Flaps 10 glide during engine failure
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 519
Likes: 16
From: Luton
Conversion rules from BGA certificates to EASA licences are not yet published because they need EASA approval. With a Silver C it should not be a big issue. There should be more information available by Easter.
Joined: Mar 2019
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
From: Auckland
The right answer is to fly as the flight manual states. I expect that it specifies a flaps up glide. When your glide transitions from a glide for distance to the approach for landing, obviously some, hopefully all flaps will be extended.
Early extension of flaps will increase lift, which you do not need ("cause you got no thrust"), and will increase drag, which you really don't want then. Consider that increased drag will increase your descent angle. That might be what you want, but be careful what you ask for, you might get it. Remember that chances of survival are inversely proportional to angle of arrival. When you develop that steep descent angle, you'll want to convert it into a very shallow one before landing. This requires energy, which you do not have from the engine, so its you inertia only. With a lot of drag that goes away fast.
When I do familiarizing flying with owners in their STOL modified aircraft I would demonstrate, and train not to glide at speeds slower, or with more drag, than the flight manual states. You can do it, but slower means less inertia, and when you go to flare, there;s nothing left, and you stall and drop in unable to arrest your rate of descent.
You'll find many cases where flight can be accomplished at slower speeds or different configurations than the flight manual states. The plane might do it, but you may have unwittingly given up a reserve of safety (inertia) which did not even think about.
Yes, safely learn and understand, but ultimately you'll find the flight manual way is the best way - I've done a lot of flight testing, and that's what I have found....
Early extension of flaps will increase lift, which you do not need ("cause you got no thrust"), and will increase drag, which you really don't want then. Consider that increased drag will increase your descent angle. That might be what you want, but be careful what you ask for, you might get it. Remember that chances of survival are inversely proportional to angle of arrival. When you develop that steep descent angle, you'll want to convert it into a very shallow one before landing. This requires energy, which you do not have from the engine, so its you inertia only. With a lot of drag that goes away fast.
When I do familiarizing flying with owners in their STOL modified aircraft I would demonstrate, and train not to glide at speeds slower, or with more drag, than the flight manual states. You can do it, but slower means less inertia, and when you go to flare, there;s nothing left, and you stall and drop in unable to arrest your rate of descent.
You'll find many cases where flight can be accomplished at slower speeds or different configurations than the flight manual states. The plane might do it, but you may have unwittingly given up a reserve of safety (inertia) which did not even think about.
Yes, safely learn and understand, but ultimately you'll find the flight manual way is the best way - I've done a lot of flight testing, and that's what I have found....
Joined: Mar 2019
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
From: Auckland
The right answer is to fly as the flight manual states. I expect that it specifies a flaps up glide. When your glide transitions from a glide for distance to the approach for landing, obviously some, hopefully all flaps will be extended.
Early extension of flaps will increase lift, which you do not need ("cause you got no thrust"), and will increase drag, which you really don't want then. Consider that increased drag will increase your descent angle. That might be what you want, but be careful what you ask for, you might get it. Remember that chances of survival are inversely proportional to angle of arrival. When you develop that steep descent angle, you'll want to convert it into a very shallow one before landing. This requires energy, which you do not have from the engine, so its you inertia only. With a lot of drag that goes away fast.
When I do familiarizing flying with owners in their STOL modified aircraft I would demonstrate, and train not to glide at speeds slower, or with more drag, than the flight manual states. You can do it, but slower means less inertia, and when you go to flare, there;s nothing left, and you stall and drop in unable to arrest your rate of descent.
You'll find many cases where flight can be accomplished at slower speeds or different configurations than the flight manual states. The plane might do it, but you may have unwittingly given up a reserve of safety (inertia) which did not even think about.
Yes, safely learn and understand, but ultimately you'll find the flight manual way is the best way - I've done a lot of flight testing, and that's what I have found....
Early extension of flaps will increase lift, which you do not need ("cause you got no thrust"), and will increase drag, which you really don't want then. Consider that increased drag will increase your descent angle. That might be what you want, but be careful what you ask for, you might get it. Remember that chances of survival are inversely proportional to angle of arrival. When you develop that steep descent angle, you'll want to convert it into a very shallow one before landing. This requires energy, which you do not have from the engine, so its you inertia only. With a lot of drag that goes away fast.
When I do familiarizing flying with owners in their STOL modified aircraft I would demonstrate, and train not to glide at speeds slower, or with more drag, than the flight manual states. You can do it, but slower means less inertia, and when you go to flare, there;s nothing left, and you stall and drop in unable to arrest your rate of descent.
You'll find many cases where flight can be accomplished at slower speeds or different configurations than the flight manual states. The plane might do it, but you may have unwittingly given up a reserve of safety (inertia) which did not even think about.
Yes, safely learn and understand, but ultimately you'll find the flight manual way is the best way - I've done a lot of flight testing, and that's what I have found....
I might try approaching with a lower nose attitude, higher airspeed, to see if that helps. But based on what I found do not use flaps
Fleet Manager
Joined: Aug 2006
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 7,090
Likes: 2,952
From: Ontario, Canada
Big Pistons is still a valued participant here, I chat with him from time to time, so we'll look forward to a contribution he might make here. He is certainly someone I listen to!
Joined: Sep 2001
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 2,787
Likes: 208
From: Toronto
Some decades ago reactivating my CPL in a 172, we did forced landings off the circuit. You can flare power off with 40 flaps provided you have enough airspeed — best learned with an instructor experienced with the technique.
I am not your insurance company.
I am not your insurance company.
Fleet Manager
Joined: Aug 2006
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 7,090
Likes: 2,952
From: Ontario, Canada
You can flare power off with 40 flaps provided you have enough airspeed
Joined: Apr 2009
Aviation Qualifications: Non-Aircrew
Posts: 1,601
Likes: 704
From: DM33
If you are in the habit of starting flare at 30 ft and floating several hundred feet down the runway you may think that a full flap flare with engine idle is impossible without excess airspeed.
If you are used to making minimum energy landings I would not expect you to have any problem making a flare with full flap and engine idle. If you do, check the CG position and adjust it further aft as required to increase elevator authority. A case of drinking water at the aft end of the baggage compartment does wonders for the flare characteristics of some types. A jump master moving to the back wall of a C-182 jump plane is just as beneficial.
My current ride has 46 degree max flaps and they are very effective. I don't have a problem with idle power flare to 3 point landing but the flare starts quite close to the ground and the approach is a lot steeper than 3 degrees.
Know your aircraft and, if you don't know it well enough yet, move incrementally closer to the corners. You may be surprised what it can do.
If you are used to making minimum energy landings I would not expect you to have any problem making a flare with full flap and engine idle. If you do, check the CG position and adjust it further aft as required to increase elevator authority. A case of drinking water at the aft end of the baggage compartment does wonders for the flare characteristics of some types. A jump master moving to the back wall of a C-182 jump plane is just as beneficial.
My current ride has 46 degree max flaps and they are very effective. I don't have a problem with idle power flare to 3 point landing but the flare starts quite close to the ground and the approach is a lot steeper than 3 degrees.
Know your aircraft and, if you don't know it well enough yet, move incrementally closer to the corners. You may be surprised what it can do.
Joined: Apr 2009
Aviation Qualifications: Non-Aircrew
Posts: 1,601
Likes: 704
From: DM33
Didn't have a good number to quote so I ran a test point today. Full flap, throttle idle, airmass FPA about 7.5 deg at my typical approach speed of 45 kt. Approach pitch attitude 2-3 degrees and 3 point attitude on level terrain is 12.5 deg so about 10 deg pitch change in flare.
Yes, it's a lot different from the typical flat flare done by many nose dragger pilots at the end of a dragged in approach.
Yes, it's a lot different from the typical flat flare done by many nose dragger pilots at the end of a dragged in approach.
Last edited by EXDAC; 25th February 2026 at 14:54.
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 475
Likes: 7
From: UK
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 9
Likes: 3
From: UK
The above is very much the personal view of a glider pilot, and whilst I used to also have a PPL was fortunate to never have an actual engine failure- but that is how I would have handled one!
Last edited by Old Coder; 26th February 2026 at 16:00. Reason: making corrections
Fleet Manager
Joined: Aug 2006
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 7,090
Likes: 2,952
From: Ontario, Canada
One of the things I train is that I would rather do a decent job of making a poorer close forced landing site, than a poor job of reaching a better one. If you have any need to stretch a glide, that means that prior to the "event" you chose to fly over territory which was lees suitable for a forced landing. Sure, we have all done it, when our confidence about the airplane was good. And, I have certainly remained over suitable areas the whole time when I was not confident about the engine! Remember, if you have to actually force land power off, you'd rather misjudge and go off the far end at 20 MPH, than misjudge, and crash short at 65 MPH! I want my students to choose a good enough close spot, and make a good job of getting into it. So, for me, "best glide" will be a brief period, usually right after the failure, while you diagnose, and choose your [nearby] spot. After that, though we won't waste a glide, I'm happy to see an approach set up which includes a lesser flap setting and a sideslip to get it. You can always undo a slidslip to recover more glide, you cannot retract flaps to do it! So, for me, any flap use for a power off forced approach will be very late on the approach, but then, as much as possible to shorten and slow my ground roll.
I have had four power loss forced landings over the years. I have been very lucky to have never damaged a plane doing it. But, I have been right up to the far fence a couple of times!
I have had four power loss forced landings over the years. I have been very lucky to have never damaged a plane doing it. But, I have been right up to the far fence a couple of times!
Joined: Jul 2016
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 226
Likes: 25
From: Broughton, UK
Most of the replies so far have concentrated on achieving maximum range during the glide. But one day I found myself 4 miles from the airfield at 8000ft, so needed to reduce altitude quickly. The plan was Full 40 degree flaps and fly just below 80 knots by pushing the nose down. It worked very well maybe 3000 fpm+ descent rate.
Also for all those glider pilots amongst us, Full Airbrakes and side slip usually gives a glide slope of over 45 degrees.
Hope this helps, in case you ever have too much altitude.
Also for all those glider pilots amongst us, Full Airbrakes and side slip usually gives a glide slope of over 45 degrees.
Hope this helps, in case you ever have too much altitude.
Fleet Manager
Joined: Aug 2006
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 7,090
Likes: 2,952
From: Ontario, Canada
Yes, you can do a full flaps Vfe descent. That wouldn't (hopefully) be in the context of an engine failure, but it can be done. I wouldn't do a 3000 FPM descent with passengers aboard, they'll probably decide to not fly with you again! Just remember that if you do that, and then actually have an engine failure while you're doing that, with full flaps already out, you've configured the airplane for the least good glide if you needed to. Setting up a base to final to flare with full flaps extended will take an extra layer of skill!
For years I fly jumpers, where a similarly fast descent was desired, I preferred to carry some power (to prevent shock cooling) and orbit down flaps up at a faster speed, A bit of G in a turn (if you're by yourself) will increase your rate of descent. That way the airplane is already set up in a good configuration for a glide if there is an engine problem.
And, for "normal" flying, a Vnav calculation....
I was right seat in the Twin Otter doing a ferry flight in 1985, and doing the radio work. We were number umpteen to land behind a long line of jets in Cairo. We were at 6000 feet approaching the airport. My Captain was a retired deHavilland test pilot. Cairo tower called me, and said that they had a break in the approaching jet traffic, if we could be down and clear in two minutes, we were cleared to land right now. I asked my Captain... As he reduced power, and smiled, he said "Yes". I accepted the landing clearance. The power smoothly came back to idle (PT-6's don't care about shock cooling), the plane slowed, the flaps went down as we continued to slow, and the nose went down, Then I felt the "braking" force, as he pulled the power levers into Beta range, and we rode some reverse all the way down to a nice landing - we were down and clear, from 6000 feet in less than the two minutes offered - not normal flying!
For years I fly jumpers, where a similarly fast descent was desired, I preferred to carry some power (to prevent shock cooling) and orbit down flaps up at a faster speed, A bit of G in a turn (if you're by yourself) will increase your rate of descent. That way the airplane is already set up in a good configuration for a glide if there is an engine problem.
And, for "normal" flying, a Vnav calculation....
I was right seat in the Twin Otter doing a ferry flight in 1985, and doing the radio work. We were number umpteen to land behind a long line of jets in Cairo. We were at 6000 feet approaching the airport. My Captain was a retired deHavilland test pilot. Cairo tower called me, and said that they had a break in the approaching jet traffic, if we could be down and clear in two minutes, we were cleared to land right now. I asked my Captain... As he reduced power, and smiled, he said "Yes". I accepted the landing clearance. The power smoothly came back to idle (PT-6's don't care about shock cooling), the plane slowed, the flaps went down as we continued to slow, and the nose went down, Then I felt the "braking" force, as he pulled the power levers into Beta range, and we rode some reverse all the way down to a nice landing - we were down and clear, from 6000 feet in less than the two minutes offered - not normal flying!
