Been hitting the air crash investigations channels quite heavy lately and am quite confused by the number of accidents involving ATR 42/72 aircraft, and many other types of turboprop aircraft. All the crashes were related to the inability to feather the prop during an engine failure and another crash that there was a PEC (propeller electronic control) malfunction that did not give the crew good indication that the prop was fully feathered allowing the engine to undertorque but still be at full N1 indications on the cockpit instruments. And on another crash
Why is it that a design is allowed that will not allow the flight crew to have complete control over the prop pitch, and my second question is if you are going to make everything electronic, why is there not a failure mode to automatically feather the prop when the engine fails.
Here is another crash where a turbine blade failed (yes anything that spins that fast can fail) but the prop pin breaking on the GOV at the same time? I just cannot grasp this. Its like crappy automotive engineering has now found its way into avaiation.
Why is it that a design is allowed that will not allow the flight crew to have complete control over the prop pitch, and my second question is if you are going to make everything electronic, why is there not a failure mode to automatically feather the prop when the engine fails.
Here is another crash where a turbine blade failed (yes anything that spins that fast can fail) but the prop pin breaking on the GOV at the same time? I just cannot grasp this. Its like crappy automotive engineering has now found its way into avaiation.
Crashed PIA ATR 42 stalled and inverted after complex engine failure
Investigators have determined that the complex failure of a Pakistan International Airlines ATR 42-500's left-hand engine preceded a loss of control which developed into a stall, loss of altitude, and eventual fatal collision with terrain. At one point in the accident sequence the aircraft...
www.flightglobal.com