Narrative:

While acting as the first officer on a reposition flight from ZZZ to ZZZ1; we encountered an unusual engine indication. As the captain pwred up and we began our takeoff roll; my attention was focused on keeping the aircraft wings level and directional control (the casa is unique in my experience with the xfer of controls at 60 KIAS). As we were accelerating; the captain stated that the right engine was not making target torque. Immediately after this statement; I called 'V1; rotate' and looked at the engine instruments. I noticed that the right torque indication was at 100% torque and stated this to the captain. The captain was concerned that the right engine was possibly not producing full power. Usual practice is to set the torque for takeoff slightly below full rated power; so that the ram air rise effect does not over-torque the propeller and engine systems. We had performed all the engine run-up and single red line computer tests on the aircraft; as well as a propeller overspd governor check. We also had performed a torque and temperature limiter computer test. The torque and temperature limiter test did not give expected indication; but all other tests were within normal limits. Was called by the captain today; who informed me that the right engine was run up by mechanics at our home base and that as of right this moment it was not producing full power. I am submitting this report because I believe the engine instrumentation and engine rigging was set in a way that although all tests were normal; we were fooled into believing that we had full power when we actually did not. I believe the proper way to proceed to avoid this situation would be tighter maintenance control procedures and a more safety-related outlook by our company towards maintenance write-ups.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CASA 212 FLIGHT CREW NOTED THEIR RIGHT ENGINE WAS NOT PRODUCING NORMAL POWER EVEN THOUGH ALL INDICATIONS WERE NORMAL.

Narrative: WHILE ACTING AS THE FO ON A REPOSITION FLT FROM ZZZ TO ZZZ1; WE ENCOUNTERED AN UNUSUAL ENG INDICATION. AS THE CAPT PWRED UP AND WE BEGAN OUR TKOF ROLL; MY ATTN WAS FOCUSED ON KEEPING THE ACFT WINGS LEVEL AND DIRECTIONAL CONTROL (THE CASA IS UNIQUE IN MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE XFER OF CTLS AT 60 KIAS). AS WE WERE ACCELERATING; THE CAPT STATED THAT THE R ENG WAS NOT MAKING TARGET TORQUE. IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS STATEMENT; I CALLED 'V1; ROTATE' AND LOOKED AT THE ENG INSTS. I NOTICED THAT THE R TORQUE INDICATION WAS AT 100% TORQUE AND STATED THIS TO THE CAPT. THE CAPT WAS CONCERNED THAT THE R ENG WAS POSSIBLY NOT PRODUCING FULL PWR. USUAL PRACTICE IS TO SET THE TORQUE FOR TKOF SLIGHTLY BELOW FULL RATED PWR; SO THAT THE RAM AIR RISE EFFECT DOES NOT OVER-TORQUE THE PROP AND ENG SYSTEMS. WE HAD PERFORMED ALL THE ENG RUN-UP AND SINGLE RED LINE COMPUTER TESTS ON THE ACFT; AS WELL AS A PROP OVERSPD GOVERNOR CHK. WE ALSO HAD PERFORMED A TORQUE AND TEMP LIMITER COMPUTER TEST. THE TORQUE AND TEMP LIMITER TEST DID NOT GIVE EXPECTED INDICATION; BUT ALL OTHER TESTS WERE WITHIN NORMAL LIMITS. WAS CALLED BY THE CAPT TODAY; WHO INFORMED ME THAT THE R ENG WAS RUN UP BY MECHS AT OUR HOME BASE AND THAT AS OF RIGHT THIS MOMENT IT WAS NOT PRODUCING FULL PWR. I AM SUBMITTING THIS RPT BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE ENG INSTRUMENTATION AND ENG RIGGING WAS SET IN A WAY THAT ALTHOUGH ALL TESTS WERE NORMAL; WE WERE FOOLED INTO BELIEVING THAT WE HAD FULL PWR WHEN WE ACTUALLY DID NOT. I BELIEVE THE PROPER WAY TO PROCEED TO AVOID THIS SITUATION WOULD BE TIGHTER MAINT CTL PROCS AND A MORE SAFETY-RELATED OUTLOOK BY OUR COMPANY TOWARDS MAINT WRITE-UPS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 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.