Narrative:

After normal run-up all system checked ok. I picked up passenger at gate. Taxied out to runway 29 for takeoff. Before takeoff checks complete. First officer had the leg. Being the first flight of day torque was set to 3700 ft pounds. During takeoff roll PNF is to call out 'autofeather armed' when the autofeather annunciators illuminate. The autofeather annunciators never illuminated and I called for an abort. I wasn't sure whey they didn't arm but I taxied back for another takeoff. During the taxi the first officer and I pulled the autofeather circuit breaker and put it back in and did another autofeather test as well as another before takeoff checklist. I took the takeoff the second time and the autofeather performed normally as it did the rest of the day. I believe the switches in the power levers should have worked but didn't. Perhaps the first officer hadn't pushed the power levers high enough. I thought that rechking the system and doing the takeoff myself where I could be sure the power levers were advanced far enough to arm the system was reasonable. I now understand that this had been questioned by FAA personnel. They think the plane should have been shut down and maintenance called. I don't agree, but I'm submitting this report in case the FAA takes some action against me. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the FAA questioned why the captain didn't return for maintenance inspection of the BE02 (D model) after they had aborted for a mechanical problem. The captain states that he could not repeat the problem and that there is no policy stating when it is, or isn't ok to reattempt takeoff. The reporter was a relatively new captain and it was first officer's first month on the line. He feels that the switches just didn't get hit, and the lack of autofeather lights was a 'no go' in his mind. He experienced no further problems during his subsequent checks, and decided to continue the flight. He performed the takeoff and got the annunciators at the appropriate time when he ran the power up. Reporter submitted a report to company and no one seemed to think it was a problem, but the FAA called (per tower report) and it became a problem. The principle operating inspector (poi) questioned the judgement involved in flight crew follow-up procedures and decision to continue the flight after the abort.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: BE02 CAPT ABORTED TKOF WHEN AUTOFEATHER LIGHTS DID NOT ILLUMINATE. AUTOFEATHER SYS WAS TESTED AND CIRCUIT BREAKERS WERE PULLED AND RESET, BUT ALL INDICATIONS WERE NORMAL, SO CREW CONTINUED FLT UNEVENTFULLY. THE FAA LATER QUESTIONED FLC JUDGEMENT IN THE INCIDENT.

Narrative: AFTER NORMAL RUN-UP ALL SYS CHKED OK. I PICKED UP PAX AT GATE. TAXIED OUT TO RWY 29 FOR TKOF. BEFORE TKOF CHKS COMPLETE. FO HAD THE LEG. BEING THE FIRST FLT OF DAY TORQUE WAS SET TO 3700 FT LBS. DURING TKOF ROLL PNF IS TO CALL OUT 'AUTOFEATHER ARMED' WHEN THE AUTOFEATHER ANNUNCIATORS ILLUMINATE. THE AUTOFEATHER ANNUNCIATORS NEVER ILLUMINATED AND I CALLED FOR AN ABORT. I WASN'T SURE WHEY THEY DIDN'T ARM BUT I TAXIED BACK FOR ANOTHER TKOF. DURING THE TAXI THE FO AND I PULLED THE AUTOFEATHER CIRCUIT BREAKER AND PUT IT BACK IN AND DID ANOTHER AUTOFEATHER TEST AS WELL AS ANOTHER BEFORE TKOF CHKLIST. I TOOK THE TKOF THE SECOND TIME AND THE AUTOFEATHER PERFORMED NORMALLY AS IT DID THE REST OF THE DAY. I BELIEVE THE SWITCHES IN THE PWR LEVERS SHOULD HAVE WORKED BUT DIDN'T. PERHAPS THE FO HADN'T PUSHED THE PWR LEVERS HIGH ENOUGH. I THOUGHT THAT RECHKING THE SYS AND DOING THE TKOF MYSELF WHERE I COULD BE SURE THE PWR LEVERS WERE ADVANCED FAR ENOUGH TO ARM THE SYS WAS REASONABLE. I NOW UNDERSTAND THAT THIS HAD BEEN QUESTIONED BY FAA PERSONNEL. THEY THINK THE PLANE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SHUT DOWN AND MAINT CALLED. I DON'T AGREE, BUT I'M SUBMITTING THIS RPT IN CASE THE FAA TAKES SOME ACTION AGAINST ME. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE FAA QUESTIONED WHY THE CAPT DIDN'T RETURN FOR MAINT INSPECTION OF THE BE02 (D MODEL) AFTER THEY HAD ABORTED FOR A MECHANICAL PROB. THE CAPT STATES THAT HE COULD NOT REPEAT THE PROB AND THAT THERE IS NO POLICY STATING WHEN IT IS, OR ISN'T OK TO REATTEMPT TKOF. THE RPTR WAS A RELATIVELY NEW CAPT AND IT WAS FO'S FIRST MONTH ON THE LINE. HE FEELS THAT THE SWITCHES JUST DIDN'T GET HIT, AND THE LACK OF AUTOFEATHER LIGHTS WAS A 'NO GO' IN HIS MIND. HE EXPERIENCED NO FURTHER PROBS DURING HIS SUBSEQUENT CHKS, AND DECIDED TO CONTINUE THE FLT. HE PERFORMED THE TKOF AND GOT THE ANNUNCIATORS AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME WHEN HE RAN THE PWR UP. RPTR SUBMITTED A RPT TO COMPANY AND NO ONE SEEMED TO THINK IT WAS A PROB, BUT THE FAA CALLED (PER TWR RPT) AND IT BECAME A PROB. THE PRINCIPLE OPERATING INSPECTOR (POI) QUESTIONED THE JUDGEMENT INVOLVED IN FLC FOLLOW-UP PROCS AND DECISION TO CONTINUE THE FLT AFTER THE ABORT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.