flaps

Get a real A&P to check out the flap situation. If its
not the breaker it could be the flap motor (one of the
reasons I do like manual flaps).

As far as why you didn't notice that your flaps were
not working... well... that is disturbing. I notice
*every* little sound, motion, vibration or whatever in
my airplane.

I hardly ever land with full flaps unless its a short
field.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 10:43:10 +0000, kontiki wrote:

I hardly ever land with full flaps unless its a short field.

Why? Unless I've some reason to do otherwise, I'll make every landing as
slow and short (and precisely where I want to touch down) as possible.
It's all good practice, and the slow part is being gentle on the airplane.

I'll often only drop the full flaps on very short final, as I dislike
dragging it in. But they're all the way down when I'm landing.

Of course, now that I think on it, I've only 30 degrees of flaps.

- Andrew

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 10:43:10 +0000, kontiki wrote:

I hardly ever land with full flaps unless its a short field.

Why? Unless I've some reason to do otherwise, I'll make every landing as
slow and short (and precisely where I want to touch down) as possible.
It's all good practice, and the slow part is being gentle on the airplane.

I'll often only drop the full flaps on very short final, as I dislike
dragging it in. But they're all the way down when I'm landing.

Of course, now that I think on it, I've only 30 degrees of flaps.

- Andrew


What I don't understand is how the original poster didn't notice there was
no pitch change or re-trim required following application of the missing
flaps. It is almost 2nd nature to reach for the trim wheel right after
selecting flaps in a Cessna so why didn't the poster notice that he didn't
need to retrim?


--
Jim Carter
Rogers, Arkansas

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 04:21:15 +0000, Jim Carter wrote:

It is almost 2nd nature to reach for the trim wheel right after
selecting flaps in a Cessna so why didn't the poster notice that he didn't
need to retrim?

Perhaps that - the "second nature" part - is exactly why it didn't
register.

I just did a flight review in our R182. Discussing gear use, the CFI
mentioned that during some training he did of someone once upon a time
there was some extended flight during which the gear horn was sounding (a
simulated engine failure). When it finally came time to land, the pilot
never put down the gear; he'd completely tuned out the sound.

Our brains are weird.

The CFI called a go around on that landing. The student went to pull the
gear up for the go around and only then realized that it was still up.
Despite the horn still doing it's bleat bleat.

- Andrew

"kontiki" wrote in message ...
Get a real A&P to check out the flap situation. If its
not the breaker it could be the flap motor (one of the
reasons I do like manual flaps).

As far as why you didn't notice that your flaps were
not working... well... that is disturbing. I notice
*every* little sound, motion, vibration or whatever in
my airplane.

I hardly ever land with full flaps unless its a short
field.

Why are you beating up the plane?

I was taught and used to teach that any landing without full flaps was an 'emergency' landing. The airplane has a
landing configuration and the performance in the book is based on that configuration...

It is good to practice emergency landings every so often.

Blueskies wrote:


Why are you beating up the plane?

I was taught and used to teach that any landing without full flaps was an 'emergency' landing. The airplane has a
landing configuration and the performance in the book is based on that configuration...

It is good to practice emergency landings every so often.



Beating up my plane? Have you ever flown a Comanche? All you
need is 20 degrees for smooth and graceful landings in a PA24.
If I'm going into a really short field (2000 feet?) then I'll
use full flaps.

All the 182's I've ever flown only need 20 degrees of flap
for nice landings too. Go full flaps and its like an anvil
with a parachute. The 182 is a great short field airplane.

"kontiki" wrote in message news
Blueskies wrote:


Why are you beating up the plane?

I was taught and used to teach that any landing without full flaps was an 'emergency' landing. The airplane has a
landing configuration and the performance in the book is based on that configuration...

It is good to practice emergency landings every so often.

Beating up my plane? Have you ever flown a Comanche? All you
need is 20 degrees for smooth and graceful landings in a PA24.
If I'm going into a really short field (2000 feet?) then I'll
use full flaps.

All the 182's I've ever flown only need 20 degrees of flap
for nice landings too. Go full flaps and its like an anvil
with a parachute. The 182 is a great short field airplane.

So, what is the expected landing performance for the Comanche, landing with 20° flaps?

Tires and brakes at least are taking more than they need to. Wheel bearings too. Struts and oleos thumping over the
expansion joints, etc...

Always landed the PA32-300 with full flaps, nice and slow. And that was in HI with screwy cross winds pretty much always
blowing 15-20 knots.

kontiki wrote:
Blueskies wrote:


Why are you beating up the plane?

I was taught and used to teach that any landing without full flaps was
an 'emergency' landing. The airplane has a landing configuration and
the performance in the book is based on that configuration...

It is good to practice emergency landings every so often.


Beating up my plane? Have you ever flown a Comanche? All you
need is 20 degrees for smooth and graceful landings in a PA24.
If I'm going into a really short field (2000 feet?) then I'll
use full flaps.

All the 182's I've ever flown only need 20 degrees of flap
for nice landings too. Go full flaps and its like an anvil
with a parachute. The 182 is a great short field airplane.

I can make nice landings with 0 or 40 degrees of flaps. The flaps don't
land the airplane.

A 182 with full flaps still glides just fine. The Arrow I now fly which
has a 3-blade prop is much worse than my 182 in the glide ratio
department. I can barely make a 180 power-off landing with it. You
have to turn base as soon as you cut power abeam the landing spot or
you'll never make it!

Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote:

The Arrow I now fly which has a 3-blade prop is much worse than my 182 in
the glide ratio department. I can barely make a 180 power-off landing with
it. You have to turn base as soon as you cut power abeam the landing spot
or you'll never make it!

As a CFI giving me a checkout in an Arrow put it: "You can cut the power and
glide a Cessna in, but a Piper comes down like dropped car keys."

--
Dan
T-182T at BFM

Dan Luke wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote:

The Arrow I now fly which has a 3-blade prop is much worse than my 182 in
the glide ratio department. I can barely make a 180 power-off landing with
it. You have to turn base as soon as you cut power abeam the landing spot
or you'll never make it!

As a CFI giving me a checkout in an Arrow put it: "You can cut the power and
glide a Cessna in, but a Piper comes down like dropped car keys."


The Arrow wasn't all that bad with the original two-blade prop. But
when the hub failed inspection requiring prop replacement, a decision
was made to go with the 3-blade as it was cheaper (go figure). What a
mistake. The 3-blade vibrates much more, doesn't perform any better on
takeoff, climb or cruise, and performs MUCH worse during glide.

Matt