full flaps for every landing?

[Joseph II]

Maybe a dumb question...

If you land with full flaps in a large aircraft, the noise problems everyone is talking about is due to the added thrust required to keep the plane in the air correct?

At first I thought the flaps themselves generated the noise, but then I had to laugh at the idea...

 

[skyking1976]

The King Air 300/350 has not been approved to land with anything less than full down flap. This is due to the AFM having landing performance data on the flaps "down" setting only. There are stuck flap approach speeds but those are emergency procedures only.

Skyking

 

[FastCargo]

Flaps...

DC-10s at FedEx have 2 landing flap settings, 35 and 50.

I'd say about 3 of 4 landings have been at 35 flap. From what I have noticed (not being in either front seat yet), the aircraft seems to have crisper handling (less wallowing) when the flaps are at 35 vs 50.

Also, typically we only save about 5 kts going to 50 flap. We usually only use it on either Captains discretion (usually if landing distance is close) or on DC-10-10s, if the landing weight will exceed 363,500 lbs.

My .02

FastCargo

 

[RockyMnt1]

Flaps

Joseph II,

It is my understanding that landing approaches in transport category aircraft are all "power on" approaches. Turbine engines just don't respond to power changes as rapidly as piston engines. There is a time lag between the movement of power levers and turbine engine response. So there are few, if any, idle thrust jet landings (except emergencies).

I am out of my element here so correct me if I am wrong. I'll let the experts take over from here...

 

[350DRIVER]

Rely on your "specific" POH for the exact flap settings and suggestions. IF a flight manual or POH does not require FULL flaps on each and every landing then if I am the PF then it is my call and depending on the landing weight and winds I will decide from there. "Suggestions" are just that nothing more and nothing less however a requirement per the flight manual is not up for debate and you should follow it. The 3 & 350 are a must for the obvious reasons. Contrary to popular belief the B100 with the Garrett's I have found are easier to grease on with full flaps in high wind situations as well as crosswinds versus landing with partial flaps.

3 5 0

 

[Salty Dog]

Great thread as I have a similar question about light a/c. When first learning to fly 150/172 I always used full flaps. With a new instructor he sugguested only half flaps as the landing roll in the 172 is still under 1000 feet yet initial climb performance in the event of a go-around is vastly superior.

Just curious what others have been told or seen as a best practice. Book just says as required.

 

[bobbysamd]

172 landings

Full flap landings during a crosswind in a 172 are a challenge, at best. I always had better luck with half flaps or no flaps at all.

I remember the POH for the 172 in which I learned was coy about the subject. "Use the minimum flap setting for the runway length," or something like that. Maybe I should mention that the 172 I was flying was an older model with the ASI calibrated in mph and provided a POH that looked more like a pamphlet than the POHs of today.

That same 172 had 40-degrees of flaps. So, if you used full flaps in that airplane for a normal landing you were really spooling up the engine. 30-degrees or even 20-degrees were better.

As RockyMnt1 points out, you must differentiate between a 172 and a transport-category airplane. The techniques are bound to be different.