|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||1801 To 2400|
|Locale Reference||atc facility : mbw|
|Altitude||msl bound lower : 13500|
msl bound upper : 13500
|Operator||common carrier : air carrier|
|Make Model Name||Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng|
|Flight Phase||cruise other|
|Route In Use||enroute airway : v589|
|Affiliation||company : air carrier|
|Function||flight crew : single pilot|
|Qualification||pilot : instrument|
pilot : cfi
pilot : commercial
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 100|
flight time total : 4700
flight time type : 250
|Affiliation||government : faa|
|Function||observation : air carrier inspector|
|Anomaly||aircraft equipment problem : critical|
non adherence : far
|Independent Detector||aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : unspecified|
other flight crewa
|Consequence||faa : investigated|
|Air Traffic Incident||Pilot Deviation|
After removal and replacement of the righthand fuel pump on small transport, I was repositioning the aircraft to den from its point of repair, billings, mt. After departure, approximately 35 mins, the oil pressure gauge began to fluctuate and continued to do so. It appeared to become worse with time. I elected to shut the engine (right side) down 35 mi northwest of mbw, about 30 mi south of casper, wy. I continued on to den west/O additional problem. On 8/mon/88, I notified den FSDO of the engine shutdown out of professional courtesy. On 8/thu/88, I was asked to give some more details of the incident. The operations inspector read to me far 91.29(B) and suggested that I would probably go under investigation. If I had to do it again, I would have landed in casper and ignored my frustration of being away from home for the repair in billings. I was also attempting to save our company additional downtime. This will not be a factor in my future decision making. I also will in the future not give any information to the FAA unless requested as required. I am in no doubt that I erred in judgement over this matter. Unfortunately, the FAA has become an enforcement agency and can no longer be looked at as a service partner. My feeling is, that as long as we, the users of the system, are in fear of the FAA, it will only weaken the integrity and safety because we are encouraged to hide the truth instead of being able to go to the FAA as a service organization for help/advice. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: the FAA is continuing their investigation. Post-flight inspection revealed that the engine was losing oil and the problem was not a gauge failure as the pilot thought at the time. This reporter is an FAA designated check pilot and the FAA has threatened to cancel this designation because of 'demonstrated poor judgement.'
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ACR SMT INFLT ENGINE SHUT DOWN ON FRY FLT. CONTINUED TO DESTINATION.
Narrative: AFTER REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF THE RIGHTHAND FUEL PUMP ON SMT, I WAS REPOSITIONING THE ACFT TO DEN FROM ITS POINT OF REPAIR, BILLINGS, MT. AFTER DEP, APPROX 35 MINS, THE OIL PRESSURE GAUGE BEGAN TO FLUCTUATE AND CONTINUED TO DO SO. IT APPEARED TO BECOME WORSE WITH TIME. I ELECTED TO SHUT THE ENG (RIGHT SIDE) DOWN 35 MI NW OF MBW, ABOUT 30 MI S OF CASPER, WY. I CONTINUED ON TO DEN W/O ADDITIONAL PROB. ON 8/MON/88, I NOTIFIED DEN FSDO OF THE ENG SHUTDOWN OUT OF PROFESSIONAL COURTESY. ON 8/THU/88, I WAS ASKED TO GIVE SOME MORE DETAILS OF THE INCIDENT. THE OPS INSPECTOR READ TO ME FAR 91.29(B) AND SUGGESTED THAT I WOULD PROBABLY GO UNDER INVESTIGATION. IF I HAD TO DO IT AGAIN, I WOULD HAVE LANDED IN CASPER AND IGNORED MY FRUSTRATION OF BEING AWAY FROM HOME FOR THE REPAIR IN BILLINGS. I WAS ALSO ATTEMPTING TO SAVE OUR COMPANY ADDITIONAL DOWNTIME. THIS WILL NOT BE A FACTOR IN MY FUTURE DECISION MAKING. I ALSO WILL IN THE FUTURE NOT GIVE ANY INFO TO THE FAA UNLESS REQUESTED AS REQUIRED. I AM IN NO DOUBT THAT I ERRED IN JUDGEMENT OVER THIS MATTER. UNFORTUNATELY, THE FAA HAS BECOME AN ENFORCEMENT AGENCY AND CAN NO LONGER BE LOOKED AT AS A SVC PARTNER. MY FEELING IS, THAT AS LONG AS WE, THE USERS OF THE SYS, ARE IN FEAR OF THE FAA, IT WILL ONLY WEAKEN THE INTEGRITY AND SAFETY BECAUSE WE ARE ENCOURAGED TO HIDE THE TRUTH INSTEAD OF BEING ABLE TO GO TO THE FAA AS A SVC ORGANIZATION FOR HELP/ADVICE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: THE FAA IS CONTINUING THEIR INVESTIGATION. POST-FLT INSPECTION REVEALED THAT THE ENG WAS LOSING OIL AND THE PROB WAS NOT A GAUGE FAILURE AS THE PLT THOUGHT AT THE TIME. THIS RPTR IS AN FAA DESIGNATED CHK PLT AND THE FAA HAS THREATENED TO CANCEL THIS DESIGNATION BECAUSE OF 'DEMONSTRATED POOR JUDGEMENT.'
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.