WingFlaps wrote:
On Jan 4, 6:17 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:
C J Campbell wrote:
On 2008-01-01 14:08:09 -0800, Dudley Henriques said:
Blueskies wrote:
"B A R R Y" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 15:00:44 -0600, Michael Ash
wrote:
Isn't there somewhat vague a section on emergency procedures which
would
allow the examiner to say, "your flaps have failed, now go land"?
My examiner called the no flap landing an emergency procedure.
Exactly!
Then every landing made in a Piper Cub, Colt, or a Decathlon is an
emergency? :-))
Oh, I don't know. Maybe I am just unlucky, but I have had several flap
failures in a Cessna 172. It never seemed like an emergency to me -- at
most, an annoyance.
One thing I do when the flaps fail is check to see if my radios are
still working, just to make sure I don't have a power failure.
We sat and watched two guys land a transient 172 one day each one
pushing out the door on his side of the airplane on final.
We asked them why they were doing this and they said the flap motor was
broken and they wanted to fly that day. They were using the doors as a
speed brake. :-))


Sounds like a reasonable idea -if one thinks an extra 10k landing
speed is going to be a BIG problem for the field. On the other hand,
I'd be worried anout the disrupted airflow over the elevator. What do
you think?

Cheers

This was the gist of the discussion at the flight office that afternoon.
The doors are indeed inline and this could indeed cause a problem.
Needless to say we mentioned it to them before they left to go home.
I think we "sold them" when we pointed out that both runways...ours and
theirs....were more than long enough for no flap landings without all
the additional fuss associated with the doors :-))


--
Dudley Henriques