1900 systems question

chperplt

Registered User
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,123
Total Time
.
This is for all the brilliant 1900 drivers out there...

During startup, within 2 or 3 seconds after engaging the starter for #1, the T-handle lights up. After troubleshooting a little while later, the fire loop tests ok, but the amp test fails. Maintenance determines that the fire loop is bad. Since the loop test passed, the problem wasn't the integrity of the loop.

My question is.. Other than too much heat, what could make the loop (amp sensing too much heat) fail that soon after engaging the starter? This was the 3rd start of the day on that engine.

Maintenance couldn't answer the question and my curious mind wants to know..

Thanks
 

flint4xx

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 6, 2001
Posts
374
Total Time
10000+
It's been awhile since 1900 school, but it sounds like the amp has an electrical glitch that is caused by the electrical draw from the starter. Does the light go back out as the power drain is reduced?

There are a bunch of circuit boards under the cockpit floor that control that stuff. Spill any cokes lately?
 

chperplt

Registered User
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,123
Total Time
.
Sorry.. I should have added more..

There are 3 circuit boards that control that system. All 3 boards were changed with no luck. The only way they were able to get the T-handle off was to disconnect the entire loop from the system. They fixed the problem by changing the entire fire loop.
 

HvyjetFO

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2002
Posts
52
Total Time
9500
hope this helps

After troubleshooting a little while later, the fire loop tests ok, but the amp test fails.
The control amplifier does several things. It discrimiates between real fires and a false indication caused from a short circuit in the control circuitry. It also has a time delay in it that prevents false warnings due to short "bursts" of resistance signals or from short circuits. When the amplifier fails, false fire warnings could happen because the protection described earlier has been lost.

I know of many false fire indications that occured due to short circuits. Sounds like this is what happened to you. While the 1900 is a great airplane, it does have its systems shortcomings.
Best of luck!
 

chperplt

Registered User
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,123
Total Time
.
Would a short circuit destroy the fire loop?

Thanks for the info
 

HvyjetFO

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2002
Posts
52
Total Time
9500
I'm not sure if a short circuit could destroy a fire loop. From the problems I've seen with short circuits, I have never seen a loop be replaced. Sorry I can't be of more help.
 

AK737FO

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
368
Total Time
12,000
Refresher course...

It has been a long time since I thought about 1900 systems. I would look for a small puddle of electrons. Find them and you will find your problem.
The BE-99 and BE-1900 seem to be prone to fire loop problems and false alarms. I recall a few dark and stormy nights, flying in heavy rain, with the T-handles looking like a Christmas tree. Doesn't give you the warm fuzzys... I also remember a false alarm that the mechanics think was caused by sunlight? A ray of sunlight getting through the cowl and tripping it somehow.
Overall, it just seems to be a picky system.
Enjoy the Big Beech!
 

Marko Ramius

Vilnius Nastavnic
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
378
Total Time
25 w/L
Was it a C-model? I never flew the C, but I was often told by our senior Captains and management types that the T-handles would often light up falsely on the C particularly if it was humid or there was some moisture in there. I think HeavyJetFO was right that it probably started with the control amplifier. The thing I always found funny about the 1900 was that for an aircraft that had a relatively simple electrical system, it sure could develop a lot of weird electrical glitches and they often weren't wired the way the "book" said. Ever turn the battery on, followed by the AC BUS switches out of curiousity? I've found some times that the inverters weren't even wired to the L/R center busses for power backup like they should be!
 

Birddog

On a mission...
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
259
Total Time
8k
The only thing that comes to mind is that the cable might have been damaged in some way, perhaps during mx. Perhaps the cable was kinked and the insulating layer was damaged. If you find out what caused it, please let us know.
 

Timebuilder

Entrepreneur
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,625
Total Time
1634
As a lifelong wrenchhead and electronics tech, I can tell you that a great many problem gremlins are caused by ground faults, causing unexpected differences in potential. A loose ground can cause electrolysis (greenish crystalline goo) and a host of maddening symptoms.

The fire loop on the PT-6, from what I have seen, is a very simple part. I'd expect to find the problem in the terminal connections of the loop (possible high/varying resistance), the cable (as mentioned above) or the board connectors.

Sometimes swapping out boards can be an exercise in futility, as merely disturbing the board can clear a problem. Then, when the old board is bench tested, no problem is found.

You coud start with wiggle tests, thermal stressing with hair dryers and aerosol cans, and ground tests.

I'd like to hear about the fix, when it happens.
 

chperplt

Registered User
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,123
Total Time
.
Yes it was a C model..


The reason this is so perplexing to me is that it occurred during the 3rd engine start of the day. It happened almost immediately after the started was engaged. Very little vibration here. The loop test passed after the fact, while the amp test failed. So obviously the problem, weather it was real or false, was within the amplifier. Replacing the loop corrected the problem.
 

Timebuilder

Entrepreneur
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,625
Total Time
1634
I understand the problem is corrected, but how did replacing the loop do anything for a bad amplifier? Did I miss something?
 

chperplt

Registered User
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,123
Total Time
.
Good question.

I don't know that the amplifier was "bad".. I just know that the amp test failed after the T-handle lit.
 

Timebuilder

Entrepreneur
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,625
Total Time
1634
chperplt said:
Good question.

I don't know that the amplifier was "bad".. I just know that the amp test failed after the T-handle lit.

I guess it's possible that

a) the process of replacing the loop disturbed something that affected the amp's ability to pass a test

b) the amp test failure was an anomoly

c) you really did have a bad loop, but testing didn't show it as bad

This is a good example of the brain teasers I dealt with every day before I started flying. I think I enjoy the flying more.
 
Top