PC-12 off runway in YTS

[flyincanuck]

Because I don't need to haul 20 skids of grade "A" eggs.

[Doc]

It reminds me of the old story about the B52 pilot and the F4 pilot. The F4 came up beside the B52 and rolled. "Try that!" said the F4 driver. The B52 pilot replied with, "Try this." After a couple of minutes with no change in the 52's flight path, the Phantom driver asked.."What did you do, I didn't see anything..." The BUFF driver replied, "I just shut down two engines.."

[CID]

Mr. Wings, if I was in a Smart Car, I would slow down when I saw the sign with the dear on it and would avoid operating on the highway in the dark. If I was in a Semi, I would be enjoying a higher level of safety and protection and would go ahead and operate on the highway with no limitations.

Risk management in aviation is a function of the aircraft type and the type of operation. Mitigation is through equipage, training requirements level of oversight....etc.

The average automobile driver doesn't really prescribe to this sort of risk management so it may be a silly argument but airline operators don't use a 767 to move 6 people a hundred miles to a remote unprepared 3000 foot strip all the time either. The equipment should suit the requirement and responsible risk management mitigates the additional risks to maintain the level of safety.

[Doc]

responsible risk management mitigates the additional risks to maintain the level of safety.

So, you would call, departing with 100 and 1/2, in a PC12, "responsible risk management...."(this is how the aircraft is operated.) I would not.

What IF YTS was down to minimums that night? What if........they missed the approach? Even it the engine hadn't gone completely south, it doesn't sound like they had much of an option of going to an alternate. Call a spade a spade....they were a little lucky. Okay, MORE than a little....

[confuzed]

So, you would call, departing with 100 and 1/2, in a PC12, "responsible risk management...."(this is how the aircraft is operated.) I would not.

Not to take this thread too far off topic but.....

That is just plain irresponsible Doc, that's actually happening? That's not even legal from what I remember of those days. Last time I checked single engines can't qualify for t/o alternates for obvious reasons. I used to hate those low ceiling/vis days while flying the caravan, as I couldn't leave and would be calling FSS and bugging them every 20-30 mins to see if there were ANY changes or upward trends...scary thought to know people aren't following that rule.

[MrWings]

Because I don't need to haul 20 skids of grade "A" eggs.

It's not about capacity or cost. It is about safety. You want to be safe, don't you?

[Salt]

There is an Ops spec for single engine IFR departures from airports below return minima. T/O alternates are required. It feels ridiculous even typing that.

[confuzed]

There is an Ops spec for single engine IFR departures from airports below return minima. T/O alternates are required. It feels ridiculous even typing that.

I can imagine, as my first thought is........why would you want to?

[Doc]

There is an Ops spec for single engine IFR departures from airports below return minima. T/O alternates are required. It feels ridiculous even typing that.

Has to be within one hour's flight on no engine?

[Caracrane]

If I remember correctly it was 72 nm from 30000 ft glide distance at gross.

[Jastapilot]

While driving down the highway, a deer suddenly runs in front of your vehicle. What would you rather be in?

Toyota Camry or a Peterbuilt 18-wheeler?

Then why aren't we all driving semi's?

Oh, but the Camry has a 15G seat built into it! *snicker*

Seriously though, I've been against the pc12 from the start! Takeoff alternate in a single! What a joke.

[Doc]

Seriously, what is the criteria for a take off alternate on a single? Don't happen to have a CAP Gen handy.
Not that you'll be able to actually get to an alternate......?? Departing at below approach limits in a single, is like playing Russian Roulette with a Colt 1911....there are no empty chambers!

[Axial Flow]

Take off Alternate:60 Minutes still air speed based on flight plan...so Caravan about 150NM and PC12 260NM...

CBAA operated aircraft I believe do not have the OPS Spec available for take off alternates which is stupid because if it's 300 and a 1/2 I am legal to go but 200 feet I can't, either way you are fooked if she quits. When TC gave CBAA authority it wasn't included as one of the ops specs but with TC running the show completely again it might be.

DOC at your age I would be more worried about prostate cancer or a heart attack. I get it...single engine IFR equals death...not by the numbers but by general thinking which must be right. At my age I am worried about just making it to your age considering I have 5000 hrs SEIFR and since risk is =severityXprobabiltyXexposure I am hoping that the severity and probability are going for me as my exposure increases daily.

A great read is Risk: Why We Fear the Things We Shouldn't - and Put Ourselves in Greater Danger Explains how we actually use our gut feeling when assessing risk because that is what we had to work with the last 100,000 years + of evolution so it usually trumps reason or statistics which show our actual risk.

[Doc]

Take off Alternate:60 Minutes still air speed based on flight plan...so Caravan about 150NM and PC12 260NM...

CBAA operated aircraft I believe do not have the OPS Spec available for take off alternates which is stupid because if it's 300 and a 1/2 I am legal to go but 200 feet I can't, either way you are fooked if she quits. When TC gave CBAA authority it wasn't included as one of the ops specs but with TC running the show completely again it might be.

DOC at your age I would be more worried about prostate cancer or a heart attack. I get it...single engine IFR equals death...not by the numbers but by general thinking which must be right. At my age I am worried about just making it to your age considering I have 5000 hrs SEIFR and since risk is =severityXprobabiltyXexposure I am hoping that the severity and probability are going for me as my exposure increases daily.

A great read is Risk: Why We Fear the Things We Shouldn't - and Put Ourselves in Greater Danger Explains how we actually use our gut feeling when assessing risk because that is what we had to work with the last 100,000 years + of evolution so it usually trumps reason or statistics which show our actual risk.

It's been said that three cups of coffee a day reduce the chance of prostate cancer by 30%. I basically marinate myself in coffee, so I should be good on that one. But, I do hear what you're saying. I'm too old to die young.
I fly a Caravan very rarely. When I do, it's VFR. We can "file" in the thing, but not single crew, therefore not on my "watch". The folks we operate the 'van for won't go IFR with one pilot. Keeps me in better weather. Sometimes, I'd rather file in VFR wx, just for the smooth cooler air...and I do. But, serious IFR? No thanks. There are enough "boogie men" lurking in life....I don't whistle in dark allies either...
I'm just happy I have two good engines, and I don't work on a pressure cooker environment.

[snoopy]

A great read is Risk: Why We Fear the Things We Shouldn't - and Put Ourselves in Greater Danger Explains how we actually use our gut feeling when assessing risk because that is what we had to work with the last 100,000 years + of evolution so it usually trumps reason or statistics which show our actual risk.

A better read is this book: Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking Which explains how we use "thin slicing" to produce more accurate decision making results based on less information, dissected in the blink of an eye without us even realizing it. "Gut" feelings are what you get when you unconsciously "thin slice" information (cut to the chase) and warn you when something is important and you better pay attention!

An excellent read, and a very useful tool in understanding how we make decisions.

Cheers,
Kirsten B.

[Doc]

You are no doubt familiar with "cognitive dissonance"?

[Colonel Sanders]

"cognitive dissonance"

Sure. That's what the FAA said Bob Hoover was suffering
from, when they pulled his medical, almost 20 years ago.

So Bob moved to Australia, passed the medical, written
and flight tests there for a commercial pilot, and flew airshows
in Australia. Some people at the time, including myself,
found that to be exceedingly odd, how he could pass an
Australian medical but not an FAA medical.

After Congress and the Senate asked the FAA to provide
more detail on their prognosis of Bob's "cognitive dissonance",
it turned out Bob's medical condition magically went away
and he got his medical back!

Hallelujah! It's a miracle!

Other medical miracles I have never understood ... how
someone could pass an obviously difficult FAA medical
(see above - much higher standards than Australia) yet
be denied a medical by TC.

Apparently, our medical standards are much higher than
the US which are much higher than Australia.

I guess no one has ever heard of ICAO.

[Doc]

Cute. Typical government knee jerk reaction. What the FAA thought Bob Hoover was suffering from was "cognitive DECAY"! Kind of like your 20 year old cat, when he starts pissing in your sock drawer...Alzheimer's is the most known example of "cognitive decay" familiar to the layman. Even though, the causes are not the same. Cognitive decay is a pretty normal side affect to the aging process. Ask anybody who works with me...

[BWL]

Is there any word on what caused the engine issue?

[Cat Driver]

Even more important is it would sure be nice to have the crew describe the event and how they handled it.

[boogs82]

yet another reason as to why I'd take my chances in an ambulance on the 144 hwy to YSB with a well trained paramedic instead of on the pilatapus....
.

Might have little choice if I close the Highway. Especially on a day like today

[pelmet]

[quote="Doc"]
Not that you'll be able to actually get to an alternate......?? Departing at below approach limits in a single, is like playing Russian Roulette with a Colt 1911....there are no empty chambers![/quote]

Sounds like a silly statement to me.

Lets think logically before posting. Real world flying entails calculated risks.

[Cat Driver]

So I take it doc has not been flying in the " REAL " world all these decades he has been flying for a living?

[Doc]

Lets think logically before posting. Real world flying entails calculated risks.

Flying in the "real world"? I'll just have to give that a try. I don't take a Hell of a lot of unnecessary risks there pelmet, "calculated" or otherwise. You, however are more than welcome to fill your boots.

[mag check]

I'll just shake off the unprovoked condescension Cat, and ask with all sincerity
Why was it bound to happen sooner or later?
Is Bravo just another crummy operator? or Single Engine IFR a crummy way of doing business?
Or is it just that Winter has finally hit, and anybody on moving rubber looks like a drunk broomball tourney in progress?
Seriously What?
*I honestly DON'T know. I have no ties to the operator, type of aircraft, type of flying, or moving rubber*
Please don't flame me!
***takes cover anyway***

To answer your questions;

Yes, and it will happen again, probably soon.

Yes, even a random check of their 128 cadors show a continuous stream of busted minimums and recurring maintenance problems. There have been many people who have left because of safety concerns.

Yes, single IFR is a crummy way of doing business. Just wait till an engine fails during an overshoot at minimums. Its coming soon to an airport near you!!!

No idea, everyone knows that broomball is stupid.