Navajos

Vlo was 125, I hate that I still know that...
We've got three birds with the older flap system with the much lower flap and gear speeds. Total PITA when coming into DEN. Fortunately I have to have a cheat sheet to look up the speeds because I fly those infrequently.
 
We've got three birds with the older flap system with the much lower flap and gear speeds. Total PITA when coming into DEN. Fortunately I have to have a cheat sheet to look up the speeds because I fly those infrequently.

How's the thing do in high Denalt airports? You know ANC area, I'm flying the thing around at sea-level for most take offs.
 
Makes rated power to a higher alt than the pos 99 does.
Lol, this made me smile, thanks.

To be fair, the 99 is a great airplane but I like flying the Navajo a bit more. It's more interesting to fly than the 99 ( Boris Badenov ).

I did a takeoff today where I was leaving an airport at 50' MSL and cruising at about 1500' and my hands were essentially constantly in motion from the time I pulled the gear up to the time I leveled off.
 
How's the thing do in high Denalt airports? You know ANC area, I'm flying the thing around at sea-level for most take offs.
I think the highest density altitude I've seen is 9,000 or so and I used most of a 6,000 runway, slightly downhill. The company take off power setting is 40" but I regularly get a few more inches than that. Most of our Navajo runs go easy of here so I regularly operate out of a 2,500 and a 3,500 MSL runway and have never had a problem.

I'd love to get one down to sea level in Alaska conditions though.
 
I think the highest density altitude I've seen is 9,000 or so and I used most of a 6,000 runway, slightly downhill. The company take off power setting is 40" but I regularly get a few more inches than that. Most of our Navajo runs go easy of here so I regularly operate out of a 2,500 and a 3,500 MSL runway and have never had a problem.

I'd love to get one down to sea level in Alaska conditions though.
lol, what? Takeoff power is throttles full. Anything less is just straight retarded. It's not a 402.

It's actually dumber than landing with the props back at 2300rpm. And that's one of the dumbest policies I've seen in a LONG time.
 
lol, what? Takeoff power is throttles full. Anything less is just straight retarded. It's not a 402.

It's actually dumber than landing with the props back at 2300rpm. And that's one of the dumbest policies I've seen in a LONG time.

Landing with the props back was something I encountered in the 99 - when asked why, they said, "noise abatement." So I never did it (oops ;) ), in the Navajo, I push the props the rest of the way up in the navajo when I'm off the governor, on approach I go to 2400, but that's per company policy, I'd prefer to have them full forward FAF inbound, but that's just me.
 
Landing with the props back was something I encountered in the 99 - when asked why, they said, "noise abatement." So I never did it (oops ;) ), in the Navajo, I push the props the rest of the way up in the navajo when I'm off the governor, on approach I go to 2400, but that's per company policy, I'd prefer to have them full forward FAF inbound, but that's just me.
You know you miss the Big Six....24/2400 till inside the cut, then a steady power reduction so you're power idle and top of the white arc over the river, activate the insta-flaps and go prop forward, land, exit Charlie.
 
You know you miss the Big Six....24/2400 till inside the cut, then a steady power reduction so you're power idle and top of the white arc over the river, activate the insta-flaps and go prop forward, land, exit Charlie.

24 square until inside the cut? Whooohhheeee, I think you guys are tougher on the engines than I was ;-) But yeah. I do miss the Scare-a-kee. The 206 is arguably less useful there in SE, but I prefer it just in general. If I could own a "big bore" single, I'd own a 206.
 
lol, what? Takeoff power is throttles full. Anything less is just straight retarded. It's not a 402.

It's actually dumber than landing with the props back at 2300rpm. And that's one of the dumbest policies I've seen in a LONG time.
In fact the Lycoming documentation insists on full power for takeoff. Something about an additional fuel valve that opens at full throttle.

Sent via teletype
 
lol, what? Takeoff power is throttles full. Anything less is just straight retarded. It's not a 402.

It's actually dumber than landing with the props back at 2300rpm. And that's one of the dumbest policies I've seen in a LONG time.
I fly it like the company tells me. At the same time, if I need it, I got it ,
 
24 square until inside the cut? Whooohhheeee, I think you guys are tougher on the engines than I was ;-) But yeah. I do miss the Scare-a-kee. The 206 is arguably less useful there in SE, but I prefer it just in general. If I could own a "big bore" single, I'd own a 206.
Well, I guess really, that's only in the one slower plane in the fleet...the other aircraft the power usually comes back a mite sooner.
 
I did a takeoff today where I was leaving an airport at 50' MSL and cruising at about 1500' and my hands were essentially constantly in motion from the time I pulled the gear up to the time I leveled off.

So what? It's like that all the time in the Arrow
 
So what? It's like that all the time in the Arrow
Do my before takeoff flow
Set Takeoff Power
Positive Rate, Gear up
100kias and obstacles cleared, flaps up
Blue line - power coming back to 40x2400
500' - Power coming back to climb power (this is somewhere between 35 and 40"Hg. depending on the load)
1000' - Right Pump off - fuel pressure's good, Left Pump off - fuel pressure's good, Icing equipment is verified as required, autopilot on, verify it's programmed properly, also it's a little chilly, I click the heater on here, 500' to go, it's winter, so I start closing the cowl flaps here
1500' - Bring the power slowly back in a couple of stages to keep from making such a huge power adjustment (33x2300x26GPH, then finally 30x2200x20GPH our company power setting), switch to the outboard tanks for cruise flight, run my checklist.

I was climbing out at about 1000' to 1200' per minute so this took about 90 seconds at most from rotation to go. Constantly busy - which is exactly the way I like it. If you're doing things methodically so that, "ok, when I click the boost pumps off there should be a slight drop in fuel pressure, but the engine shouldn't flame out" this sort of thing takes time to do. So "no" it's not a big deal, but it's a much higher workload than you'd see in say, a KingAir. In the 1900 for example:

Before takeoff flow
Set Takeoff Power
Positive Rate, Gear up
400' - Flaps Up, Bleeds On, Yawdamp On, Synchrophaser On
1500' - Level Off, Cruise Power Cruise Check.

Granted you're to 1500' a little faster, but not by a lot.
 
Well, I guess really, that's only in the one slower plane in the fleet...the other aircraft the power usually comes back a mite sooner.

I recall doing about 2" per minute in the PA32, and around 1" per minute in the 206 and having almost no engine troubles.
 
Well there's things that are well.. um ok. And then there's things that are actually unsafe. This is one of them.
Well, all the Navajo drivers I know at the company are still sucking wind, we haven't had any major engines failures since I've been here, the fuel flow still pegs out on take off, and my paychecks are on time.

Like I said, I do it like they tell me and use it all if I have to.
 
Ya, we never had any engine failures due to anything but stupid pilot, but if you're going to do a reduced power takeoff in a light twin.... I mean I really can't get my head around that. I'd flat refuse that on safety grounds. It's not that it's hard on the engine, it's that you're spending too much time getting altitude that you NEED in this airplane in the event of an engine failure. At max gross on one engine, the SE SS is still not much above sea level.
Another operator of pa31's has a policy of landing with the props back at 2300 rpms. In the words of southpark... dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb.
 
Ya, we never had any engine failures due to anything but stupid pilot, but if you're going to do a reduced power takeoff in a light twin.... I mean I really can't get my head around that. I'd flat refuse that on safety grounds. It's not that it's hard on the engine, it's that you're spending too much time getting altitude that you NEED in this airplane in the event of an engine failure. At max gross on one engine, the SE SS is still not much above sea level.
Another operator of pa31's has a policy of landing with the props back at 2300 rpms. In the words of southpark... dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb.

http://www.risingup.com/planespecs/info/airplane372.shtml
Piper PA-31-350 Chieftain - Performance Data

Horsepower: 350 Gross Weight: 7000 lbs
Top Speed: 230 kts Empty Weight: 4221 lbs
Cruise Speed: 211 kts Fuel Capacity: 182 gal
Stall Speed (dirty): 74 kts Range: 883 nm
blank.gif

Takeoff Landing
Ground Roll: 1350 ft Ground Roll 1045 ft
Over 50 ft obstacle: 2510 ft Over 50 ft obstacle: 1880 ft
blank.gif

Rate Of Climb: 1120 fpm Rate of Climb (One Engine): 230 fpm
Ceiling: 24000 ft Ceiling (One Engine): 13700 ft

I think in Denver things would be spooky - especially with an old plane, and with the Vg kit, I think SE Service Ceiling would be below ground in Denver (I'll check the STC next time I think about it) but theoretically, you should be able to climb out a little bit. Anecdotal evidence suggests that it is possible to survive a V1 cut in the thing, I met a guy in Nome a few years ago who told me that he lost one about a second after rotation in Fairbanks in the summer (read 80 degrees or so) and he said he was sinking rapidly with the gear and flaps out, with the gear and flaps up he was sinking at 50 fpm, and with the dead cowl closed and the good one open he was climbing at about 150fpm - yes he said the cowls made that much of a difference. So... I dunno, he also had the high gross weight kit on and was "loaded up" in his words.

My opinion? Takeoff with max power in all twins (and pistons for that matter) unless you have performance and the performance data available to take of with less - it lessons the steps you have to take after takeoff to get max power out of the engine. In the Navajo, if you lose an engine after you've already selected the gear up or are in the process of it, and catastrophically lose an engine there, let's say at the "barrier speed," then you're looking at having to go back over to the throttles and push the power the rest of the way up before going over to the flaps to retract them (if you use them) or starting the feathering process, because you're gonna need all the power you can get.

As for landing with the props back at 2300RPM, well, here they want us to have the props at 2400RPM for landing, I do, but I go a step further, once I get off of the governors (at about 90 - 85 KIAS) then I reach and push the props the rest of the way up to get max power if I need it in case a fourwheeler or a truck drives on the runway or whatever.
 
Back
Top