Partners and Programs:
  • BARS
  • SKYbrary
  • ASN
  • Contact Us
  • Members' Center
  • Login
  • Support Aviation Safety

  • Industry Updates
  • The Foundation
    • About the Foundation
    • Asia Pacific Centre for Aviation Safety
    • Founders
    • Mission
    • History
    • Leadership
    • Officers and Staff
    • Media/Communications
    • Aviation Award & Scholarship Programs
    • Work with Us
    • Join Us
  • AeroSafety World
  • Events
  • Toolkits & Resources
    • Mental Health and Wellness
    • Global Action Plan for the Prevention of Runway Incursions (GAPPRI)
    • COVID-19 Crisis Resources
    • Fatigue Management
    • Flight Path Monitoring
    • Global Action Plan for the Prevention of Runway Excursions (GAPPRE)
    • Go-Around Project
    • Global Safety Assessment Project
    • Learning From All Operations
    • Past Safety Initiatives
    • Pilot Training and Competency
    • Special Reports
    • ASN Accident Dashboards
    • ASN Accident Data
    • Videos
  • Industry Updates
  • The Foundation
    • About the Foundation
    • Asia Pacific Centre for Aviation Safety
    • Founders
    • Mission
    • History
    • Leadership
    • Officers and Staff
    • Media/Communications
    • Aviation Award & Scholarship Programs
    • Work with Us
    • Join Us
  • AeroSafety World
  • Events
  • Toolkits & Resources
    • Mental Health and Wellness
    • Global Action Plan for the Prevention of Runway Incursions (GAPPRI)
    • COVID-19 Crisis Resources
    • Fatigue Management
    • Flight Path Monitoring
    • Global Action Plan for the Prevention of Runway Excursions (GAPPRE)
    • Go-Around Project
    • Global Safety Assessment Project
    • Learning From All Operations
    • Past Safety Initiatives
    • Pilot Training and Competency
    • Special Reports
    • ASN Accident Dashboards
    • ASN Accident Data
    • Videos
  • Contact Us
  • Members' Center
  • Login
  • Support Aviation Safety
Partners and Programs:
  • BARS
  • SKYbrary
  • ASN

FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION HEADQUARTERS

701 N. Fairfax Street, Suite 250,
Alexandria, Virginia 22314

Phone: +1 703 739 6700 Fax: +1 703 739 6708

  • Aviation Safety Experts
  • AeroSafety World
  • AeroSafety World June 2018
  • Tracking Engine Troubles

DataLink

Tracking Engine Troubles

A 5-year ATSB review finds almost all turboprop engine failures were ‘low risk.’

by Linda Werfelman | June 25, 2018

Australian turboprop airplanes experienced an average of 83 power plant failures a year between 2012 and 2016, with almost all classified as “low-risk” events, according to data from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB).

The ATSB data, included in a June 15 report, Power Plant Failures in Turboprop-Powered Aircraft,1 says 1,894 occurrences involving technical failures on turboprop aircraft were reported between 2012 and 2016, and of those, 417 (22 percent) involved power plant problems (Figure 1). The number of occurrences reported each year has been declining, the report said, citing data that showed a decrease from 467 in 2012 to 270 in 2016.

Figure 1 — Technical Occurrences Involving Turboprop Aircraft, 2012–2016

Source: Australian Transport Safety Bureau

Of occurrences involving operators with a known number of flight hours, 314 reports were filed between 2012 and 2015, the report said.

“With a combined total of just over 1.4 million flight hours for these aircraft in this timeframe, this equates to approximately 2.2 occurrences every 10,000 flight hours, or roughly one occurrence every 4,500 flight hours,” the report added.

An analysis of the 417 power plant occurrences found that they occurred in 11 operational groups (Figure 2) and that 44 percent involved high-capacity commercial air transport aircraft.2 Of these, more than three quarters were Bombardier DHC-8s, which fall into both high-capacity and low-capacity categories. Aircraft in low-capacity operations accounted for 24 percent of the total, and those engaged in charter operations accounted for 14 percent.

Figure 2 — Proportion of Power Plant Occurrences by Operation Type, 2012–2016

Source: Australian Transport Safety Bureau

More than half (244, or 52.5 percent) of the power plant occurrences involved abnormal engine indications, including abnormal readings of engine power output or temperature, engine overspeed or engine over-torque warnings, along with “any general reports or observations of abnormal sights or sounds by a crewmember,” the report said (Figure 3).

Figure 3 — Power Plant–Related Occurrences Involving Australian Turboprop Aircraft, 2012–2016

Source: Australian Transport Safety Bureau

Of the 244 cases of abnormal engine indications, only one was classified as an accident — the Dec. 13, 2016, crash of a Beech 200 in Moomba, South Australia, following illumination of the left engine fire warning light. The ATSB’s final report on the accident said that the pilot shut down the engine and used the fire extinguisher, and the airplane touched down in sand to the left of the runway threshold. The pilot and the two passengers were uninjured but the airplane was substantially damaged.3

The second-most frequent occurrence type involved engine failure or malfunction, which accounted for 107 events (23.1 percent) of the total, including 33 events that led to in-flight engine shutdowns, the report said.

Pratt & Whitney Canada PW100/150 engines were associated with more power plant occurrences (236) than any other family of engines, the report said, followed by Honeywell International TPE331 engines (72), Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A engines (69) and General Electric CT7 engines (25), the report said (Figure 4). Most of these engine models are used in a number of different types of aircraft.

Figure 4 —  Power Plant–Related Occurrences by Engine Model, 2012–2016

Source: Australian Transport Safety Bureau

Nearly half (185, or 44.4 percent) of all power plant–related occurrences involved Bombardier DHC-8 airplanes, followed by Fairchild SA226/227 Metros, with 43, the report said (Table 1).

Table 1 — Power Plant Occurrences by Aircraft Type, 2012–2016
Aircraft Type Number of Occurrences
Source: Australian Transport Safety Bureau
Bombardier DHC-8 185
Fairchild Industries SA227 43
Fokker Aircraft F27 30
SAAB Aircraft 340 25
Beech Aircraft 200 17
Cessna Aircraft 441 17
Embraer EMB-120 16
Pilatus Aircraft PC-12 14
Avions de Transport Régional ATR 72 13
Cessna Aircraftr 208 11
British Aerospace PLC3200/4100 8
Raytheon Aircraft 200 7
Convair 580 5
Hawker Beechcraft 200 5
Air Tractor AT-802 3
Beech Aircraft 1900 3
Ayres S2R 2
Dornier D0228 2
Pacific Aerospace 08-600 2
Air Tractor AT-502 1
Beech Aircraft 300 1
Dornier DO328 1
Fairchild Industries SA226 1
Government Aircraft Factors N22 1
Piper Aircraft PA-42 1
Reims Aviation F406 1
Rockwell International 690 1
Socata Group Aerospatiale TBM 1

Of the 417 power plant occurrences, 96 percent were classified as “low-risk,” four were considered “medium-risk,” and three were “high-risk,” the report said. None was classified as “very high-risk.”

All three high-risk occurrences involved engine failures or malfunctions with forced or precautionary landings in Cessna 208 Caravans, the report said.

Two occurrences resulted in minor injuries; both involved aircraft that were flown in agricultural operations, experienced engine problems and collided with terrain, the report said.

The Convair 580 had the highest rate of power plant–related occurrences — 13.9 per 10,000 flight hours — but the report noted that “with only four occurrences between 2012 and 2015, the high rate was due to comparatively low flight hours.” All four occurrences were classified as low-risk and were considered incidents rather than accidents or serious incidents. Their operator, which was the only Convair 580 operator in Australia, told the ATSB that the fleet was retired in 2017 and replaced with newer turbofan aircraft.

Notes

  1. ATSB. Transport Safety Report AR-2017-017, Power Plant Failures in Turboprop-Powered Aircraft. June 15, 2018.
  2. High-capacity aircraft are defined as those with maximum capacity of more than 38 seats or a maximum payload capability of more than 4,200 kg (9,259 lb). Low-capacity aircraft are those with 38 seats or fewer or a maximum payload capability of 4,200 kg or less.
  3. ATSB. Investigation AO-2016-170, Engine Shutdown and Collision With Terrain Involving Beech Aircraft Corporation B200 VH-MVL. Dec. 13, 2016.

Share:

Print:

Key Safety Issues

  • Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT)
  • Loss of Control–In Flight (LOC-I)
  • Mechanical Issues
  • Runway Safety (approach and landing)
  • Sabotage/Intentional Acts
  • Midair Collisions (MAC)
  • Runway Safety (Conflicts)
  • Wildlife Issues
  • Fatigue
  • Cabin Safety
  • Emerging Safety Issues
    • Lithium Batteries
    • Safety Information Sharing and Protection
    • Unmanned Aircraft Systems

Related Content

Aviation Industry Data, News

‘A Step Back’

Accident data for 2024 falls short of the ‘exceptional performance’ recorded the previous year, IATA…

by FSF Editorial Staff

accident data, Helicopter Safety, News

Situationally Unaware

Study finds loss of situational awareness the most frequent human factor in HAA flights.

by Linda Werfelman

Boeing, News, Research, safety data

Safety News

Boeing CEO notes ‘serious lapses’ in performance, says he’s working on culture change.

by FSF Editorial Staff

Read more articles

1920 Ballenger Ave., 4th Floor, Alexandria, VA 22314

Phone: +1 703 739 6700 Fax: +1 703 739 6708

Projects & Partners

  • Basic Aviation Risk Standard
  • SKYbrary
  • Aviation Safety Network
  • Asia Pacific Centre for Aviation Safety
  • Donate
  • Advertise on our website
  • Sponsor & Exhibit at our Events
  • Work with Us
  • Contact Us
  • Site Map
  • Privacy

© 2025 Flight Safety Foundation

Join our group on LinkedIn