PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister
PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
C-FKAB, a Pilatus PC-12/45 aircraft operated by Air Bravo Corp., was conducting flight PCO1414
from Kenora (CYQK), ON, to Thunder Bay (CYQT), ON, with 2 crew onboard. During final
approach into CYQT at approximately 9 nautical miles from Runway 12, the flight crew powered
back the engine and the aircraft's engine started vibrating. The flight crew pitched the nose up to
gain altitude and observed abnormally high engine internal turbine temperature (ITT) and high NG
(gas generator) on the engine gauges with no corresponding increase in engine power. The crew
acknowledged the abnormality, declared an emergency and manually shutdown the engine. The
crew continued the glide and landed the aircraft safely on Runway 12. The pilot taxied off the
runway with remaining momentum. There were no reported injuries and no further damage to the
aircraft. The aircraft was towed to the hangar for further inspection.
The operator's maintenance inspection indicated that blades separated from the PT2 disc at the
root. The engine is being sent to Pratt & Whitney Canada for further inspection.
from Kenora (CYQK), ON, to Thunder Bay (CYQT), ON, with 2 crew onboard. During final
approach into CYQT at approximately 9 nautical miles from Runway 12, the flight crew powered
back the engine and the aircraft's engine started vibrating. The flight crew pitched the nose up to
gain altitude and observed abnormally high engine internal turbine temperature (ITT) and high NG
(gas generator) on the engine gauges with no corresponding increase in engine power. The crew
acknowledged the abnormality, declared an emergency and manually shutdown the engine. The
crew continued the glide and landed the aircraft safely on Runway 12. The pilot taxied off the
runway with remaining momentum. There were no reported injuries and no further damage to the
aircraft. The aircraft was towed to the hangar for further inspection.
The operator's maintenance inspection indicated that blades separated from the PT2 disc at the
root. The engine is being sent to Pratt & Whitney Canada for further inspection.
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
Is this from Cadors? Was there a date?
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
Engines will throw blades
Sometimes that's just what they do
So we carry two
Sometimes that's just what they do
So we carry two
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
Shutting down an engine in a single engine airplane is quite ballsy 

As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-
- Rank 4
- Posts: 267
- Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2020 10:22 pm
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
I agree, but I am guessing they feathered it to extend their glide.
This CADOR makes it sound like the decision to shut it down was a quick and easy one, but I guarantee they first exhausted all possibilities of getting any power back. Once they realized there was no way of restoring power, they knew feathering the propellor would at least help extend their glide. Keeping the propeller turning at idle thrust would have created unnecessary drag that could have impacted their glide ratio.
With that being said, this is pretty crazy and rare to hear about. The failure rate on a pc12 is almost non existent….but of course it happens to Air Bravo

Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
How many people are dead from losing an engine in a PC-12?
Vs how many are dead from losing an engine in a King Air?
Remember that time when an Airbus wound up in the Hudson? Or that 777 wound up short of Heathrow? Transat in the Azores?
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
Didn’t they glide in to YTS years ago too?Dronepiper wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 2:00 pm The failure rate on a pc12 is almost non existent….but of course it happens to Air Bravo
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1156
- Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 12:25 pm
- Location: in the bush
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
What can you tell us about the PT6A-67 and of your experiences behind that type of engine?Dronepiper wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 2:00 pm The failure rate on a pc12 is almost non existent….but of course it happens to Air BravoI am glad to hear they managed to land safely. Sounds like a well trained crew. Thankfully it also happened very close to an airport.
Furthermore, what on earth did you mean by stating “of course it happens to Air Bravo”?
In all of my years operating PT6’s the problem child is usually the FCU, furthermore, my past experiences with AB drivers have been nothing but positive.
TPC
-
- Rank 4
- Posts: 267
- Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2020 10:22 pm
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
TeePeeCreeper wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 11:50 pmWhat can you tell us about the PT6A-67 and of your experiences behind that type of engine?Dronepiper wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 2:00 pm The failure rate on a pc12 is almost non existent….but of course it happens to Air BravoI am glad to hear they managed to land safely. Sounds like a well trained crew. Thankfully it also happened very close to an airport.
Furthermore, what on earth did you mean by stating “of course it happens to Air Bravo”?
In all of my years operating PT6’s the problem child is usually the FCU, furthermore, my past experiences with AB drivers have been nothing but positive.
TPC
Well, first off, it doesn’t take an expert to do a quick google search to learn about the history of the PT6A-67B and it’s failure rate. Out of millions of flights hours, only a handful of engine failures have occurred. In the US, there hasn’t been a single PC12 engine failure that has led to a fatality. It’s a proven fact that King Air’s have a higher fatality rate when confronted with an engine failure.
Air Bravo pilots are great. I never once said anything bad about them. They are all great people. If you notice above, I even specifically said “sounds like a well trained crew.” They are a great bunch of hardworking guys who have to put up with a lot of BS.
As for the company itself, just talk to any current or recent ex AB driver and they will explain.
As for your comment on the FCU, if you read the report above, it specifically mentions the cause of the engine failure was due to blade separation.
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
2 shutdowns, 1 failure. No SEIFR for me
-
- Rank 6
- Posts: 402
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:29 am
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
Bob….
How many 777’s and Airbus’s have flown safely to an airport for hours on one? Many every year including one with me in it!
How many 777’s and Airbus’s have flown safely to an airport for hours on one? Many every year including one with me in it!
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
Somebody was wondering where the initial report came from. The TSB will send daily reports if requested.
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2014 10:23 am
- Location: ysb
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
Sounds like Bob can't handle two. I understand. Stick to one.
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
Lol. I’ve got more two engine hours than one engine hours. Never had one quit on me or had to shut one down outside of training, either way.
Statistics don’t lie. Why the hell has nobody been killed in a PC-12 engine failure in spite of how many there are and how many hours they fly all around the world vs how many have died in a King Air when they still have a functioning one?
It’s also interesting that many of the multiple incidents of multi-engine aircraft losing all engines that there were no fatalities.
Maybe if pilots are forced to just glide the aircraft to a safe on or off field landing.. outcomes are better regardless of the number of engines?
The second engine is just convenience of possibly continuing to an airport at great risk, it seems.
Certainly for lighter aircraft.
Statistics don’t lie. Why the hell has nobody been killed in a PC-12 engine failure in spite of how many there are and how many hours they fly all around the world vs how many have died in a King Air when they still have a functioning one?
It’s also interesting that many of the multiple incidents of multi-engine aircraft losing all engines that there were no fatalities.
Maybe if pilots are forced to just glide the aircraft to a safe on or off field landing.. outcomes are better regardless of the number of engines?
The second engine is just convenience of possibly continuing to an airport at great risk, it seems.
Certainly for lighter aircraft.
-
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2386
- Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
The issue with the King Air is the private operators in the US. Got a big bank account? Here, have a King Air. Twins are much more difficult to handle with an engine out than a single. Run a shutdown drill, that one probably hasn't practiced in over a year, while wrestling a plane that's trying to roll over. No wonder they crash. A single turns into a glider with significantly less input required from the pilot.
Train TWO King Air pilot to 703 standards in the same flight deck, and they don't roll over and crash anymore. The difference is training. How many 604/703/704 King Airs and 1900s roll over every year in Canada? ZERO. And I bet there's a couple that land every year with one engine.
1 private guy with 1000hrs, poor training and flies 100hrs a year vs 2 well trained proficient pilots who fly 500+ hours a year. I know which plane I'd rather be in.
Train TWO King Air pilot to 703 standards in the same flight deck, and they don't roll over and crash anymore. The difference is training. How many 604/703/704 King Airs and 1900s roll over every year in Canada? ZERO. And I bet there's a couple that land every year with one engine.
1 private guy with 1000hrs, poor training and flies 100hrs a year vs 2 well trained proficient pilots who fly 500+ hours a year. I know which plane I'd rather be in.
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
The twin rollovers happen when the engine failure happens unexpectedly during takeoff or final approach. During cruise they are a non event. Which means they don't show up in statistics and skew your view of their safety record.‘Bob’ wrote: ↑Wed Apr 05, 2023 9:06 pm Lol. I’ve got more two engine hours than one engine hours. Never had one quit on me or had to shut one down outside of training, either way.
Statistics don’t lie. Why the hell has nobody been killed in a PC-12 engine failure in spite of how many there are and how many hours they fly all around the world vs how many have died in a King Air when they still have a functioning one?
It’s also interesting that many of the multiple incidents of multi-engine aircraft losing all engines that there were no fatalities.
Maybe if pilots are forced to just glide the aircraft to a safe on or off field landing.. outcomes are better regardless of the number of engines?
The second engine is just convenience of possibly continuing to an airport at great risk, it seems.
Certainly for lighter aircraft.
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
My view of the safety record is not up for debate.digits_ wrote: ↑Thu Apr 06, 2023 5:14 amThe twin rollovers happen when the engine failure happens unexpectedly during takeoff or final approach. During cruise they are a non event. Which means they don't show up in statistics and skew your view of their safety record.‘Bob’ wrote: ↑Wed Apr 05, 2023 9:06 pm Lol. I’ve got more two engine hours than one engine hours. Never had one quit on me or had to shut one down outside of training, either way.
Statistics don’t lie. Why the hell has nobody been killed in a PC-12 engine failure in spite of how many there are and how many hours they fly all around the world vs how many have died in a King Air when they still have a functioning one?
It’s also interesting that many of the multiple incidents of multi-engine aircraft losing all engines that there were no fatalities.
Maybe if pilots are forced to just glide the aircraft to a safe on or off field landing.. outcomes are better regardless of the number of engines?
The second engine is just convenience of possibly continuing to an airport at great risk, it seems.
Certainly for lighter aircraft.
Zero fatalities due to engine failure vs dozens regardless of the phase of flight.
The PC-12 has far more hours spent in cruise where it’s supposedly vulnerable than a King Air spends below 2000 feet vulnerable to an engine failure.
Yet out of the over a dozen engine failures the PC-12 has had in the last 25 years, none have killed anyone.
Why?
I’ll take a guess.
1) Focused pilot(s). Rather than killing themselves trying to avoid the ground, they concentrate on arriving at it in the most safe way possible.
2) Newer aircraft. More reliable. Easier to egress from. All PC-12s have glass and gps/FMS for better situational awareness. Remember, Tindi just lost a King Air with two functioning engines due to antiquated avionics.
3) Redundancies. EPL means that what would have killed an engine on a different aircraft won’t necessarily do it on the PC-12. I doubt an FCU failure on a PC-12 would make it into the news, either.
4) Lighter weight and lower stall speeds. Crash landings have increased survivability aspects.
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1156
- Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 12:25 pm
- Location: in the bush
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
I can’t disagree with most of your post Bob, but the 45/47 doesn’t have an FMS or glass à la Honeywell Apex….‘Bob’ wrote: ↑Fri Apr 07, 2023 8:21 pmMy view of the safety record is not up for debate.digits_ wrote: ↑Thu Apr 06, 2023 5:14 amThe twin rollovers happen when the engine failure happens unexpectedly during takeoff or final approach. During cruise they are a non event. Which means they don't show up in statistics and skew your view of their safety record.‘Bob’ wrote: ↑Wed Apr 05, 2023 9:06 pm Lol. I’ve got more two engine hours than one engine hours. Never had one quit on me or had to shut one down outside of training, either way.
Statistics don’t lie. Why the hell has nobody been killed in a PC-12 engine failure in spite of how many there are and how many hours they fly all around the world vs how many have died in a King Air when they still have a functioning one?
It’s also interesting that many of the multiple incidents of multi-engine aircraft losing all engines that there were no fatalities.
Maybe if pilots are forced to just glide the aircraft to a safe on or off field landing.. outcomes are better regardless of the number of engines?
The second engine is just convenience of possibly continuing to an airport at great risk, it seems.
Certainly for lighter aircraft.
Zero fatalities due to engine failure vs dozens regardless of the phase of flight.
The PC-12 has far more hours spent in cruise where it’s supposedly vulnerable than a King Air spends below 2000 feet vulnerable to an engine failure.
Yet out of the over a dozen engine failures the PC-12 has had in the last 25 years, none have killed anyone.
Why?
I’ll take a guess.
1) Focused pilot(s). Rather than killing themselves trying to avoid the ground, they concentrate on arriving at it in the most safe way possible.
2) Newer aircraft. More reliable. Easier to egress from. All PC-12s have glass and gps/FMS for better situational awareness. Remember, Tindi just lost a King Air with two functioning engines due to antiquated avionics.
3) Redundancies. EPL means that what would have killed an engine on a different aircraft won’t necessarily do it on the PC-12. I doubt an FCU failure on a PC-12 would make it into the news, either.
4) Lighter weight and lower stall speeds. Crash landings have increased survivability aspects.
TPC
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
Of my oei experience. 2 were prop seals, and one was #1 main hearing failure/overtemp
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1900
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 6:53 am
- Location: On final so get off the damn runway!
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
These things seem to glide really well.
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
Yes but lots of places I go are beyond gliding distance.....
- Redneck_pilot86
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 12:47 pm
- Location: between 60 and 70
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
Really?
Rumour has it that when the RCMP transitioned to the PC12 in the arctic, they were able to demonstrate that they were never beyond gliding distance of a runway.
The only three things a wingman should ever say: 1. "Two's up" 2. "You're on fire" 3. "I'll take the fat one"
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
Well frankly I would say you were incorrect. In order to stay within gliding distance of land(not runway) we had to change routes, even then over the . you were hyper vigilant of anything. Best distance at I think fl280 was something like 70 miles. Put a few mountains or inland waterways, or little civilisation and you would spend way more time out of gliding distance than with in
-
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2577
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 11:07 pm
- Location: Negative sequencial vortex
Re: PC-12 Engine Failure Glide to Runway
Three-Zero wrote this
It was a hard thing to do
A germane Haiku
If I'd known I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself