Pc-12 safe in a field.

Just don't stall it folks. Better to land in control short/somewhere not ideal rather than pancake it in.
 
Shows what a pu--y cat the PC-12 is. That thing wobbles like a cherokee, impressive given its size.
 
Shows what a pu--y cat the PC-12 is. That thing wobbles like a cherokee, impressive given its size.

They are anything but tame in a stall. They have both a stick shaker and pusher. Aside from a stall, they truly are a pu**y cat to operate and fly safely.

PC12 stall testing with the shaker/pusher disabled.
 
I watched this go down on flightradar24 as it was happening. Pilot did at least one 360 to lose altitude. It was bizarre as from the look of it I thought he had plenty of energy to make the field. Here is a screen shot of his flight track. Field elevation was around 400 feet. Sounds like everyone loved so that’s some good news for sure.

aed765ca7e3cdaf4f49c0fc63287e213.jpg



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Last edited:
Not throwing down on that.
One of my biggest fears is wasting needed energy, before reaching the field.
(might throw down on the title though, "PC12 safe" lol)
 
Not throwing down on that.
One of my biggest fears is wasting needed energy, before reaching the field.
(might throw down on the title though, "PC12 safe" lol)

Absolutely! My CFIs have always taught me to do circles above or beside the runway or landing spot of you need to scrub energy. Not before you get there. Granted. I don’t know what happened here specifically. I know after he declared the emergency he changed direction to mesquite, then did the huge circle dropping altitude. During the circle it looked like he was keeping it between 95-100 knots.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Last edited:
They are anything but tame in a stall. They have both a stick shaker and pusher. Aside from a stall, they truly are a pu**y cat to operate and fly safely.

PC12 stall testing with the shaker/pusher disabled.

That thing does a near perfect Split-S!

Absolutely! My CFIs have always taught me to do circles above or beside the runway or landing spot of you need to scrub energy. Not before you get there.

Back when I was hang gliding there was one LZ that had not much landable nearby. The goal was to get there with excess altitude, circle at the correct end of the LZ, and when you like what you see, commit and land.
 
I don't think twins are any safer than singles................but I will say that two PT-6's have quit on me. Both were in a King Air and were non-events.

The P&W MTBF published statistics are "fake news!"
 
buh buh buh single turbines are SAAAAAFER than two pistons! :fingerwag:

Walked away from it, ergo good landing. :thumbsup:
Turbines are much less likely to stop running than piston engines, on a per-hour basis. They also fly many more hours, on average, than the given piston engine. I'll take the PT-6, please (or the GE Catalyst, if available.)
 
Unfortunately this guy had engine problem, airport close by, engine stabilizes producing some power, so he decided to try to make DFW about 20 or so away, engine said nope, gets back to first airport with altitude to spare, then does a 360 on a left base, ends up short.

Moral of the story, get on the fricken ground at first sign of trouble like this and sort it out there. I hope he is ok.

 
Good thing is that, most likely due to corona, the flight had no passengers. They typically fly pretty full on most of their routes.
 
They are anything but tame in a stall. They have both a stick shaker and pusher. Aside from a stall, they truly are a pu**y cat to operate and fly safely.

PC12 stall testing with the shaker/pusher disabled.

Do you know if the pilot is using appropriate rudder inputs during those stalls, or is this a test to see how it performs without rudder input? The videos are too grainy for me to identify rudder movement.
 
Do you know if the pilot is using appropriate rudder inputs during those stalls, or is this a test to see how it performs without rudder input? The videos are too grainy for me to identify rudder movement.
They were testing to see if it met the stall requirements for certification. It failed. That is why it has to have the stick shaker/pusher. There is no requirement to test it using bad technique.
 
Unfortunately this guy had engine problem, airport close by, engine stabilizes producing some power, so he decided to try to make DFW about 20 or so away, engine said nope, gets back to first airport with altitude to spare, then does a 360 on a left base, ends up short.

Moral of the story, get on the fricken ground at first sign of trouble like this and sort it out there. I hope he is ok.


these summaries always are great. Glad he is safe. Plane could have been spared though. Will be interesting to see what happened to the engine. I don’t know much about PT6’s anybody with turbine experience care to speculate ?
 
these summaries always are great. Glad he is safe. Plane could have been spared though. Will be interesting to see what happened to the engine. I don’t know much about PT6’s anybody with turbine experience care to speculate ?

Fuel control unit is a known weakness on the PC12. He said he still had NG so one can speculate it could have been another FCU failure.
 
I don't think twins are any safer than singles................but I will say that two PT-6's have quit on me. Both were in a King Air and were non-events.

The P&W MTBF published statistics are "fake news!"
Only one PT-6 failure here...King Air and non-event also (KA does a wonderful ILS to 300&1 on one engine). But much like any statistic, the statistics don’t matter if you’re one of the “one in xxx” that it happens to.

For what it’s worth, my two jet engine failures, two piston twin engine failures, and two piston single failures were non-events as well.
 
Back
Top