New Pilatus PC-12 N128CM

FSE and PE make for a powerful combination
Post Reply
wmburns
Posts: 474
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 7:28 am

New Pilatus PC-12 N128CM

Post by wmburns »

Recently purchased a "new to me" Pilatus PC-12. As far as FSE aircraft go, it's a high air frame model at over 800 hours. Purchased in Greeley-Weld County Airport (KGXY) and flown cross country ending up in the PilotEdge coverage area at Banning Municipal Airport (KBNG). The ferrying flights took 14:45 hours and 15 movements. Of which only one movement was with zero PAX. During the cross country ferry managed to earn 81,188 v$'s (almost 10% of purchase price). Which if I do say so myself was great!

Skyvector link:
http://skyvector.com/?ll=39.84678475877 ... :A.K2.KBNG

When looking for a new aircraft tail number, I try to look for one with some "history" associated with it. In general the more famous (infamous) the better. In this case chose N128CM. N128CM was a PC-12 that crashed attempting to land in Butte, Montana after experiencing in flight freezing of the fuel system. This led to an imbalance between the left/right tanks with one tank being almost full and the other almost empty. The pilot lost control while attempting a go around after being too high on the first landing attempt. The NTSB theorized that the work load needed to maintain controllable flight with such a large imbalance over whelmed the pilot perhaps during a slight lapse in attention.

Short version:
http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Acci ... R1105.aspx

Long version:
http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Acci ... AR1105.pdf

I like to study accident reports as I feel there is much to learn from them. It's always surprising to me how complex an accident "sequence" can be. It's never a single thing but a chain of events that leads to an accident. In the case of N128CM, the pilot completed numerous flights without adding an approved anti-icing additive (FSII) as required for flights conducted in below freezing temperatures (virtually every flight conducted over 8,000' ISA). This lead to a relaxed understanding of the importance of the anti-icing additive (conducted x flights with no problem......).

The flight sill had a chance to end well if not for a bad case of "Get-There-Itis". The pilot choose to continue the flight after the fuel imbalance exceed the recommended 2 bars and did not decide to divert until an additional 30 minutes had passed. Compounding this by passing up closer airports to reach KBTM. Just wondering if the choice was affected by a desire to reach an airport that worked better for the PAX or operations?

http://www.aopa.org/Pilot-Resources/Saf ... There-Itis

IMO the lesson to be learned here is to know your airplane. Never stop learning. Thanks PilotEdge for the opportunity to learn.
Post Reply