Metro 3 ( dangerous as they say it is )

[propstojets]

With the left engine running at 98% N1 there is so much drag on the propeller that the only way out is to feather. It is not about VMC, it is about the massive drag.

I have experienced this event several times in a full motion Jetstream simulator. It is a violent departure for controlled flight if you not not get the STOP/FEATHER lever pulled.

The table in the accident report doesn't show any bank until they were at/below VMC. Would it not be correct to assume they wouldn't have started to roll if they kept the speed up?

They were about to hit the trees... How do you keep the speed up without increasing the power on the operating engine to attempt to stop the descent? That massive amount of asymmetric thrust of a high-drag unfeathered left engine plus adding power on the right engine to not hit the trees in a last ditch effort to save the airplane would surely roll the aircraft, even if they are above VMC. Remember, a windmilling non-feathered prop greatly increases your Vmc speed compared to a feathered prop.

The only way to prevent a roll might have been to leave both levers at idle and mush it into the trees, but with the only prospect being crashing into the trees short of the runway, it's reasonable to see why they added power, which caused the roll.

At 500' AGL when the engine malfunctioned, combined with almost near normal engine parameters, idle power on the right engine (thereby no yawing moment to alert the crew of an issue, etc), they might have not even known they had a major issue until they brought the power up. The left engine windmilled, and the asymmetric thrust from the right engine rolled them. They really had no chance, aside from feathering the left engine. Which, by all accounts, aside from one engine gauge showing the torque, they would have had no reason to even think about shutting it down so close to the ground.

[BTD]

No.

Maximum power was applied to one or both engines, and the landing gear was initially selected up and then re-selected down before it could fully retract. The crew declared an emergency with Kenora FSS and unsuccessfully attempted to initiate a climb.

https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-rep ... c0150.html

[‘Bob’]

Metros are shitty planes operated by shitty companies in shitty conditions with shitty pilots.

The holes in each layer of Swiss Cheese go from scattered to broken in comparison to a typical 703/704 running King Airs or 1900s.

[goingnowherefast]

Metros are shitty planes operated by shitty companies in shitty conditions with shitty pilots.

Bit of an insult to say shitty pilots. Maybe pilots with shitty training due to working for shitty companies and a lack of good Metro sims.

Lots of excellent pilots have flown Metros.

The only reason King Airs have a higher accident rate is because they're common with rich private pilots in the US with almost no training. Private pilots have a nasty habit of letting it roll over after an engine quits. Professional pilots, even with poor training tend to hang onto a twin with an engine failed.

Flown by comparatively well trained pilots, the King Air/1900 is a far superior airplane.

[digits_]

The only people that truly love metros are the accountants. The weight and volume those planes can move for their fuel burn is very impressive.

[shamrock104]

Currently going through a Metro ground school. I have not been at it or here long enough to make detrimental statements

[‘Bob’]

Metros are shitty planes operated by shitty companies in shitty conditions with shitty pilots.

Bit of an insult to say shitty pilots. Maybe pilots with shitty training due to working for shitty companies and a lack of good Metro sims.

I mean to say that they lack experience. What does a typical Metro FO have today? 250 hours? Not even enough PIC to get PICUS. What does a typical Metro captain have? 1500 hours? Maybe less if it's run 703 or cargo?

So an FO that doesn't know what he doesn't know and is mostly along for the ride; and a captain who's just getting into the overconfident/complacent phase of his career; rocketing around in an aging sportscar of a plane and unable to say no to perceived or actual pressure in some of the most remote and underserviced airports in the world with a hostile winter climate.

Lots of excellent pilots have flown Metros.

Lot's of excellent pilots were produced by Metros. Like how many comedic greats were products of child abuse.

[godsrcrazy]

I mean to say that they lack experience. What does a typical Metro FO have today? 250 hours? Not even enough PIC to get PICUS. What does a typical Metro captain have? 1500 hours? Maybe less if it's run 703 or cargo?

So an FO that doesn't know what he doesn't know and is mostly along for the ride; and a captain who's just getting into the overconfident/complacent phase of his career; rocketing around in an aging sportscar of a plane and unable to say no to perceived or actual pressure in some of the most remote and underserviced airports in the world with a hostile winter climate.

Lots of excellent pilots have flown Metros.

When is the last time you looked at some of the Pilot hours at Jazz and Encore. The only thing that keeps these things in the air is the training.

[Blowin' In The Wind]

Metros are shitty planes operated by shitty companies in shitty conditions with shitty pilots.

Bit of an insult to say shitty pilots. Maybe pilots with shitty training due to working for shitty companies and a lack of good Metro sims.

I mean to say that they lack experience. What does a typical Metro FO have today? 250 hours? Not even enough PIC to get PICUS. What does a typical Metro captain have? 1500 hours? Maybe less if it's run 703 or cargo?

So an FO that doesn't know what he doesn't know and is mostly along for the ride; and a captain who's just getting into the overconfident/complacent phase of his career; rocketing around in an aging sportscar of a plane and unable to say no to perceived or actual pressure in some of the most remote and underserviced airports in the world with a hostile winter climate.

Lots of excellent pilots have flown Metros.

Lot's of excellent pilots were produced by Metros. Like how many comedic greats were products of child abuse.

I never felt in danger like I did during that part of my career!

[bobcaygeon]

Bit of an insult to say shitty pilots. Maybe pilots with shitty training due to working for shitty companies and a lack of good Metro sims.

I mean to say that they lack experience. What does a typical Metro FO have today? 250 hours? Not even enough PIC to get PICUS. What does a typical Metro captain have? 1500 hours? Maybe less if it's run 703 or cargo?

So an FO that doesn't know what he doesn't know and is mostly along for the ride; and a captain who's just getting into the overconfident/complacent phase of his career; rocketing around in an aging sportscar of a plane and unable to say no to perceived or actual pressure in some of the most remote and underserviced airports in the world with a hostile winter climate.

Lots of excellent pilots have flown Metros.

Lot's of excellent pilots were produced by Metros. Like how many comedic greats were products of child abuse.

I never felt in danger like I did during that part of my career!

"Danger is a bit of an overstatement" for 703/704 Ops regardless of the plane type. 705 is just boring and non-memorable.

Reality ys a King Air 200 is a terrible sked machine. Burns way too much gas down low even with -41's.

1900's didn't start showing up in the north until they were older due to the costs. It's still a fuel pig.

"High risk" is more appropriate to describe twin otter/single otter ops on floats, eskers, skis, etc.

[goingnowherefast]

I dunno, some of the things I've watched Metros do (or try to do) can be described as dangerous.

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/195679
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/312796
* Merlins, but same shit, different pile.

These accidents are more indicative of management pressure and company culture than a slam on Metros/Merlins directly. If a company is going to fly the cheapest airplanes they can find, you know they're gonna be cheap and squeeze everywhere else too


There is a mind-boggling number of runway excursions on Metros due to prop start locks or the silly nosewheel steering system. Some of these excursions find snow banks or drainage ditches and prop blades enter the fuselage. Beechcraft aren't immune from runway excursions, but there's a lot less of them because of far superior nosewheel steering design and much better engines.

[cpt sweet'njuicy]

There are legions of Metro pilots in this country that have their own story about their time on this plane. If you go to the Sunwest or Perimeter school of Metro, you should receive a good solid education on the plane. I can’t speak to the other operators in this land. The best pilot I ever was was when I flew the Metro 2 on medevac. The worst was in the early days of being captain on it into the short runways. The issues were either of my own making or that of maintenance in some way. Either the plane was broken, or it wasn’t fixed right and needed another bit of loving.

The other pilots issues that I was aware of were mostly the same.

I would be more concerned about how the maintenance is at the company offering you the job, not the plane itself. I would worry about that and my own personal preparation. The Metro 3 is the long wing and higher powered version of the two common Metro types in Canada. I liked to say that the shit pilots flew the Metro 3 because they needed the extra wing and power. Then I flew it, and it was pretty nice. It toned down my rhetoric and joking. I never really flew it in anger but did put some time on it doing steep turns.

The Metro 3 is protected by the performance certification built into it. You have no worries. The Metro 2 is not as capable. The Metro 2 is protected by the skills of the person holding the controls at the magic time. There is a wonderful video out there in the ether of a test pilot feathering the prop during the takeoff on a Metro 3 in the desert somewhere. The plane almost seems like it was trapped in ground effect. That is the safer of the two. I don’t know the conditions or circumstances at the time of the test flight, but it sure looked exciting.

As to the start lock and or steering situations you have heard about, I can say with great confidence that the issues are mostly the pilot failing to check that both propellers came off the locks and confirming positive torque as the power is coming up. I can think of possibly five times I failed to check. The cool pilots would look for the oil pressure dip at the moment to help them confirm it.

The steering is incredibly reliable. Mud, water, ice, snow, the steering just keeps working. If you have terrible maintenance, then that just can’t be factored in. I once MEL’d the steering and continued to operate into the gravel runways for the day. This included tight gravel runway turns. If you learned to operate the plane, then it was ok. If you didn’t have the experience, then you didn’t do it.

It really is the environment that can take an ordinary pilot and, over time shape and prepare them for the Metro or any other plane. Where I worked likely had the most Metro movements in the history of the type so if the Metro was a pile of shit I would have seen it. I didn’t. If it was prone to this or that, I would have seen it. I didn’t.

I hope you decide to take the job and I hope you choose to buy in to trying to master the plane and its systems. Not an easy task.

[goingnowherefast]

As to the start lock and or steering situations you have heard about, I can say with great confidence that the issues are mostly the pilot failing to check that both propellers came off the locks and confirming positive torque as the power is coming up. I can think of possibly five times I failed to check. The cool pilots would look for the oil pressure dip at the moment to help them confirm it.

My point is the start lock system doesn't exist on Beechcraft (except the B100, but they're rare). If the system wasn't necessary and didn't exist, it can't be be mismanaged by pilots. It's additional complexity that adds risk to this aircraft type and is evidenced by the additional runway excursions.

Is the Metro/Merlin dangerous? No, it's safer than a Navajo, but isn't as good as others.

Is it typically flown by cheap and sketchy operators, with some exceptions? Yes. Both accidents I linked above are the same operator.

I'd put my family on a Bearskin Metro without concern. But, given the choice, I'd rather put them on a PASCO 1900. However, I'd rather walk than go on a Skyscare Metro.

[cpt sweet'njuicy]

I think that the start lock system is really the only way to run a fixed shaft turboprop but my experience is limited.
You arent wrong about complexity but simply having the complexity of retractable landing gear has caused innumerable incidents and cost.
In your line of thinking I can say that the AWI system and the auto ignition systems are interesting. The way the landing gear actually works compared to how I thought it works is interesting. It is not an easy plane to figure out at least for me.

So poor was the original Metro 2's performance single engine that they put auto ignition and and NTS system and Armed alcohol water injection on it to absolutely guarantee a relight immediately...assuming it would relight and to help carry you to a safe altitude if you were stuck with only one engine. Autofeather could be argued to be a death sentence in the early Metro 2 on takeoff. They just had to try to automatically get that failed engine to restart or else. I suspected they knew it was going to be bad after test flying it originally.
For the pilots it certainly is a bunch of complexity that many others dont need to worry about. I dont know anything else at the moment as the majority of flying I have done is on that type.

I hope the guy takes the job and then we can all get their feedback after their first runway incursion trying to takeoff with one on the locks.

Now for the trolling part of the show.

Why are you so hard on ole Skycare? You mad Bro? Skycare meets all the same safety targets and follows all the same rules that every other operator in Canada has to follow. If they didnt, Transport Canada would swoop in a turn them off. Just because you couldn't get a job there doesn't mean you need to beat up on Skycare. They care. Its in the name. Sky............Care. Learn to read Bro!

[goingnowherefast]

Maybe they shouldn't run a straight shaft engine then. It's great for APUs, but there are better designs for airplane power plants.

Every PT6 and every PW1xx I've flown all have auto-ignition, or its simply run continuously for certain conditions. It's not a feature unique to Garrett engines.

Your description of the consequences for a engine failure in a Metro 2 kinda makes my point.

I'm hard on Skycare because of their safety record, reputation and things I've witnessed them do. Ever heard of why Skyward doesn't exist anymore? (I'm dating myself with that remark). They write off more Metros/Merlins than Perimeter, despite having a significantly smaller fleet. If they were a good company, they'd have a comparable safety record.

[MD-2]

Considering how many Metro's Perimeter / Bearskin has written off lately, I would say they are in the same boat as Skycare or worse. The Metro is job security for a Structures AME! You can't walk around one of these aircraft without finding fuel leaks and cracks!!

[digits_]

Considering how many Metro's Perimeter / Bearskin has written off lately, I would say they are in the same boat as Skycare or worse. The Metro is job security for a Structures AME! You can't walk around one of these aircraft without finding fuel leaks and cracks!!

They are a bit like the blackbird: fuel leaks are to be expected

[cpt sweet'njuicy]

What are the latest write-offs of Metro's lately? I am way out of the loop so fill me in please. I don't have any ties there and I get no news. Do tell.

[Turboprops]

Skycare meets all the same safety targets and follows all the same rules that every other operator in Canada has to follow.

That’s where you’re wrong lol, I don’t even know where to begin with skycare busting CARs and just having no respect to their employee’s rest/health

[cpt sweet'njuicy]

I was trolling there. I was around when Skyward packed it in and I heard all the rumours. We took some of their people actually. One of which later became the CP. I see that Skycare is always looking for people it seems. Maybe every outfit is looking for people these days I dont know. I had the opportunity to train a few of them in the sim for Skycare and later some migrated over to the company.

Someone spill the beans on Perimeter breaking planes. I've earned the right to know their business. I am surprised I didnt hear about broken planes even as out of the loop as I am.

[goingnowherefast]

Many of Perimeter's goof-ups involve ground ops. Running over GPUs and such. Can't fault the airplane for that sort of thing.

My memory is a bit hazy on this one. I recall a gear down ferry flight, and they lost an engine when nearing the maintenance base
If my memory is working I think that plane got smacked on pretty hard and more damage happened.

It's pretty unfair to compare Skyscare to Perimeter. While I'm glad I never worked for either, they are night and day apart.

[cpt sweet'njuicy]

Was that the one where they landed at Thompson?

[LotsOfGravy]

Yes, I remember this one. New captain, she had to ferry a plane back to Thompson due to gear issue. Lost an engine, and could have put gear up but elected not to (following the ferry permit). Allegedly exceeded limitations on the good engine. Lack of SOPs/CRM enroute. She came into YTH, wheels touched and she ripped reverse (with only one engine) while the plane was essentially still flying. Incredible video footage of it happening - never seen a plane pivot in the air like it. After that, she lost her command at Perimeter. She went to Sunwest and proceeded to bend one of their metros.

She's now at AC.

[digits_]

Yes, I remember this one. New captain, she had to ferry a plane back to Thompson due to gear issue. Lost an engine, and could have put gear up but elected not to (following the ferry permit). Allegedly exceeded limitations on the good engine. Lack of SOPs/CRM enroute. She came into YTH, wheels touched and she ripped reverse (with only one engine) while the plane was essentially still flying. Incredible video footage of it happening - never seen a plane pivot in the air like it. After that, she lost her command at Perimeter. She went to Sunwest and proceeded to bend one of their metros.

She's now at AC.

Is that video footage available somewhere? I've never seen it but it sounds very intriguing...

[cpt sweet'njuicy]

I was around for that one. The engine didnt fail, it was listed on the ferry permit with some sort of issue and it was unexpectedly losing oil pressure on the way to yth. The pilot was in a conundrum because they were forbidden to raise the gear because of the ferry permit restriction but they knew that if the engine eventually failed she was taught that the Metro cannot fly single engine with the gear down. Im pretty sure they were thinking of shutting it down and if they did it would have been necessary to raise the gear to get to the field. If I recall, they left the gear down and flew it to yth and then on landing the reverse didnt work as expected because the oil was gone from that engine and so propeller control was suspect. Excitement happened on landing. I dont know if I have seen that footage.

The rest is about right. That was ten years ago I think. I was looking for the incidents that happened recently as mentioned by MD-2 up there. I assumed there were piles of smashed tubes lying in a heap somewhere based off their comment. I lost track of that pilot, so they went to Sunwest. Sunwest refused to fly on gravel runways way back and I wonder what the circumstances were for the incident you mentioned.

The findings on that one were that the pic was very new and should have not been asked to execute that particular ferry permit and they should not have accepted it. It was an interesting situation. I wonder if they will read this thread. I remember them.