Arrrrg, 260 nm with the flaps jammed 15degrees down...

[minitour]

Since I missed the original post I am unaware of the type of airplane that had flaps stuck. More than likly a cessna 172. Anyone dare to find a fuel burn chart with flaps 15 in the AFM. Now 265 nm is quit a distance with no calculations to go off.

Fuel burn is based on the engine, altitude, and other things, but how would the flaps know any of that?

The fuel burn in a 152 (we'll just use round numbers) is 6 GPH. If you're flying around with flaps 15, all that would do is decrease your range and that of course is dependent on ground speed...but not increase your fuel burn. For example, if you're burning (round number) 10 GPH and moving at 120 knots and you've got 120 gallons usable, you can go how far? Now decrease the ground speed to 90, 60, etc...fuel burn is still 10 GPH but range is significantly decreased.

I understand what you're getting at...just want to make sure if a student pilot reads this he/she doesn't go running off looking to create charts for flaps down fuel burn...

Anyway...moving on...we're over 45, what do I win?

-mini

 

[TonyC]

Anyway...moving on...we're over 45, what do I win?

-mini

Nuthin' until the thread gets closed or deleted.



.

 

[minitour]

Nuthin' until the thread gets closed or deleted.



.

Da*n...I KNEW I should have read the fine ... er...regular sized print...

-mini

 

[FN FAL]

you might do well, simply checking the definition of one small word we call tact.

We? Who's we? Some frowsy ne'er do well types may have a different definition on tact. Like, "Officer, we dint tact no lady last night!" or "Imo tact dat on yo bill, suckah!"

 

[Uncle Sparky]

Only in Idaho..........

 

[sidewinder]

why did I read this thread?

blah blah blah