Counter rotating multi engine

[ToiletDuck]

I'm waiting on my checkride to get my Com-multi and I was wondering what other aircrafter were counter rotating props. I've learned on a seminole and the school use to have a senica. My father and I were wanting to look into getting a twin and I'd prefer to have counter rotating props on it. So what other aircraft are there? Also is there really a noticable difference between a regular and counter rotating prop planes once in flight?
Duck

 

[LAXSaabdude]

I'm waiting on my checkride to get my Com-multi and I was wondering what other aircrafter were counter rotating props. I've learned on a seminole and the school use to have a senica. My father and I were wanting to look into getting a twin and I'd prefer to have counter rotating props on it. So what other aircraft are there? Also is there really a noticable difference between a regular and counter rotating prop planes once in flight?
Duck

Depends on what size twin you want. Seminole and Seneca are both counter-rotating, but if you want something bigger, the Navajo CR and Chieftain are counter rotating. Pretty easy to fly, carry a good load, but costly.

LAXSaabdude.

 

[bigD]

The Duchess is counter-rotating as well.

I instructed in a Grumman Cougar for a couple hundred hours, and it's not counter-rotating. Honestly, I didn't notice any real difference between shutting the left down or the right. But with the Cougar's puny 160hp motors, it's not too surprising.

 

[gern_blanston]

Some Twin Comanches are have counter-rotating props.
Lowers Vmc substantially over the non-counter-rotating Twinkies. Neat little airplane.

 

[minitour]

The Duchess is counter-rotating as well.

wait....the Duchess is a twin???

I just thought it was a bigger 172RG

-mini

 

[erj-145mech]

And then there is the Aerostar 700P (PA-60)

 

[dogman]

Or even the P-38, except they're contra-rotating

 

[JimG]

Other than for training purposes...does anyone really know why Beech made the Dutchess, or why anyone would want one?

I got my multi in a Seminole....same question there.

I'm not trying to be a smart ass, but my old 1960 M-35 would out-run, and probably out-carry (useful load) both of those.

And probably glide almost as far dead-stick than the others do with one engine at high altitudes where I live/fly.

 

[ToiletDuck]

Yea same question here. That Seminole's CG is way forward too. With 100lbs of lead in the back it still sits right on the line. With full 110 gal of fuel I think it's still a little out of CG.

 

[Mason]

Other than for training purposes...does anyone really know why Beech made the Dutchess, or why anyone would want one?

I got my multi in a Seminole....same question there.

I'm not trying to be a smart ass, but my old 1960 M-35 would out-run, and probably out-carry (useful load) both of those.

And probably glide almost as far dead-stick than the others do with one engine at high altitudes where I live/fly.

Yep, for training purposes

 

[KigAir]

Does a MU2 have counter rotating props?

 

[WMUSIGPI]

Nope but like all other Garrets (J31, SA227,B100 ect) both props spin opposite to the "normal" clockwise spin.

 

[SkyWestCRJPilot]

The straight Navajo (PA31-310) doesn't have counter-rotating props but the Navajo Chieftain (PA31-350) does. The most noticeable difference is you don't need lots of right rudder on climbout in the Chieftain like you do in the Navajo. The other big difference is the obvious safety of not having a "critical" engine. Both are equally "critical" though. The drawback is that your maintenance may be more expensive because you have more different parts for the engines instead of the same exact engine with the same parts.

 

[gern_blanston]

Absolutely right. BOTH engines on a piston twin are critical. After an engine failure on a normally-aspirated light twin, what you've got is the same situtation you've got after an engine failure in a '182: You're in a glider. a Baron or Twinkie'll glide quite a ways on one, but you're not going too far.

 

[erj-145mech]

The straight Navajo (PA31-310) doesn't have counter-rotating props but the Navajo Chieftain (PA31-350) does. The most noticeable difference is you don't need lots of right rudder on climbout in the Chieftain like you do in the Navajo. The other big difference is the obvious safety of not having a "critical" engine. Both are equally "critical" though. The drawback is that your maintenance may be more expensive because you have more different parts for the engines instead of the same exact engine with the same parts.

The only parts that are different are the prop/spinner, the crank, and the cam. The straight Navajo, there was a 300 (non-turbo) and the 310 (turbo) were conventional rotations. The Navajo CR was counter rotation with L/TIO-540-F2BD's at 325 hp and the short fuselage and the Chieftan with the 350 HP -J2BD engines and the long fuselage.

This doesn't take into effect the Colemill Panther converstion which is popular with the straight PA 31's.