PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Chieftain down in SA
View Single Post
Old 29th Jan 2014, 10:11
  #44 (permalink)  
Two_dogs
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: (Not always) In front of my computer
Posts: 371
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
DF,

They are all PA-31 aircraft, variants were; (Source Wikipedia)

PA-31 NavajoInitial production version, also known unofficially as the PA-31-310.

PA-31-300 NavajoVariant of the Navajo with normally aspirated engines; 14 built.

PA-31 Navajo BMarketing name for 1971 improved variant with 310 hp (231 kW) Lycoming TIO-540-E turbo-charged piston engines, new airconditioning and optional pilot access door and optional wide utility door.

PA-31 Navajo CMarketing name for 1974 improved variant with 310 hp (231 kW) Lycoming TIO-540-A2C engines and other minor improvements.

PA-31P Pressurized NavajoPressurized version of the PA-31 Navajo, powered by two 425-hp (317-kW) Lycoming TIGO-541-E1A piston engines.

PA-31-325 NavajoReferred to as the "Navajo C/R" for Counter Rotating; variant of Navajo with counter-rotating propellers introduced with the PA-31-350 Chieftain. 325 hp (242 kW) Lycoming TIO-540 / LTIO-540 engines PA-31-350 ChieftainStretched version of the Navajo with more powerful 350-hp (261-kW) engines that rotate in opposite directions (a Lycoming TIO-540 and a Lycoming LTIO-540) to eliminate critical engine issues. PA-31P-350 MojavePiston-engined variant of the PA-31T1 Cheyenne I; 50 aircraft built.

PA-31-350T1020Also known as the T1020/T-1020; variant of the PA-31-350 Chieftain optimised for commuter airline use, with less baggage and fuel capacity and increased seating capacity (nine passengers). First flight September 25, 1981. 21 built.

PA-31T3Also known as the T1040/T-1040; turboprop-powered airliner with fuselage of the PA-31-350T1020, and wings, tail and Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-11 engines of PA-31T Cheyenne. First flight July 17, 1981. 24 built.

PA-31-353Experimental version of PA-31-350; two built


Even if both props were feathered, surely they would still be rotating in the correct sense unless stopped. Even then, the angle of incidence to the direction of travel should still be positive with regard to the normal rotation direction. A yawing moment (nose left) might account for the opposite rotational damage?

Creamie, do I get a Chocolate Frog?

Last edited by Two_dogs; 29th Jan 2014 at 10:22. Reason: Wikipedia addendum
Two_dogs is offline