Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Question about B737 flap40 landing

Wikiposts
Search
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Question about B737 flap40 landing

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 4th Jan 2008, 03:12
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: China
Age: 46
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question about B737 flap40 landing

An instructor said that when 737 land with flap40, touchdown speed is just vref, there will be winglets stall occur, which cause horizontal control unsteadily.Is that right? I cannot find any depiction through the doc.
Any one have some idea? thanks.
bradlee737 is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2008, 03:56
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I haven't flown the 737NG, but on the older series the approach min speed is Vref+5, why would it be otherwise?
TopBunk is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2008, 04:24
  #3 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: China
Age: 46
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
yes, appoach min speed is vref+5, vref is for touchdown(wind calm).
bradlee737 is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2008, 07:42
  #4 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Actually I believe 'touchdown speed' is nominally Vref-5 although it is rare to see that flown correctly. Vref is the 'target speed' at 50' I believe?

bradlee - I am fairly new to winglets on the NG but I know nothing of this claim and I don't think that the winglets contribution to directional stability is significant. Perhaps CaptainSandL can help here? There is nothing I have seen from Boeing about it.
BOAC is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2008, 08:44
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Vref is the 'target speed' at 50' I believe?
I think that is for certification reasons only. In other words the test pilot aims for that as part of the certification process.

For day to day operations the +5 is bled off approaching touch-down (defining "approaching" is a matter of many personal opinions). Touch down is acceptable at minus five from Vref. In practice it is extremely rare to see this as many pilots flare at anything from 5 to 15 knots faster than Vref due lazy flying techniques in calm wind and long runways.
Tee Emm is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2008, 10:04
  #6 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Correct, as I said.... but the point being that the NG does not fall out of the sky at Vref-5 and presumably does not suffer from this legendary 'winglet stall'? If it does, then Boeing do not know about it.
BOAC is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2008, 10:32
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: On The Golf Course - On the River..!!
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Boeing state that approach speed of Vref 30+5 or Vref 40+5 is flown in order that full manoever protection is assured at Flap 15 (go-around) configuration.

Stall speeds are therefore considerably less than Vref 40-5 or Vref 30-5 (although I can't lay my hands on the factor above Vs for Flap 30 or 40 configuration at the appropriate flap Vref speed).

Touchdown technique is to effect touchdown at a speed between Vref and Vref-5 as previously mentioned (power being slowly retarded during the roundout/flare) - note that on a -800(NG) tailstrike will occur at around +13 deg pitch (oleos extended) or +11 deg pitch (oleos compressed).


Cheers

ScottyD
ScottyDawg is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2008, 10:34
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I agree with "Bradlee737", Vref40 is the speed to aim for at 50', touching down just a 'smigin' under.

Anyway, the normal B737NG landing flap is 30.

Cheers, FD
Flight Detent is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2008, 11:02
  #9 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Folks - we are slowly drifting further away from the original question! Has anyone else heard of this 'winglet stall' - whatever that might be?
BOAC is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2008, 11:55
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I fly the NG with winglets and to be honest I DID notice a horizontal instability when near VREF. I don't know why but i had a scary ldg once in germany when i had a big wing drop very close to the ground with only a 10kt crosswind and no gust at all. Maybe your instructor knows something we don't.
Lucky Angel is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2008, 12:53
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
....but the point being that the NG does not fall out of the sky at Vref-5 and presumably does not suffer from this legendary 'winglet stall'....
You won't necessarily "fall out of the sky" because a relatively small part of the wing has stalled.

This is NOT B737-specific, but in a general sense, it's entirely possible that at the higher AOAs associated with the final stage of the approach/flare, the winglet is sufficiently off-design that there is a flow breakdown, or stall; if the winglet has been "tuned" for maximum efficiency in cruise, then the conditions at the tip may be very different. I certainly have heard of similar behaviour on other types (winglet stall, that is, not the control issues mentioned).

Personally, I would be surprised if there was a significant handling effect, as
(1) winglet retrofits have generally been accomplished without having to introduce handling limitations, and often on the basis of no change to handling (not perf, otherwise why bother!)
(2) if there were an effect, there would be numerous issues relating to asymmetric versus symmetric stalls, and I can't again recall of limitations which might be consistent with such a concern (xwind limit changes, etc.)

Again, personally, I'd be more inclined to attribute changes in control characteristics in the final stages of the approach to increasing ground effects, but that's just an opinion.
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.