PA31 Take-Off and Landing Performance
Thread Starter
PA31 Take-Off and Landing Performance
Can somebody with a PA31 Flight Manual readily accessible please tell me the TODR/LDR for a PA 31 with 2 x LYCOMING TIO-540-A2C and HARTZELL HC-E3YR-2ATF/FC8468-6R props.
MAUW, and at one intermediate weight; standard ISA day, Sea Level, Nil Wind, height to/from 50 or 100 ft.
If it's easier and you can scan/email the graphs, then please PM me.
Many thanks in advance.
MAUW, and at one intermediate weight; standard ISA day, Sea Level, Nil Wind, height to/from 50 or 100 ft.
If it's easier and you can scan/email the graphs, then please PM me.
Many thanks in advance.
Not enough information. What version of the PA31 is that? Don't know about you, but I don't bother memorising the engine suffixes or prop model numbers. No point to it. On the rare occasion I need the information I go to the manuals. Especially as the aircraft may have optional equipment or even an STC to use something else entirely.
There's quite a bit of variation between PA31s, from the original non-turbo PA31-300 to the PA31-310 (a Navajo with 310 HP and turbocharged), the PA31-325 (A Navajo with 325 HP turbo engines) to the PA31-350 (Navajo Chieftain with 350 HP turbo & a 2' fuselage extension). The factory options also affected things eg with or without wing lockers or Cleveland heavy duty brakes. On top of that are third party STCs to modify them with larger engines (for the -310 & -325 variants), four bladed props instead of three bladed, increased GW with winglets, fences and/or vortex generators.
In the last four years I've flown 5 different PA31s - and every one of them was different. One was a -310 with a VG kit but no lockers, another a -325 with lockers, VGs, -350 engines, winglets, fences and 4 bladed props. Three Chieftains were different with variations in VGs and the like.
The late model -325 manual I have has data for short field & normal take-off & landing. I'll give you approximates because because I'm too lazy to sharpen my pencil
. All to or from 50' ISA, SL, nil wind, paved level dry rwy.
Take off MTOW & mid-wt
Normal 6500 lb: 2500'
Normal 5500 lb: 2100'
Short 6500 lb: 2250'
Short 5500 lb: 1850'
Landing MLW & mid-wt & standard brakes
Normal 6500 lb: 2350'
Normal 5500 lb: 2000'
Short 6500 lb: 1750'
Short 5500 lb: 1600'
BTW, I checked the details in this manual. It has the same prop & hub that you give but a different engine suffix.
There's quite a bit of variation between PA31s, from the original non-turbo PA31-300 to the PA31-310 (a Navajo with 310 HP and turbocharged), the PA31-325 (A Navajo with 325 HP turbo engines) to the PA31-350 (Navajo Chieftain with 350 HP turbo & a 2' fuselage extension). The factory options also affected things eg with or without wing lockers or Cleveland heavy duty brakes. On top of that are third party STCs to modify them with larger engines (for the -310 & -325 variants), four bladed props instead of three bladed, increased GW with winglets, fences and/or vortex generators.
In the last four years I've flown 5 different PA31s - and every one of them was different. One was a -310 with a VG kit but no lockers, another a -325 with lockers, VGs, -350 engines, winglets, fences and 4 bladed props. Three Chieftains were different with variations in VGs and the like.
The late model -325 manual I have has data for short field & normal take-off & landing. I'll give you approximates because because I'm too lazy to sharpen my pencil
. All to or from 50' ISA, SL, nil wind, paved level dry rwy.Take off MTOW & mid-wt
Normal 6500 lb: 2500'
Normal 5500 lb: 2100'
Short 6500 lb: 2250'
Short 5500 lb: 1850'
Landing MLW & mid-wt & standard brakes
Normal 6500 lb: 2350'
Normal 5500 lb: 2000'
Short 6500 lb: 1750'
Short 5500 lb: 1600'
BTW, I checked the details in this manual. It has the same prop & hub that you give but a different engine suffix.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't remember much about 'em....
It's been over 35 years since I've flown a Navajo....both the straight
Navajo with the 310 HP engines and the Chieftan with the 350 hp engines.
But, I do recall the thing will not fly very well on one engine, unless you're
relatively light, and you're close to sea level. (Turbo charging helps, but it's not a cure-all.)
And, as I recall, it has the flight characteristic of a divergent fugoid on its longitudinal axis. Trying to remember the drama between the test pilot and Piper, when they were certifying the aircraft.
Not to push Cessna, but most Cessna twins will fly on one engine, albeit poorly. I flew the 310, 340, 401, 414. Again, this is pushing 40 years ago.
However....exceptions..... There's a thread currently here on PPrune about 'the runway behind you'. I remember taking off from El Paso one hot summer day....loaded to near max gross takeoff weight. This was in a C-414. About the time I reached for the gear handle, one engine quit. Thank God I took off from the end of a long runway....the plane was not flying well at all. (I'm guessing the density altitude was well over 8000 feet.) So, I dropped the gear, landed straight ahead on the runway, and got to a stop with maybe 1000 feet of runway remaining.
Many of these twins do not fly on one engine. The rest do a poor job. And, most, if not all, will not accelerate from lift-off speed to Vyse with
the gear down (on one engine). So, the reality is: Your "V1" in these airplanes (in practice) is when you have Vyse, an established rate-of-climb, and your hand off the throttles going for the gear handle. Agreed....not FAA standard, but in practice, it's what you have to do.
Fly safe,
PantLoad
Navajo with the 310 HP engines and the Chieftan with the 350 hp engines.
But, I do recall the thing will not fly very well on one engine, unless you're
relatively light, and you're close to sea level. (Turbo charging helps, but it's not a cure-all.)
And, as I recall, it has the flight characteristic of a divergent fugoid on its longitudinal axis. Trying to remember the drama between the test pilot and Piper, when they were certifying the aircraft.
Not to push Cessna, but most Cessna twins will fly on one engine, albeit poorly. I flew the 310, 340, 401, 414. Again, this is pushing 40 years ago.
However....exceptions..... There's a thread currently here on PPrune about 'the runway behind you'. I remember taking off from El Paso one hot summer day....loaded to near max gross takeoff weight. This was in a C-414. About the time I reached for the gear handle, one engine quit. Thank God I took off from the end of a long runway....the plane was not flying well at all. (I'm guessing the density altitude was well over 8000 feet.) So, I dropped the gear, landed straight ahead on the runway, and got to a stop with maybe 1000 feet of runway remaining.
Many of these twins do not fly on one engine. The rest do a poor job. And, most, if not all, will not accelerate from lift-off speed to Vyse with
the gear down (on one engine). So, the reality is: Your "V1" in these airplanes (in practice) is when you have Vyse, an established rate-of-climb, and your hand off the throttles going for the gear handle. Agreed....not FAA standard, but in practice, it's what you have to do.
Fly safe,
PantLoad
Add at least 25 % to any number you get from the PA 31 POH. A test pilot with a brand new airplane and perfect conditions could make book numbers, but there is no way you could reliably due it in the field.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you've got the vortex generators installed on the wings, view with a suspicious eye the improved performance that they supposedly bring. Flights at the allowed higher weight have very marginal performance, especially in the case of an engine out.
But, I do recall the thing will not fly very well on one engine, unless you're
relatively light, and you're close to sea level. (Turbo charging helps, but it's not a cure-all.)
relatively light, and you're close to sea level. (Turbo charging helps, but it's not a cure-all.)
The TSIO-540 has a density controller on the manifold. As you climb higher the density controller senses less pressure in the air mass and allows more 'boost' from the turbo charger into the inlet manifold of the engine allowing greater performance at higher altitude. This is why you can maintain 31" all the way to your cruising altitude in a PA31 whereas a non turbo charged engine will be well below 20" by 10,000.
As a rule of thumb you need 1000m at 40 degrees, MTOW, 5000 pressure height with a 5knot tail wind for take off and about 800m for landing.
When I flew these aircraft I would have a figure for worst case scenario. If the conditions were better than the day and I was at MTOW or less then I was good to go.
And yes the are very poor on one engine. Definitely not for the stupid or inexperienced!
What a bugger. I was at the office today & did performance calcs. for a -310. Even wrote the figures down. Can anyone tell what I did with the bloody bit of paper? Damned if I can find it now.
Anyway, it was for a TIO-540-A. No graphs for short vs normal, however had separate take-off graphs for with & without wing lockers. Figures weren't much different to the ones I gave previously - within a couple of hundred feet. If I find the bit of paper with the information I'll add the figures here.
Anyway, it was for a TIO-540-A. No graphs for short vs normal, however had separate take-off graphs for with & without wing lockers. Figures weren't much different to the ones I gave previously - within a couple of hundred feet. If I find the bit of paper with the information I'll add the figures here.
Last edited by Tinstaafl; 2nd Sep 2009 at 17:28.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just like to add a quick advice: don't consider the wingtip mod available (a rarity, but just in case...). It's purely for looks. Performance could actually be made worst with the added weight.
Thread Starter
Tinstaaafl:
If you do find it, please post! I was going into the CAA library at The Belgrano today, and had arranged to view the Manual; but unfortunately got held up so have had to delay until Tuesday. A heads-up over the weekend would be useful, TVM.
If you do find it, please post! I was going into the CAA library at The Belgrano today, and had arranged to view the Manual; but unfortunately got held up so have had to delay until Tuesday. A heads-up over the weekend would be useful, TVM.
Thread Starter
I got all the info yesterday from the CAA Flight Manual section at CAA Gatwick, who will make manuals available on (prior) request, in the Library.
Thanks to you all for your input.
A bit of VFM for all those Licence etc fees we pay!
Thanks to you all for your input.
A bit of VFM for all those Licence etc fees we pay!
