DEPARTING ILE; FLT CREW OF SF34 EXPERIENCED EXPLOSIVE SOUND FROM R SIDE OF ACFT. ABORTED TKOF AND; UPON INSPECTION; DISCOVERED THE R PROP SEIZED. SUBSEQUENT INVESTIGATION NOTED NUMEROUS WRITE-UPS REGARDING OPERATIONAL ABNORMALITIES ON THIS PROP-ENG COMBINATION.

Narrative

WE KEPT THE ACFT ALL DAY; AND WE HAD VERY QUICK TURNS. COMING OUT OF ILE; WE HAD PRECOMPUTED THE TORQUE TO BE 100. GRAY APCH RELEASED US; AND WE ANNOUNCED INTENTIONS TO DEPART ILE ON THE CTAF. BEFORE TKOF CHKLIST WAS COMPLETE. PWR WAS SET; AND ALL ENG PARAMETERS WERE NORMAL. A FEW SECONDS LATER; ABOUT 65 KTS; WE HEARD AN EXPLOSION OUT THE R SIDE OF THE ACFT. I ANNOUNCED 'ABORT' 3 TIMES. USING DEEP REVERSE AND BRAKING WE CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP; AND THE PARKING BRAKE WAS PARKED. AT FIRST WE DID NOT KNOW WHAT WAS WRONG. LOOKING AT THE #2 INSTS; EVERYTHING WAS NORMAL EXCEPT ITT. THE ITT WAS AROUND 12:15 AND THE RED ITT LIGHT WAS ON. I CALLED FOR #2 TO BE SHUT DOWN; AND CALLED '#2 CL; FUEL OFF.' AT NO TIME DID THE FIRE HANDLE ILLUMINATE OR THE FIRE BELL SOUND. WE WENT THROUGH THE EMER PROC CHKLIST AND PULLED THE FIRE HANDLE; AND DISCHARGED EXTINGUISHING AGENT. THE FO COMPLETED THE EMER PROC CHKLIST. AFTER WE ASCERTAINED THAT THERE WAS NO FIRE; WE RETURNED TO THE GATE. THERE WAS NO EMER DECLARED. WE DID CALL ILE OPS; AND HAD THEM CALL CFR TO COME AND EXAMINE THE R ENG. NO EVIDENCE OF FIRE OR FIRE DAMAGE WAS VISIBLE OTHER THAN THE FAINT SMELL OF HALON. PAX WERE DEPLANED NORMALLY BY AIRSTAIRS. UPON POSTFLT INSPECTION; THE PROP WOULD NOT ROTATE; AS IT HAD SEIZED. LAST MONTH; THERE WERE 2 INSTANCES OF THE R-HAND PROP HAVING PROBS. BOTH STATED THAT OIL WAS LEAKING FROM THE R-HAND PROP; AND ONE STATES THAT THE PROP WAS ALREADY ON TDMI. FURTHER DOWN THERE ARE 5 OTHER INSTANCES THAT INVOLVE THE 4-HAND PROP IN SOME FORM OR ANOTHER. ONE LEAK; AN OVERSPD; ANOTHER OVERSPD; PGB OIL PRESSURE FLUX AND ANOTHER PROP OIL GAUGE FLUX. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR ADVISED THAT HE HAD FOLLOWED UP WITH THE COMPANY MAINT DEPTS AND LEARNED THAT THE FAILURE WAS NOT PROP RELATED BUT WAS; IN FACT; A TURBINE FAILURE HE TERMED AN 'EXPLOSION.' HE WAS UNABLE TO EXPLAIN; HOWEVER; WHY A FAILURE IN THE TURBINE WOULD HAVE RESULTED IN THE PROP SEIZING. THE ENG AND PROP WERE BEING CHANGED DURING HIS INVESTIGATION AND HE IS CONFIDENT THAT APPROPRIATE MAINT PROCS WERE TAKEN.