PC12 Glide Approach

[Brian Abraham]

Pin, what he is saying is that from ten thousand you can glide 20 miles ie a ratio of 1:2 if you forget about everything but the raw number. Pilots like to keep maths simple.

[Pin37]

Thanks for that info Brian, I understand what he is saying now

[FourBalls]

Sorry Pin. What I mean is 2nm/1000' ie 12:1 using same scale - a safe number to make the field. Actual glide is more likeley to be 15:1.

From FL200, you have around 22min till you land. Enough time for a cuppa

[Tidbinbilla]

What about IMC? Can you glide an RNAV or similar approach when it's dark and stormy?

[goldypilot]

jebbbusssss i can think of 3 single engine turbine AC in Australia with failures this month now. This is makes me wonder what is happening to PT6 this year. Everyone get ready to hear about the pt6 pro's and con's.....

[FourBalls]

Tid

What about IMC? Can you glide an RNAV or similar approach when it's dark and stormy?

This is why we have the cloud-break. 1:1 descent profile is designed to avoid the rocks at most places in oz. The normal glide is maintained until 7nm then point it at the field. Altitude alert set at 1200agl and radalt set at 700' - level off height. Puts you near vne - then circling approach if visual. If not, gear, flap, bring it down at 80kt, try to miss obstacles and nail the 64kt stall onto the deck. Easier said than done.

I like the sound of the RNAV option too.

[Pin37]

Fourballs

Thanks for that explanation Fourballs, Wow that thing is almost a glider.I never realized they were so good. I think if I was ever a patient I would feel fairly safe in the hands of the RFDS
PS. Can you thermal those things? (only kidding)

[Mainframe]

Single engine Tubine

fourballs (furr balls?)

In the event of engine failure the PC-12 has two significant advantages over the van.

1. Its cruising in the flight levels, so has altitude to play with.
The van is usually 10,000' or lower, less options

2. It has a typical TAS of 240 kts, plenty of penetration speed for gliding and a huge margin above best glide speed.
The van is typically 160 kts with a pod, and a bit slower with floats.

Height plus speed are good things to have in your bag of luck and definitely increase your options.

The van does glide beautifully, especially when feathered, the PC-12 even better.

The van in IFR RPT ops (for which it should never have been approved) has to meet ASETPA (Approved Single Engine Turbine Powered Aircraft) requirements.

RFDS has a working engine failure in IMC (dont even think about night) procedure for the PC-12.

Vans operated to ASETPA criteria in RPT need a means of carrying out a dead stick instrument approach to a forced landing.

One method is to use a database of surveyed ALA's such that the aircraft arrives over the top and continues to descend in a pseudo LLZ/DME runway aligned approach.

Quite an exciting procedure and if flown correctly can be a great confidence booster.

Will post a diagram when I work how to include a PDF.

The following is part of the procedure based on a King KLN89B / KLN90

4-2 ASETPA - Initial Procedures

♦

Initiate after positively identifying that engine has failed

Secure Engine

1 Airspeed 85 - 95 kts

2 Power Lever Idle
3 Propeller Feather
4 Fuel Condition Lever Cutoff
5 Flaps Up
6 Fuel Boost Off
7 Fuel Shutoff Off - Pull Out
8 Ignition Normal
9 Stanby Power Off
10 Electical Load Reduce

GPS

11 NRST Press
12 Airfield type - Rotate Outer Knob ENT Press
13 D Press
14 ENT Press
15 Track & Distance to Airfield Displayed
16 Heading Turn to Track
17 HSI Course bar Turn to Track

CDI Scale (setting to .3 nm)

18 CRSR Press
19 CLR Press Button x 2
20 Rotate Inner Knob .3 nm
21 CLR Press

Airfield Information (If required)

22 Outer Knob Rotate Counter clockwise
23 Cursor ACT
24 Inner Knob In Rotate Counter clockwise
25 Rotate Outer Knob clockwise Cursor at NAV

26 Track to Airfield
27 Airspeed Best Glide for weight ~ 700 fpm (refer placard)
28 Mayday Transmit intentions

Cessna 208 - Emergency Checklist Part B

Page two graphics still to come when I learn how to paste it

4-3 ASETPA - Approach Procedures

♦ Check Height above Airfield and decide which approach to carry out

♦ Optional - Right Hand Circuit may be used

Type of Approach

1 > 5000' above GPS Reference High Holding Approach

2 > 2500' " GPS " Mid Level Approach

3 < 2500' " GPS " Abbreviated Approach to FAF

High Holding Approach > 5000' Mid Level Approach > 2500'

1 2 1

Overhead GPS Reference

IAP

4 OBS Mode Select

5 Course bar Runway Direction

6 Heading 45° to Runway Direction for 1 nm

7 Turn Left Rate 1 (15°)

8 Intercept Course bar & Inbound Track

9 Track to Final 600' @ 1 nm

10Flap As required

28Landing → 4-4 Power Off Forced Landing

Cessna 208 - Emergency Checklist Part B 01 July 2003

(This procedure is based on the King KLN89B GPS)

Chart icons

Δ IAF > 5000'

Δ IAF FAF 600' FAF
* GPS Ref Pt

* GPS Ref Pt 1 nm
Δ IAF > 2500'

Δ IAF FAF 600' FAF
* GPS Ref Pt

* GPS Ref Pt 1 nm

[Grogmonster]

My two Bobs worth

Lets not get into that old chestnut of twin versus single. How about considering that PT6 turbines, like all engines, have an overhaul at TBO regardless of what hours that may be. Now have a think about how long they have been in service. The PT6 can be overhauled a number of times. It may well be that some of these failures might have occured in engines that have been reworked 3 or 4 times and that work may not have been done in the PWC factory approved work shop. I am not pointing anywhere in particular but there are overhauls and there are overhauls. What we may possibly be seeing is the result of overhauls not quite up to scratch on an engine that has in excess of 10,000 hours since new. Just a thought!!!!!!

Groggy

[Arnold E]

Groggy
Are you suggesting that CASA would approve a workshop that is not up to"scratch"??

[PyroTek]

Mainframe, (or anyone else who wants to answer)

So am I correct in assuming, based off those checklists that there are no trouble checks/attempts to restart the engine - like a piston engine? Or did you omit that from the checklist?
Come to think of it,
Example: PT6 Has a flame out, attempt to restart or perform said checklist and find nearest suitable aerodrome?

Sorry for being ignorant (if I have been)

Pyro

[Dixons Cider]

Decision... engine start attempt(s)=less time remaining on Batts should relight not occur.

From what I've read here, thats along time on Batt only if its a flameout/IFS from the high levels.

Just pointing out a consideration when considering restart attempts.

Gotta say I'm way impressed with glide/cloudbreak procedure. Kudos to anybody who performs that! Great thread by the way

[FourBalls]

Dixons Cider is correct - pc12 restart attempts are limited to one with the single battery installed. Use up all your power and you lose efis+gyro instruments and flap - flapless landing uses 80% more runway than flaps 40. Gear is ok - it will fall out below 110kts.

Pyro

So am I correct in assuming, based off those checklists that there are no trouble checks/attempts to restart the engine - like a piston engine?

The POH has trouble checks (time permitting) for Power Control Lever failure (eg due bleed air leak) and the use of the Manual Override Lever - which basically acts directly on the fuel metering valve and is very touchy - you lose torque and Ng governing and landing distance required doubles! There are also airstart procedures.

Of course this is of no use with an oily windscreen as is the case here. Your only option is feather it and glide. At least you know your option.

Mainframe - thanks for the 208 info. You did, however forget the third advantage of the pc12 - it isn't fugly. Swiss and sweet
(not to be confused with the wamby-pamby who just won the tennis)

[PyroTek]

Of course this is of no use with an oily windscreen as is the case here. Your only option is feather it and glide. At least you know your option.

Obviously, in this case. When the oil comes out, something has clearly had a major issue.
Thanks for the info

[Nil defects]

So what about if you are half way between Wyndham and Derby at 2am in the morning and this scenario occurs. There is nothing that has lights and within gliding distance and you, nurse and unfortunate pax are probably dead.

The RFDS management are more than happy to risk the life of their crews flying around in single engine aeroplanes at night because it is cheaper.

If they are going to operate them at night then they should always plan to be within a gliding distance of a suitable and available landing strip or fly the King Air.

It's time they had bit of a re-think about the safety of their crews!

[goldypilot]

i dunno eco. I flew over some flat terrain the other day but i still recon if i went in i wouldn't have high chances of walking away. i guess we will never know unless it happens to us and if its out time its out time.

[Arnold E]

Maybe its worth noting that the last major accident that occurred in the RFDS (central section), and it was fatal, was in a King Air.

[morno]

It's funny that those who think the PC-12 is dangerous, are in most cases those who know very little about the aircraft.

If you are endorsed, have experience on the things, know their capabilities and have some knowledge of the design of the machine in regards to it's crash worthiness, then you are normally one to take back any words you said about the PC-12 before, being dangerous.

Job very well done to the crew onboard.

morno

[Hans Solo]

With respect Morno,
Its not that the aircraft is inherently dangerous, on the contrary it has its good points and its bad points like any aircraft, HOWEVER, IMHO I just dont think it is the right aircraft for RFDS.
I have several reasons for taking this opinion, but probably the most critical one is the large amount of night flying in very remote areas.
Just my two cents worth.
(BTW, my opinion is garnered from years of operating said aircraft and not that of an armchair expert).

Hans

[Jabawocky]

Didn't a dood do it in Townsville recently??

That may have been the Qld Police C208 with a prisoner run out of TL, he/she did an excellent job there too!