those are composite props. On a metal prop you'd get the tips bending on a prop strike.
Also, those props are feathered.
If you look at this C130J, when the engines are off, they're feathered.
Looking at the Saab 2000, it uses the same engine/prop family, these engines/props have a feather pump.
On shutting down the AE2100 engines, you move the prop lever to feather. This is because the feather pump is driven off the engine accessory. As part of normal procedures, you feather the engines for shutdown so they dont windmill etc.
The other scenario is you'd feather in the case of an engine failure.
Both engines have their props feathered. I think this is far more consistent with an aircraft being parked, and then shut down, then eventually bombed.
As i said above, if the aircraft had crashed, firstly, the hull would have had to disintegrate, then the engines would have had to stay attached to the wing, and then strike the ground.
But as i said above, these are composite props. They dont bend like a metal prop upon strike. You can see the prop blades have either shattered off or perhaps melted and bended? It is not however consistent with a strike.
Here is a saab 2000, same engine and prop. Left engine shows the tips just shattered, not bent.
Shattered prop, consistent with the one in the pic too.
What you are referring to, a metal prop strike. But also notice the pitch of the props is far different.
Basically, in summary, its more consistent with it being bombed/blown up rather than crash landing and tips bending. The prop position/damage is far more consistent with the former.
Also, C130 props rotate ACW when viewed from the front. So the damage once again is not consistent with what you suggest.
