Full flaps

[Dazzler]

At what point in the traffic pattern do you teach your primary students to extend full flaps on landing?

"When the runway is made" is how I've heard it described sometimes, but how do you teach a student when that point is?

Others teach it as soon as you roll out on final approach.

How about factoring in wind/gusts? Do you still teach full flaps, or land with partial flaps?

[Roger, Roger]

Turning final in both the airplanes I teach in.

Some say the 172 lands better in a strong xwind with less flaps. I guess it lands faster, so you have more control authority.

DA-42 does great with full flaps in any wind (i've taken it up to about a 25 knot xwind component) though approach flaps are normal coming out of an instrument approach.

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by Dazzler

At what point in the traffic pattern do you teach your primary students to extend full flaps on landing?

When turning final.

"When the runway is made" is how I've heard it described sometimes, but how do you teach a student when that point is?

Needless disburbance of a stabilized approach, IMO. If you lose an engine, raise the flaps.

How about factoring in wind/gusts? Do you still teach full flaps, or land with partial flaps?

Gusts are irrelevant with regard to flaps or partial flaps. Only real issue is rudder authority, which flaps will decrease at the performance limits. But even with 40 degree flaps on a C172, you can handle about 30 knots direct crosswind. I see no reason to decrease the flap setting until the wind is stronger than that. Even then, you can increase rudder authority with a faster approach or keeping a trickle of power in.

So I essentially teach full flaps on every landing, which ensures the aircraft handles the same way every time.

[c172captain]

For the definition of when the runway is made, I teach my students that the runway is made when you are at the point that you can continue the approach and land safely on the runway with no power.

[Roger, Roger]

Originally Posted by c172captain

For the definition of when the runway is made, I teach my students that the runway is made when you are at the point that you can continue the approach and land safely on the runway with no power.

If you still have power in at that point, you're generally aiming too far down the runway. Unless you're aiming for a further turnoff.

[minitour]

Originally Posted by tgrayson

Needless disburbance of a stabilized approach, IMO. If you lose an engine, raise the flaps.

How does that hot screw with a "stabilized approach"?

-mini

[SteveC]

Originally Posted by minitour

How does that hot screw with a "stabilized approach"?

-mini

Just losing an engine will make sure that "stabilized" is no longer a factor. I think he can go ahead and raise the flaps then.

[ILS37R]

Generally speaking, full flaps on final.

For primary student in 172, for example, if they have the plane trimmed correctly with an appropriate power setting, the first notch on downwind puts them at 80-85 kts, second notch on base for 70-75 and final notch on final for about 60-65ish, no other inputs needed, really.

That said, it depends somewhat on the aircraft and what the approach is looking like. With a DA-20 or DA-40, I teach to extend LDG flaps on final, but the way those planes glide, sometimes full flaps are necessary on base (the -20 and -40 only have three settings, including retracted). I've also flown aircraft where the first couple notches are ho-hum, but the final notch is an express elevator to the ground and, in that case, I'd teach to hold off a little on the full setting.

I suppose, to me, it's sort of like IFR Alternate filing requirements:

Always extend full flaps on final, unless...

[escapepilot]

Flaps?? What are flaps?? I don't have those on the Citabria.

I guess I'm going to have to go against the norm on this one. Full flaps only on short field. By definition, flaps are used to increase the angle of descent w/o increasing airspeed - like is needed when approaching over an obstacle.

Also, it depends on the situation. I frequently flew out of a 1200' field with obstacles at the far end. The normal approach there was 20 degrees. If you had to go around, 30 degrees of flaps would put you in the trees.

If I use flaps, I try to keep it around 20 degrees unless more is necessary. I don't think there really is a one size fits all answer as to when to apply them.

[wjmiller3]

Originally Posted by escapepilot

Flaps?? What are flaps?? I don't have those on the Citabria.

I guess I'm going to have to go against the norm on this one. Full flaps only on short field. By definition, flaps are used to increase the angle of descent w/o increasing airspeed - like is needed when approaching over an obstacle.

Also, it depends on the situation. I frequently flew out of a 1200' field with obstacles at the far end. The normal approach there was 20 degrees. If you had to go around, 30 degrees of flaps would put you in the trees.

If I use flaps, I try to keep it around 20 degrees unless more is necessary. I don't think there really is a one size fits all answer as to when to apply them.

Just because the plane has X amount of flaps, doesn't mean you you need to use them just because the lever will go that far. One of my pet peeves I guess (along with many others), to see a 172 coming in to a 9000ft runway with 40 degrees of flaps down.....WHY???? Too much drag for no good reason what so ever, going too slow, burning too much fuel, and have to run the engine at cruise power just to maintain 65kts of airspeed. And the best part, you ask them why they do it like that, and the only answer is "thats the way I was taught".

I land Cessna's at 20 degrees unless it is a true short/soft field landing. In higher winds, 10 degrees. I think the plane just flies better that way. Look at the SOP for larger aircraft, most all of them do not land full flaps unless certain conditions exist.

Planes like Diamond/Cirrus, with only two flap settings I can somewhat understand. But a freakin Cessna? Come on.....

[ILS37R]

Originally Posted by wjmiller3

One of my pet peeves I guess (along with many others), to see a 172 coming in to a 9000ft runway with 40 degrees of flaps down.....WHY???? Too much drag for no good reason what so ever, going too slow, burning too much fuel, and have to run the engine at cruise power just to maintain 65kts of airspeed. And the best part, you ask them why they do it like that, and the only answer is "thats the way I was taught".

It's so we can make the first turn-off and enjoy a leisurely two mile taxi to the ramp.

Duh.

[wjmiller3]

Originally Posted by ILS37R

It's so we can make the first turn-off and enjoy a leisurely two mile taxi to the ramp.

Duh.

LOL.. Why didn't I think of that.....

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by minitour

How does that hot screw with a "stabilized approach"?

Your stabilized approach is already screwed up by the engine failure.

[Douglas]

: When the runway is made.
I hate when somebody turns final, adds flaps and then needs to add power.

"Two wrongs do make a right?!?"

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by escapepilot

The normal approach there was 20 degrees. If you had to go around, 30 degrees of flaps would put you in the trees.

Not in a properly executed go-around.

[minitour]

Originally Posted by tgrayson

Your stabilized approach is already screwed up by the engine failure.

So let's make it worse by screwing with configuration when we should be doing something else?

-mini

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by wjmiller3

172 coming in to a 9000ft runway with 40 degrees of flaps down.....WHY????

Discipline.

A guy who flies into a 9,000 ft runway has trouble landing on a 3,000 ft runway because he's adopted sloppy habits that the long runway forgives. He flies too fast, too shallow, and can't put the airplane down in a predictable place. When faced with a real short-field, he may have trouble flaring the airplane with full flaps.

If you land on every runway like it's only 1,000 ft long, then you can land almost anywhere in the country with no change in technique.

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by minitour

So let's make it worse by screwing with configuration when we should be doing something else?

The very best thing you can do for yourself is to increase your glide range so that you can possibly make the runway. Raising the flaps accomplishes that.

[Roger, Roger]

Originally Posted by wjmiller3

I land Cessna's at 20 degrees unless it is a true short/soft field landing. In higher winds, 10 degrees. I think the plane just flies better that way. Look at the SOP for larger aircraft, most all of them do not land full flaps unless certain conditions exist.

Planes like Diamond/Cirrus, with only two flap settings I can somewhat understand. But a freakin Cessna? Come on.....

Um. Gotta disagree with you on that one. The 172 lands real nice with 30 degrees.

[minitour]

Originally Posted by tgrayson

The very best thing you can do for yourself is to increase your glide range so that you can possibly make the runway. Raising the flaps accomplishes that.

...which is why you shouldn't be putting them down until you can make the runway power off, in the first place.

-mini

[wjmiller3]

Originally Posted by tgrayson

Discipline.

A guy who flies into a 9,000 ft runway has trouble landing on a 3,000 ft runway because he's adopted sloppy habits that the long runway forgives. He flies too fast, too shallow, and can't put the airplane down in a predictable place. When faced with a real short-field, he may have trouble flaring the airplane with full flaps.

If you land on every runway like it's only 1,000 ft long, then you can land almost anywhere in the country with no change in technique.

Not saying you should never practice to stay proficient, but if we use the above train of thought, then EVERY landing should be a power off 180 short approach. Cause you never know when you might have an engine failure and you might have trouble getting to the runway because your "sloppy".

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by minitour

...which is why you shouldn't be putting them down until you can make the runway power off, in the first place.

So you make 100,000 unstabilized approaches in order to prevent one? Silly. I've seen student pilots pull the flaps up to make the runway and it just isn't a big deal. This needs to be a tool in the pilot's toolbox.

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by wjmiller3

then EVERY landing should be a power off 180 short approach.

Some people do exactly that.

[Roger, Roger]

Originally Posted by wjmiller3

Not saying you should never practice to stay proficient, but if we use the above train of thought, then EVERY landing should be a power off 180 short approach. Cause you never know when you might have an engine failure and you might have trouble getting to the runway because your "sloppy".

Most light trainers fly really nice like that. Not how I do it, but it would work pretty well.

Get in something like a Lance or Arrow and from what I hear it wouldn't work so well.

Fly the plane you're in. When you're in a different plane, fly it the way that works best.

[wjmiller3]

Originally Posted by Roger, Roger

Most light trainers fly really nice like that. Not how I do it, but it would work pretty well.

Get in something like a Lance or Arrow and from what I hear it wouldn't work so well.

Fly the plane you're in. When you're in a different plane, fly it the way that works best.

We have an Arrow, somehow it transforms from a fun plane to fly, to a cinderblock when you pull the power back...