ATCO who does not have a PPL.

I've started this thread because I called a local standby today for a Malibu stating the above problem. The pilot diverted to us because we have a nice wide runway. I took it to mean that the a/c might go a bit wonky on the ground on landing, but in truth, it's a new one on me.

Can anyone tell me what this means, and what the possible consequences could be?

Thanks.

[Deeday]

I take it that it was a Turboprop Malibu, in which case the main parameter that tells you how much power the engine is delivering is the torque. I suppose that message is the TP equivalent of "engine running rough" for pistons (but I'm not a TP driver).

[jxc]

I reckon he was after a free landing :D

[Kerling-Approsh KG]

Can anyone tell me what this means

Foxy, it means that the pilot made a poor job of describing his emergency to you.

Some emergencies are easy to describe; recent (last five years) ones I've had have included:

'We have a small electrical fire which has not gone out';
'We have total hydraulic failure and must land with flaps up and no spoilers, so the landing will be faster and longer than normal';
'We have shut down an engine and will not be able to go around below 500 feet' (this in an historic twin...);
'Rapid depressurisation, emergency descent, we are descending now FL100',I've also suffered a variety of minor problems, and have always taken pains to describe them in sufficient detail to let the controller do his or her job, without baffling anyone with science.

A pilot saying that he has an 'engine torque setting problem' is unhelpful. At face value, assuming that the torque indication is u/s, I'm puzzled that this is worth mentioning. ITT, prop RPM, speed, fuel flow, etc, should be enough to set the power correctly. If the torque control was faulty, then saying, for example, 'I have lost control of the engine power' would be much clearer.

Foxy, your best course of action might be to ask for clarification, along the lines of 'Are you able to maintain height and speed?'; 'Will you make a normal landing?', etc. Sadly, some pilots flying what they regard to be 'posh' aircraft lose their common sense somewhat and forget the basics.

Hope this helps.

K-A KG

[Foxy Loxy]

KAKG,

I wish I could have asked! But Radar was pretty busy at the time, and when I did ask my colleague "what does that mean?" he wasn't sure either, and he DOES have a PPL. I decided on the LSB because it might have had a bad outcome. I just didn't know, I played safe.

The pilot was able to maintain altitude and speed, and went visual and landed safely. He did not at any stage declare an emergency on R/T.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I would suggest from an ATC perspective problems in aircraft come in 3 types

1)Those that do not effect flight safety and the ability to manoever the aircraft normally and conform to all normal ATC instructions

2) Those that may at some future time effect flight safety and the ability to manoever the aircraft normally and conform to all normal ATC instructions

3) Those that have an immediate flight safety impact.

Examples from a light aircraft point of view aligned with above could be

1) EGT guage has failed

2) Alternator has failed. Comms exist now but will be lost in 30 mins

3) The engine is running rough


For para 1 issues there would not normally be any need to tell ATC. For para 2 items ATC should be informed after you have troubleshot the problem and decided on what you want to do. Obviously para 3 problems mean you immediately declare an emergency.

In any case simply tell ATC what aircraft system is malfunctioning. There is no reason to tell a big story. The most important part of your call is to clearly state what you require (eg I need to land on the nearest runway, I need to descend now) and state any restrictions (eg once established on final I cannot accept a go around). If you are debating whether or not you should declare an emergency, that in itself is reason to declare.

[SNS3Guppy]

A "torque setting problem" could mean any number of things. Whereas the advertising party didn't elaborate, then you need only know it's an engine/thrust problem. What it is exactly, isn't known.

A torque setting problem could imply a failed gauge or instrument. It could imply a failed propeller. It could imply a failed governor. It could imply a failed fuel control, linkage, fuel topping governor, fuel pump, or any number of other issues. The pilot may be having trouble setting power because he's experiencing transient power or propeller problems, it could be because he's got low oil. It could be because he can't see the instrument indication. It could be any number of other possibilities.

Apparently the pilot wanted nothing more than your runway, and wasn't seeking additional services such as priority, crash-rescue, or otherwise.

As far as potential complications on landing, that will really depend on what's wrong. No particular chance of anything going "wonky," though if it's truly a power problem then the possibility might exist of a power loss enroute. If it's a propeller problem, the pilot may not have reverse on landing...again, not a particularly big emergency.

[belowradar]

Torque is important on a Turbine and early warning of problems can often start as abnormalities which are seen on the instruments. An indication of fluctuating (or loss) of Torque is serious and should be investigated.

Sounds to me like the pilot was being prudent and decided to land and play it safe. Probably just a faulty indication but worth an engineering check.

[IO540]

On a turboprop engine, a "Torque setting problem" is the same as a "Throttle setting problem" on a piston engine.

On a piston engine you set RPM or MP (with the power lever); on a turboprop engine you set torque (with the same power lever) - usually, AFAIK. On a turbojet you set some other stuff.

It would not be in the PPL(A) general knowledge stuff, but I can sort-of imagine a TP pilot hoping ATC would know what it means. Similarly, one might expect them to understand that e.g. a "landing gear hydraulics leak" is something relatively important.

One could argue he should just have declared an emergency, but ATC do sometimes probe reasons e.g. if you simply request 20 degrees left they are likely to check whether it is "due weather" to make sure you are not trying to get a shortcut which they would not otherwise give you. So I can see a pilot stating more details of a problem than he actually thinks ATC will understand fundamentally, just in case they query it further. Or an airport might deny a (non Mayday) landing clearance because they have not received PNR for Customs/Immigration (I have had that), in which case one would obviously declare a Mayday immediately but a lot of pilots don't want to do that.

I would have used the sdame expression if I had the same problem, but only to properly English speaking ATC. In Spain/Italy I would just say I have an "engine problem".

[Kerling-Approsh KG]

One further thought...

Too many pilots don't use 'Pan' and 'Mayday' correctly, and dare I say, too few controllers insist on clear declaration of urgency or emergency...

Foxy, I've no doubt that the LSB was the right thing to do, but I'm very much of the opinion that normal operations should continue until someone declares urgency or emergency, and the proper protocols have been followed. I've seen things go wrong too often when they are not (and indeed, even when they are!).

May I ask, Foxy, are you recently qualified, and Nats or non-NATS? Just interested to explore the 'aeroplanes and piloting awareness' side of things, in the context of cut-backs from the old days (pre-about 70 course, I think) when everyone got PPLs, through the 12 hour folk, to the zero-flight-time controllers of today... By PM if you prefer.

[Foxy Loxy]

Thank you everyone for your replies which have been very helpful. :ok:

The PA46 is an aircraft type I am not especially familiar with, and I was keen to extend my knowledge in the hope that it will help in the future. I will continue to monitor this thread in case there are any more contributions.

KAKG, PM for you.

[IO540]

If you google on the callsign (which you presumably have, if you are an ATCO) you will have a lifetime's supply of photographs.

It must be the Jetprop conversion, for "torque" to make any sense. For more details go to jetprop.com.

[Genghis the Engineer]

It does raise an interesting question - if we (pilots) have an emergency or significant failure, you'd naturally expect us to tell the controller working us, since it may affect our subsequent requests or lead to some escalating problem.

A few years ago on my way into Prestwick (from memory I think I was talking to Scottish at the time) I had an alternator failure. I called ATC and told them this, telling them I was shutting off my transponder to save power. Whilst they were happy for me to turn the transponder off, the problem itself clearly alarmed the controller somewhat until I explained that the worst that could happen was that my radio stopped working - we dealt with it, although maybe not as well as we might between us.

But, I can't recall anybody ever giving me any training in what level of understanding of aircraft systems and emergencies I can actually expect of what controllers at what levels? I can explain things in plain english at length if required - and if I have a mayday-level problem I will with a clear conscience. In my case however, or that perhaps of this PA46 pilot, it's not a true emergency but nonetheless useful to inform ATC that there is a problem in case it escalates.

I'm not aware of a particular protocol here, but maybe there should be? For example in my case:

"Scottish Information, G-AB, be advised I have a minor engine fault which requires me to shut down my transponder now and may subsequently lead to a radio and lights failure, it appears unlikely to cause an engine failure".

Or the Malibu's case:

"Foxy Radar, G-CD, be advised that I have a minor engine failure which may affect my accurate speed and altitude control and increase my landing distance."


Either way, it does make a strong case for having controllers who have trained in flying to something similar to PPL level (although you could make a stronger case for perhaps something more tailored - say light aircraft to solo standard, a sample cross-country through a selection of airspace, couple of glider flights and jet jumpseat rides, handful of emergencies in a sim, and groundschool covering PPL air law, ATPL systems and nav?) Or does that happen already anywhere?

G

[SNS3Guppy]

But, I can't recall anybody ever giving me any training in what level of understanding of aircraft systems and emergencies I can actually expect of what controllers at what levels?

Never assume that the controller will know more than that which you provide.

State your problem clearly, simply, and succinctly, and state the nature of service that you require.

"Wonderworld Approach, Cherokee Niner Three Alpha Foxtrot Roundworm."

"Cherokee Niner Three Alpha Foxtrot Roundworm, go ahead."

"Cherokee Niner Three Alpha Foxtrot Roundworm has an electrical failure, 30 minutes battery remaining, request direct Spongebobville."

"Cherokee Foxtrot Roundworm, Wonderworld Approach clears you direct Spongebobville. Say nature of help requested."

"Cherokee Foxtrot Roundworm requests early clearance to land, due to limited battery life remaining. Thanks."

"Cherokee Foxtrot Roundworm, roger. Contact Spongebobville Approach now on One Two Three, decimal Four Five Zero."

Done.

[jxc]

Foxy Radar sounds very nice :E

[mad_jock]

Give the bloke in the aircraft a break.

He is single engine, single crew and something doesn't look right. Yes after 8 years experence driving turbo props a torque bridge dropping out isn't worthy of a mention to ATC. But if you havent seen it before, you don't have a second engine that looks right etc etc.

Actually bugger it single engine I would be screaming mayday like a girl and if anyone had an issue with that on the ground they could go :mad: themselves

[S-Works]

As a Turboprop driver myself including the PA46 I am with MJ on this one.