File photo of an Air Tractor 802 Fire Boss operated by Conair. Not necessarily the aircraft involved in the incident.A single engine amphibious air tanker made a forced landing Tuesday while working on a wildfire in British Columbia.
“This evening a Conair 802 Air Tractor Fireboss Skimmer aircraft experienced an engine failure during operations on the Connell Ridge Wildfire, near Cranbrook,” said BC Wildfire Service Executive Director Ian Meier. “The pilot conducted a successful forced landing and was transported to receive medical assessment. Our thoughts are with the pilot involved in this incident as well as their family, friends and colleagues. The BC Wildfire Service is providing all possible assistance to the pilot and Conair.”
Jeff Berry, Director of Business Development with Conair Aerial Firefighting confirmed the pilot was able to walk away unharmed from the aircraft to a helicopter and was transported to Cranbrook for assessment by paramedics.
“His skill and training as an aerial firefighting pilot under challenging circumstances enabled him to execute an exceptional emergency maneuver resulting in a safe outcome,” said Berry. “He was faced with a problem with the engine, he went through his emergency procedures, and put the aircraft down in such a way that he was able to walk away unharmed. Faced with a difficult bunch of decisions in a very, very short period, he did exceptionally well.”
The Connell Ridge Fire 14 miles south Cranbrook, BC has burned approximately 1,235 acres (500 hectares) since it was discovered August 1, 2022.
Connell Ridge Fire map, August 3, 2022Thanks and a tip of the hat go out to Mike.
18 Comments
Holy cow a PT6 engine failure? Rarer than a unicorn fart! Glad the pilot handled it great and is safe and sound!
Could it have ingested some junk from the fire?
No. The air intake system makes it impossible unless the filter itself disintegrates and is ingested somehow and then still unlikely. That and it is nonstandard to be flying through an area of debris that could, except on very rare occasions indeed, be ingested anyhow. Likely a component failure ie P3 line, fuel feed, FCU etc. I am sure they already have a good idea already.
When I flew those I had two engine failures. Good thing the pilot is ok!
When I flew the YT-1300 Corellian light freighter and did the Kessel Run in 12 parsecs it was powered by a Girodyne SRB42 sublight engine with a Rippinnium Quadex Power Core (subluminal) Class 0.5 Coaxium Isu-Sim SSP05 Hyperdrive (superluminal). If I had an engine failure during that run It would’ve caused a tear in the space/time continuum. Super pucker factor!!!
Ohhhhhhh!
And here I thought I strained my rippinnium quadex trying to get all those stuck screws out of the access/inspection panels on that Cessna 340 wing after someone did a gravel strip landing in Mexico.
I was on working man’s comp for two weeks!
NOT the poster identifying as “doug” above.
I have had several failures in PT6 powerplants. It happens. Anything mechanical can experience a malfunction or failure. I have had one forced landing in a SEAT, using a TPE-331-10, due to an engine failure.
I had a lot more engine failures behind radial engines in large air tankers.
The Air Tractor and the PT6A is about as reliable as they come. Nothing is perfect.
Doug, you had two engine failures in a Fireboss?
This is getting deep.
He said he had two pt6 engine failures, didn’t specify the airframe. Then he said one engine failure in a SEAT, which was probably a dromider based on the engine specified.
I had an engine fail on a SEAT. I climbed out on the cowling while I was in a 6000fpm dive, repaired it, climbed in, started it and still made my drop. No big deal.
I did that once too, in an F4U Corsair over Saipan in 44.
Doug is my hero!! NOT
There’s more than one “doug” here; one who has been posting here for some time, and one stalker, who has also used my name from another web board, who thinks he’s being cute. The other “doug,” the stalker, has no fire experience.
PT6A failures are rare, as are engine failures in SEATs. The fact that this pilot made a successful forced landing speaks well for the airframe. The 802 airframe is a tubular roll cage with removable panels.
Someone mentioned ingesting materials over the fire; the design of the 802 and the PT6A precludes ingesting materials, due to filtration, and the design of the intake/induction flow path, as well as location of the intake on newer models.
It’s frustrating to see moronic commenters creeping into Fire Aviation. These a*#wipes need to zip up their pants and go back to watching their cartoons. LR!
Lone Ranger is right.
Positive and thoughtful comments go a long way.
Aren’t we all professional?
Please think before typing all.
Thanks Bill!
Well, it does get annoying when a certain person has to always one-up everyone, then condescendingly bashes people who don’t agree with his “inputs”…Shoot, he even bashes people who AGREES with him. Nobody likes a know it all, hence the recent mocking posts.
Agreed. The fabrications and embellishments are beyond pale on here. Too bad his name really isn’t “Doug”.
Comments are closed for this article!