Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, I WAS Birddog
-
- Rank 7
- Posts: 711
- Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 8:03 am
Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
I am looking for performance numbers for Approach flap landings in the Beech 200, specifically Vref speeds. The AFM only has Full Flap and Zero Flap ref speeds and charts so technically landing at Approach Flap makes me a "test pilot".
Does anyone know of a supplement, etc to give me this data? I ask because I am looking to maintain a stabilized approach ie not selecting flap below 500 ft AGL and Flaps Approach would be perfect for an ILS/LPV at minimums.
Full Flap works on approach but in the event of a go-around, the Beech 200's flap selection system has caused problems in training, especially with a engine failure in the missed. ie Crews only moving the Flap selector to Approach when "Flaps Approach" is called in the missed. A 200 pilot would know what happens when you move the flap selector from Full to Approach ie nothing but "Crickets" chirping
Thoughts?
Does anyone know of a supplement, etc to give me this data? I ask because I am looking to maintain a stabilized approach ie not selecting flap below 500 ft AGL and Flaps Approach would be perfect for an ILS/LPV at minimums.
Full Flap works on approach but in the event of a go-around, the Beech 200's flap selection system has caused problems in training, especially with a engine failure in the missed. ie Crews only moving the Flap selector to Approach when "Flaps Approach" is called in the missed. A 200 pilot would know what happens when you move the flap selector from Full to Approach ie nothing but "Crickets" chirping
Thoughts?
Re: Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
Vref can be calculated by looking up the stall speed table, and multiplying values for the given weight by 1.3. In general, the flaps Approach Vref speeds were about 2 kts faster than the full flap Vref speeds.
I do not know of any performance tables for Approach Flap landings, but they will be longer than full flap, and shorter than flapless. So if you have enough LDA for a flapless landing, you're good to go with approach flaps.
I am a firm believer in not changing the flap config below 500 ft, and can attest to the King Air's handling with approach flaps. I feel that this is the best, and safest option, for those low IFR days.
I do not know of any performance tables for Approach Flap landings, but they will be longer than full flap, and shorter than flapless. So if you have enough LDA for a flapless landing, you're good to go with approach flaps.
I am a firm believer in not changing the flap config below 500 ft, and can attest to the King Air's handling with approach flaps. I feel that this is the best, and safest option, for those low IFR days.
Re: Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
I would do the following:
1. Find the relationship between Full Flap approach speed and full flap stall speed in KCAS.
2. Find the relationship between Zero Flap approach speed and zero flap stall speed KCAS.
3. Knowing these two relationships (I would imagine they are about the same) calculate Approach Flap approach speed from approach flap stall speeds.
1. Find the relationship between Full Flap approach speed and full flap stall speed in KCAS.
2. Find the relationship between Zero Flap approach speed and zero flap stall speed KCAS.
3. Knowing these two relationships (I would imagine they are about the same) calculate Approach Flap approach speed from approach flap stall speeds.
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2014 12:01 am
Re: Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
I wouldn't worry too much about it!!! Most ppl can't cross the fence at Vref. Some even touch down at Vref ++ And then they bitch about the brakes poor performance...
That's in a jet too!!!
That's in a jet too!!!
Re: Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
The Beech 350 does not have Vref speeds for approach flaps either. The idea is to either land flapless or with full flaps. Does the AFM suggest applying full flaps at the FAF on a two engine approach and is the 2 engines operating missed approach procedure predicated on commencing the miss with full flaps? I think it does.
Remember that the Be20 (90 and 100 also) are not required to demonstrate a One Engine Inoperative missed approach during certification flight testing so there are the published procedures to be followed but no performance charts available to determine how much room you need. The suggested procedure is to clean the airplane up and accelerate to Vy while still descending. Therefore, do everything you possibly can do to eliminate the requirement for a OEI miss.
Doeing approach to stall exercises during training and PPC's, I had the same flap selection problem in a Beech 100, (same system). The answer we got (from TC) was to simply go from full flaps to flaps up during recovery. Remember the above comments about a OEI miss. A stall is an uncontrolled maneuver whereas the Approach to a Stall is a controlled maneuver.
with full flaps, modern thinking is to break the stall first, then clean up the airplane and climb back to the original altitude. there is no requirement to be able to approach a stall and recover without a loss of altitude.
Suggested reading is a very careful digestion of the AFM and CARS 523 for Normal Category airplanes and/or USA Part 23 for Normal Category airplanes.
Remember that the Be20 (90 and 100 also) are not required to demonstrate a One Engine Inoperative missed approach during certification flight testing so there are the published procedures to be followed but no performance charts available to determine how much room you need. The suggested procedure is to clean the airplane up and accelerate to Vy while still descending. Therefore, do everything you possibly can do to eliminate the requirement for a OEI miss.
Doeing approach to stall exercises during training and PPC's, I had the same flap selection problem in a Beech 100, (same system). The answer we got (from TC) was to simply go from full flaps to flaps up during recovery. Remember the above comments about a OEI miss. A stall is an uncontrolled maneuver whereas the Approach to a Stall is a controlled maneuver.
with full flaps, modern thinking is to break the stall first, then clean up the airplane and climb back to the original altitude. there is no requirement to be able to approach a stall and recover without a loss of altitude.
Suggested reading is a very careful digestion of the AFM and CARS 523 for Normal Category airplanes and/or USA Part 23 for Normal Category airplanes.
The average pilot, despite the somewhat swaggering exterior, is very much capable of such feelings as love, affection, intimacy and caring.
These feelings just don't involve anyone else.
These feelings just don't involve anyone else.
Re: Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
My opinion only:
If you look at the AFM for single engine approach and landing, it says to set flaps approach and then fly 10 kts above normal landing approach speed (which is beechcraft speak for Vref if you look at the charted speeds for landing approach speed which is normally Vref based on flaps down). Flaps go down when landing assured. I take this as guidance from the manufacturer for a recommended ref speed for flaps approach (both two engine and single engine). I only assume landing is assured when my wheels roll on the runway (so flaps can stay at approach for landing). The only thing it doesn't say is runway length required with flaps approach. This would make a normal flaps approach ref speed approximately 110 kts vs 130 kts for flaps up.
You see this in a number of other aircraft that say if there is an engine failure on approach, go flaps approach, and add 5 or 10kts to the Vref speed.
Apex
If you look at the AFM for single engine approach and landing, it says to set flaps approach and then fly 10 kts above normal landing approach speed (which is beechcraft speak for Vref if you look at the charted speeds for landing approach speed which is normally Vref based on flaps down). Flaps go down when landing assured. I take this as guidance from the manufacturer for a recommended ref speed for flaps approach (both two engine and single engine). I only assume landing is assured when my wheels roll on the runway (so flaps can stay at approach for landing). The only thing it doesn't say is runway length required with flaps approach. This would make a normal flaps approach ref speed approximately 110 kts vs 130 kts for flaps up.
You see this in a number of other aircraft that say if there is an engine failure on approach, go flaps approach, and add 5 or 10kts to the Vref speed.
Apex
Re: Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
The 200 AFM calls flaps full for approach, in the event of a go-around it is direct to flaps up. There is no stop at flaps approach, hence why Beech never added a notch to stop or an activation with for the flaps at flaps approach on the way up.
We use to fly ours in the manner you mentioned, however after referencing the AFM and questioning the method it mentions we went and started to try it. Minimal difference in aircraft performance, as the 200 is quite powerful.
Cheers,
We use to fly ours in the manner you mentioned, however after referencing the AFM and questioning the method it mentions we went and started to try it. Minimal difference in aircraft performance, as the 200 is quite powerful.
Cheers,
Re: Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
I just follow the AFM and use full flaps for approach, 0 for the overshoot. Never had a problem doing this.
-
- Rank 5
- Posts: 302
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 8:22 am
- Location: Prairies
Re: Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
The AFM for the B200 doesn't call for flaps full for approach, it calls for flaps full in the normal landing checklist and yes you can stop the flaps at approach from full in the B200. It is not like older 200's where you had to go all the way up and then bring it back to approach when the indicator was at flaps approach.flyinhigh wrote:The 200 AFM calls flaps full for approach, in the event of a go-around it is direct to flaps up. There is no stop at flaps approach, hence why Beech never added a notch to stop or an activation with for the flaps at flaps approach on the way up.
We use to fly ours in the manner you mentioned, however after referencing the AFM and questioning the method it mentions we went and started to try it. Minimal difference in aircraft performance, as the 200 is quite powerful.
Cheers,
Re: Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
As a side note having this very discussion with Flight Safety in relation to "stabilized approaches" ie) breaking out at 200' and instead of reconfiguring the aircraft maintain flaps appr to landing.
I was advised that the NTSB actually lands flap approach using the stall speed * 1.3 and then for performance data calculations they use flaps up values. This is the official recommendation for doing this.
Beech clearly states either flaps full or flaps up for landing and when talking to a Beech test pilot he said the 200 is not actually considered an aircraft suitable for Stabilized Approach in regards to flap reconfiguration at short final.
Now we all know a proactive good pilot should have no problem smoothly trimming the plane when extending the flaps causing no balloon and smooth transition to full flap.
Just some food for thought.
I was advised that the NTSB actually lands flap approach using the stall speed * 1.3 and then for performance data calculations they use flaps up values. This is the official recommendation for doing this.
Beech clearly states either flaps full or flaps up for landing and when talking to a Beech test pilot he said the 200 is not actually considered an aircraft suitable for Stabilized Approach in regards to flap reconfiguration at short final.
Now we all know a proactive good pilot should have no problem smoothly trimming the plane when extending the flaps causing no balloon and smooth transition to full flap.
Just some food for thought.
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1311
- Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2014 11:14 pm
- Location: The Gulag Archipelago
Re: Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
Or, you can do what I do. If everything's stable down thr GP, just land the puppy with whatever flap you have hanging out. This is not rocket science that requires hours of pouring over charts and graphs for the sake of 3 knots IAS one way or the other. I have never met anybody who can maintain plus or minus 3 knots anyway. The added bonus....less flap to suck up if you miss. Not everything is difficult. Why make it so?
Illya
Illya
Wish I didn't know now, what I didn't know then.
-
- Rank 5
- Posts: 302
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 8:22 am
- Location: Prairies
Re: Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
It is very easy to maintain +/- 3 kts in the 200, you just have to get to know the power settings that work for your plane! Also I have never had a problem putting flaps full at 200ft, with a little forward pressure, with no ballooning if you are flying the proper profile. 130 or 120kts (whichever your company ops prefer) to 500ft AGL and then slowly pulling the power off to target Vref over the fence. That is not saying you can't land flaps approach considering most places you are landing on an ILS that has a runway of at least 5000ft.
Re: Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
Flightsafety says the US Military produced numbers for flap approach landings, perhaps there is a US Military flying forum you may be able to get them from?
Re: Beech 200 Approach Flap landings
I put together a table of Vref speeds for various weights, using the B200 POH. The Flaps Approach speeds are about half-way between the Flaps Up and Flaps Down numbers.