37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1611912 |
Time | |
Date | 201901 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
State Reference | US |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Chancellor 414A / C414 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | Final Approach |
Route In Use | Other ILS |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Component | |
Aircraft Component | Engine Control |
Person 1 | |
Function | Pilot Flying Single Pilot Captain |
Qualification | Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Flight Instructor Flight Crew Multiengine |
Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 10 Flight Crew Total 7200 Flight Crew Type 10 |
Events | |
Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe |
Narrative:
While tracking the glideslope; it became clear the left engine mp (manifold pressure) was not changing with throttle movements. Rather than trying to deal with the problem while continuing the approach; I elected to cancel IFR; break off the approach; and circle north of the final approach course to take further action. I decided it would be safer to feather the engine and make a single engine landing than to attempt a landing with one engine producing partial power (~50%). We train for single engine landings; but we don't train for a stuck throttle.I [advised ATC] so ATC would clear any traffic and reduce the chance of a distraction and especially of having to go around on one engine. I rejoined the final approach course and landed without incident.I believe the problem was mechanical but I have not heard specifically what caused the engine to become unresponsive.the situation was greatly eased by being in VMC. I feel like I handled it pretty well and will handle it the same way if it happens again. However; in IMC it would have been much more challenging as the point at which the failure occurred was after radar service was terminated. I would have had to re-establish radar contact; negotiate re-sequencing for the approach; all while single engine and potentially in icing conditions. A suggestion is to incorporate similar kinds of real-life scenarios in training and recurrent curriculum.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: C414 Captain reported left engine control problems that led to a single engine approach and landing.
Narrative: While tracking the glideslope; it became clear the left engine MP (Manifold Pressure) was not changing with throttle movements. Rather than trying to deal with the problem while continuing the approach; I elected to cancel IFR; break off the approach; and circle north of the final approach course to take further action. I decided it would be safer to feather the engine and make a single engine landing than to attempt a landing with one engine producing partial power (~50%). We train for single engine landings; but we don't train for a stuck throttle.I [advised ATC] so ATC would clear any traffic and reduce the chance of a distraction and especially of having to go around on one engine. I rejoined the final approach course and landed without incident.I believe the problem was mechanical but I have not heard specifically what caused the engine to become unresponsive.The situation was greatly eased by being in VMC. I feel like I handled it pretty well and will handle it the same way if it happens again. However; in IMC it would have been much more challenging as the point at which the failure occurred was after radar service was terminated. I would have had to re-establish radar contact; negotiate re-sequencing for the approach; all while single engine and potentially in icing conditions. A suggestion is to incorporate similar kinds of real-life scenarios in training and recurrent curriculum.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.