Originally Posted by
rickair7777
I've flown turboprops which had power lever angle authority waaaaay beyond the torque and temp limits, you could definitely ruin a motor with the flick of your wrist, and most likely could cause it to come apart instantly. Panic power was a number you set on a steam gauge, not the firewall. Would have been nice to have a hard stop for panic situations, short of the firewall.
Again, with the exception of those engines that contain electronic limiting (eg, FADEC, etc), you can't trim the top. end of a turbine, and the acceleration isn't linear; it becomes a very steep upward curve to destruction when at the upper end of the power spectrum, which is why we do derated takeoffs and why it's important to respect the numbers.
Kalitta's engines in Bogota had no margin in them; Kalitta cobbled them together out of red tagged parts bought from various airlines and they were already beyond the margins of safety and legal tolerance. That they came apart when pushed was no surprise.
There's a military mentality that one would like to have military power available in a non-military aircraft, but the limitations, design, and criteria for the aircraft are quite different. Many platforms already have an excess of thrust, up through aircraft that are already 1+1, etc, and the ability to derate and still have adequate thrust available to call "military" is an option. This is not the case on most transport category aircraft, and unlike the tactical taxis, transport category aircraft lack bang seats. There is no returning it to the taxpayer.
There are also no taxpayers. Only shareholders.