To full flaps or not to full flaps!

This forum has been developed to discuss flight instruction/University and College programs.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, Right Seat Captain, lilfssister, North Shore

User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6409
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: Lurking

Re: Re:

Post by Beefitarian » Mon Mar 21, 2011 3:46 pm

nightbird wrote:
Beefitarian wrote:"There's your problem, full flap reduces the rudder's effectiveness on that plane."
When you add full flaps some of the airflow that goes to the tail is deflected (high wing), hence the effectiveness reduction in the rudder. Try doing a forward-slip without flaps and full flaps and you will notice some difference. Now when it comes to landing it will only affect if you have to use full rudder.
I did and that is pretty much how I remember it.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Pardon me, may I fly your light single?

fish4life
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1692
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:32 am

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by fish4life » Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:24 pm

keep in mind once the aircraft start to get a bit larger if you don't use full flap you run a greater risk of tail strikes... Hell we have a older 150 with the swept tail (no rear window) and if you flare too much without flaps you'll tail strike
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6409
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: Lurking

Post by Beefitarian » Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:31 pm

I've never done it but I noticed during the walk around someone's dragging the eyebolt or whatever's on the back of lots of 172s I've flown.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Pardon me, may I fly your light single?

User avatar
burhead1
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 603
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:30 pm
Location: kinda north
Contact:

Re:

Post by burhead1 » Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:45 pm

Beefitarian wrote:I've never done it but I noticed during the walk around someone's dragging the eyebolt or whatever's on the back of lots of 172s I've flown.
Shhh it was Me :)
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6409
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: Lurking

Post by Beefitarian » Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:12 pm

It's ok bur, that's why they use an eyebolt or that little aluminum angle bracket to protect the tail.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Pardon me, may I fly your light single?

Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5059
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by Big Pistons Forever » Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:36 pm

I hate "one size fits all pronouncements" of the right way to do something, like "always land with full flap". The amount of flap I use is appropriate to the aircraft and the conditions. Little airplanes with big flaps, like the single Cessna's all seem to do better with less flap in strong crosswinds. Little airplanes with small flaps like Grummans do better with full flaps under all conditions. Heavier aircraft like the Pa31, work fine with full flaps, although 400 series Cessna's can be a bit easier to handle with less than full flaps, if you have a long runway. Transport catagory aircraft are landed with the flap specified in the AFM for the runway length.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
skybaron
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 241
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:46 pm
Location: Hotel De Glace

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by skybaron » Tue Mar 22, 2011 7:28 am

Cat Driver wrote:
I've never used full flap with the beav.


You have never used full flaps on a Beaver?

Do you fly one for a living?

Try using full flap in high winds with a STOL wing and you will think harder the next time you pump them all the way down.
Using full flaps in a Beaver in high winds would be poor judgment making for sure, but the airplane was designed and approved for the flap range available, therefore it is safe to use full flap if needed.

From the DHC-2 AFM:

"Full Flap is only required for emergency landing in very restricted areas".

Then:

Minimum run landings may be necessary under EXDRAORDINARY circumstances.

"pilots familiar with the aircraft and experienced in short landing technique may perform minimum run landings by using full flap & reducing airspeed on the final approach to 65-68mph & maintaining that speed to the point of flare out"

+1 on one size doesn't fit all.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18919
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by Cat Driver » Tue Mar 22, 2011 9:04 am

From the DHC-2 AFM:

"Full Flap is only required for emergency landing in very restricted areas".

Then:

Minimum run landings may be necessary under EXDRAORDINARY circumstances.

"pilots familiar with the aircraft and experienced in short landing technique may perform minimum run landings by using full flap & reducing airspeed on the final approach to 65-68mph & maintaining that speed to the point of flare out"

+1 on one size doesn't fit all.

I am not sure what you mean by :

" +1 on one size doesn't fit all. "

The AFM clearly outlines the operating limitations therefore a pilot must be proficient in full flap landings...correct?

In other words a proficient pilot is one who can operate the airplane throughout it's complete flight envelope when and if needed.
---------- ADS -----------
  
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.

DHCdriver
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 2:56 pm

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by DHCdriver » Tue Mar 22, 2011 5:43 pm

Cat Driver wrote:
From the DHC-2 AFM:

"Full Flap is only required for emergency landing in very restricted areas".

Then:

Minimum run landings may be necessary under EXDRAORDINARY circumstances.

"pilots familiar with the aircraft and experienced in short landing technique may perform minimum run landings by using full flap & reducing airspeed on the final approach to 65-68mph & maintaining that speed to the point of flare out"

+1 on one size doesn't fit all.

I am not sure what you mean by :

" +1 on one size doesn't fit all. "

The AFM clearly outlines the operating limitations therefore a pilot must be proficient in full flap landings...correct?

In other words a proficient pilot is one who can operate the airplane throughout it's complete flight envelope when and if needed.
:P I agree 100% Cat.
---------- ADS -----------
  

ScurvyDog
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2004 8:26 am

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by ScurvyDog » Tue Mar 22, 2011 5:52 pm

I thought the question was about a PA31. It's really cool how the threads on Avcanada degrade to an arguement about flaps on a beaver!
---------- ADS -----------
  

DHCdriver
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 2:56 pm

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by DHCdriver » Tue Mar 22, 2011 6:07 pm

O.K. enough with the beav and back to the Ho people. :goodman:
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
skybaron
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 241
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:46 pm
Location: Hotel De Glace

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by skybaron » Tue Mar 22, 2011 9:11 pm

Cat Driver wrote: I am not sure what you mean by :

" +1 on one size doesn't fit all. "

The AFM clearly outlines the operating limitations therefore a pilot must be proficient in full flap landings...correct?

In other words a proficient pilot is one who can operate the airplane throughout it's complete flight envelope when and if needed.
Sigh.
I quoted the AFM to bring to your attention that a full flap landing with the DHC2 is not something normally carried out while approaching to land. Should one have experience, and be comfortable with a full flap landing? Of course! Without question.

Would I elect to use full flap on the -2 for every landing? Hell no. Too aggressive of a pitch down attitude, descent rate, and finally coupled with (most important IMHO) the time its going to take for me to raise those barn doors to takeoff setting on a balked approach / overshoot scenario. In the end, I'm guessing because of these reasons and many more, DHC decided to have a "landing flap" setting (one notch before full flapper).

Hence "one size doesn't fit all".
---------- ADS -----------
  

Hedley
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 10430
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 6:40 am
Location: CYSH
Contact:

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by Hedley » Tue Mar 22, 2011 9:28 pm

When it comes to full flap discussions, I'm surprised no one has mentioned the C150 with it's 40 flap and the later C152 with 30 flap.

Many years ago, on the odd rare occasion, I would demonstrate 60 degrees of flaps on a buck fifty. Yes, 60, no typo. Fly a circuit but don't descend on final. Maintain 500 feet until the runway numbers disappear under the nose.

Apply 40 flap, nose down, and push open both doors all the way. Seriously. Cessnas do one thing well, and that's descend. Each door might be roughly equivalent to another 10 degrees of flaps. Or not. I dunno. Anyways, with 40 flap and both doors pushed open, you can pretty well hold a vertical downline above the runway numbers and the speed won't climb much with all that junk hung out in the breeze. As you enter the flare, close both doors and land.

I think it's safe to mention, now that he's retired, that a Transport Canada Inspector taught me about 60 degrees of flaps on a buck fifty, all those decades ago :wink:



This video has absolutely nothing to do with flaps or even aviation for that matter, but I kind of like the acoustic guitar playing at the beginning.
---------- ADS -----------
  

fish4life
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1692
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:32 am

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by fish4life » Tue Mar 22, 2011 9:31 pm

The same 150 I was talking about earlier that will almost have you strike the tail if you don't use flaps was one of the early ones equipped with 40 flap... That setting is for the most part too much flap for day to day flying, if I remember correctly it was about 2100rpm to maintain 500fpm decent and 65-70kts
---------- ADS -----------
  

ScurvyDog
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2004 8:26 am

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by ScurvyDog » Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:49 am

I heard when flying the Wright Flyer, all landings are done flap less. Any one know what flaps to use the Spruce Goose?
---------- ADS -----------
  

Hedley
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 10430
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 6:40 am
Location: CYSH
Contact:

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by Hedley » Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:21 am

the Wright Flyer
You haven't even gotten started on what they did wrong:

They did not have a Certificate of Registration.
They did not have a Certificate of Airworthiness.
They did not have a current annual.
They did not have any airframe and engine logbooks.
They did not have a compass.
They did not have a pilot's certificate of any kind.
They did not have a pilot medical.
They did not hold a valid A&P/IA certificate.

Really, given all of the above, the Wright Brothers should have been thrown in jail for quite a number of years for daring to commit the Sin of Aviation (tm). Landing flapless is pretty small beer, compared to all their many other offenses.
Spruce Goose?
Oh goodie. Can I talk about what a nutjob Hughes now? Again, given what else he did (and was accused of), flaps vs no flaps would be a fart in a windstorm for Howard Hughes.
---------- ADS -----------
  

ScurvyDog
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2004 8:26 am

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by ScurvyDog » Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:29 am

Hehe I knew that would get things going hedley! Love poking the bear.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Hedley
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 10430
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 6:40 am
Location: CYSH
Contact:

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by Hedley » Wed Mar 23, 2011 6:33 am

I should do colour commentary, like that fat guy on football.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
iflyforpie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7776
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
Location: Winterfell...

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by iflyforpie » Wed Mar 23, 2011 8:06 am

fish4life wrote:The same 150 I was talking about earlier that will almost have you strike the tail if you don't use flaps was one of the early ones equipped with 40 flap... That setting is for the most part too much flap for day to day flying, if I remember correctly it was about 2100rpm to maintain 500fpm decent and 65-70kts
The problem with the 150 is, owes its design to the 140 (basic fuselage and wings) and the 170 (slotted Fowler flaps), both of which were taildraggers mainly intended to go on and off dirt or grass strips, plummeting at a steep angle over the rows of trees that would invariably be at the edge of the field.

When jets finally came around, light aircraft became more tailored to pilots who would eventually fly them. The Cherokee, with its low-wing, laminar-flow airfoil, all-moving stabilator, (relatively) high wing loading, and ornamental flaps was made perfectly for the pilot following the PAPIs in for landing. Just drive it on like you would an Ercoupe (which was incidentally designed by the same guy: Fred Weick).

In fact, if you come in too steep and a bit slow in a Cherokee, you can find yourself uncomfortably on the back of the power curve and wind up hitting obstacles or slamming down on the runway early owing to the large amount of induced drag and ineffective stabilator.

Cessnas were not designed to hold a three-degree slope with full flaps with a low power setting. Even the 206 I fly will require cruise power settings with full flap to follow the PAPIs in on the very odd occasion I am doing a straight-in to a runway that has them (but then I will usually but 20 on and 40 on short final). Four degrees (500ft at one mile) suits most single engine Cessnas much better for full flap approaches.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Geez did I say that....? Or just think it....?

PanEuropean
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 3:03 pm
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by PanEuropean » Wed Mar 23, 2011 10:01 am

skybaron wrote:I quoted the AFM to bring to your attention that a full flap landing with the DHC2 is not something normally carried out while approaching to land. Should one have experience, and be comfortable with a full flap landing? Of course! Without question.

Would I elect to use full flap on the -2 for every landing? Hell no. Too aggressive of a pitch down attitude, descent rate, and finally coupled with (most important IMHO) the time its going to take for me to raise those barn doors to takeoff setting on a balked approach / overshoot scenario. In the end, I'm guessing because of these reasons and many more, DHC decided to have a "landing flap" setting (one notch before full flapper).
I agree with Skybaron on this matter. In addition to the disadvantages that he has mentioned, there are other reasons to avoid using full flap for landing unless it is absolutely necessary. These include reduced elevator authority for pitch-up maneuvers, and an increased risk of tailplane stall in the event of any contamination being present on the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer.

Full flap decreases the stall speed of the aircraft, thus if a crosswind is present, the crosswind component as a percentage of touchdown speed (stall speed) will increase. In strong crosswinds, this may result in directional control difficulty between the flare and the time all the aircraft weight is on the wheels.

Michael
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Shiny Side Up
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5335
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
Location: Group W bench

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by Shiny Side Up » Wed Mar 23, 2011 10:22 am

flaps vs no flaps would be a fart in a windstorm for Howard Hughes
Which at one time he would have probably tried to catch and keep in a jar.

"I know! we'll go in the Spruce Goose!"

"But sir! That's just a model...

*click*

"GET. IN."


:D
---------- ADS -----------
  
We can't stop here! This is BAT country!

User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6409
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: Lurking

Post by Beefitarian » Wed Mar 23, 2011 12:22 pm

Howard Huges had 100% tiger blood he'd use flaps as required. That poser Chuck is probably running about 45% and would land full flaps just because you and the book said to.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Pardon me, may I fly your light single?

DHCdriver
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 2:56 pm

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by DHCdriver » Wed Mar 23, 2011 3:28 pm

ScurvyDog wrote:I thought the question was about a PA31. It's really cool how the threads on Avcanada degrade to an arguement about flaps on a beaver!
O.K. enough with the Spruce Goose and back to the Ho people. :smt014
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18919
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by Cat Driver » Wed Mar 23, 2011 3:50 pm

That poser Chuck is probably running about 45% and would land full flaps just because you and the book said to.
If it is me you are referring to I take that comment as an insult to my record as a pilot.

Maybe it was because I knew how to make decisions such as how much flap to use and when that was part of an over fifty year career that was accident free?
---------- ADS -----------
  
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.

Giveitago
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 10:14 am

Re: To full flaps or not to full flaps!

Post by Giveitago » Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:03 pm

Cat Driver wrote:
That poser Chuck is probably running about 45% and would land full flaps just because you and the book said to.
If it is me you are referring to I take that comment as an insult to my record as a pilot.

Maybe it was because I knew how to make decisions such as how much flap to use and when that was part of an over fifty year career that was accident free?
Ummmm......I'm gonna guess he was going for the humor part with the comment and was refering to Chuck Yeager...
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “Flight Training”