Flap 3 landings
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: In OY-VKH
Age: 31
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all A320 isn't a plane you normaly should be worried about when it comes
to tailstrike. Bigger bus models may have that ''problem'' but only when takeoff or landing at farely high speeds.
Flaps increase doesn't make that the chanses of tailstrike getting higher, just to increase
the lift coefficient - and thereby possible to land at lower speeds.
In this case when Flaps 3 landings are not so often used as Flaps full you may just keep a higher speed to not stall it. But of course airplanes at higher speeds is much moore controlable than the planes att low speeds, be careful to not overpull it.
to tailstrike. Bigger bus models may have that ''problem'' but only when takeoff or landing at farely high speeds.
Flaps increase doesn't make that the chanses of tailstrike getting higher, just to increase
the lift coefficient - and thereby possible to land at lower speeds.
In this case when Flaps 3 landings are not so often used as Flaps full you may just keep a higher speed to not stall it. But of course airplanes at higher speeds is much moore controlable than the planes att low speeds, be careful to not overpull it.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: SE England
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Robini, totally disagree.
Flap3 on the 320 makes a HUGE difference to the pitch attitude at landing. The Vref increase is about 4 knots, but you will have about 7ish degrees nose up as opposed to 4 in flap full. Personally don't find it as stable on the approach, but company SOP is F3 unless F full is required.
The 320 IS much more of an issue in the flare with F3 than the 321 in F3. Don't try to hold it off. I find closing the thrust levers at 25R and a tiny little flare about 15R will see you right. If you use a Flap full flare with F3 you will float along at 8 feet!
Flap3 on the 320 makes a HUGE difference to the pitch attitude at landing. The Vref increase is about 4 knots, but you will have about 7ish degrees nose up as opposed to 4 in flap full. Personally don't find it as stable on the approach, but company SOP is F3 unless F full is required.
The 320 IS much more of an issue in the flare with F3 than the 321 in F3. Don't try to hold it off. I find closing the thrust levers at 25R and a tiny little flare about 15R will see you right. If you use a Flap full flare with F3 you will float along at 8 feet!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Miami
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robini:
Refrain from such ignorant posts, read and learn from experienced pilots. Anyone that has been even close to an A320 series A/C knows you got everything backwards; have a little respect for yourself and stick to what you really know, if any in aviation from your posts.
G
Refrain from such ignorant posts, read and learn from experienced pilots. Anyone that has been even close to an A320 series A/C knows you got everything backwards; have a little respect for yourself and stick to what you really know, if any in aviation from your posts.
G
what sort of fuel savings do you realize? Thanks
I fly the 319 and to be honest, my technique isn't much different whether using Flap 3 or full. The only difference I find is the slightly higher nose attitude and the fact the aeroplane feels a little more "slippery", so to speak.
In terms of flare, I still close the thrust levers around the same point, i.e. around the "30" auto call-out (plus or minus a bit depending on head/tailwind conditions of the day); for Flap 3 I find I flare ever so slightly later and obviously a little bit less due to the attitude already being higher. Other than that, I find there's little difference between the two.
I can't really speak for the A320 or 321 but with the higher weight I suspect there might be a bit of a difference? I note the poster above who mentions the huge difference in attitude between F3 and F full on the A320.
In terms of flare, I still close the thrust levers around the same point, i.e. around the "30" auto call-out (plus or minus a bit depending on head/tailwind conditions of the day); for Flap 3 I find I flare ever so slightly later and obviously a little bit less due to the attitude already being higher. Other than that, I find there's little difference between the two.
I can't really speak for the A320 or 321 but with the higher weight I suspect there might be a bit of a difference? I note the poster above who mentions the huge difference in attitude between F3 and F full on the A320.
Sun worshipper
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 320 IS much more of an issue in the flare with F3 than the 321 in F3. Don't try to hold it off. I find closing the thrust levers at 25R and a tiny little flare about 15R will see you right. If you use a Flap full flare with F3 you will float along at 8 feet!
As a matter of fact, the A321 wing trailing edge is different from the rest of the family -Airbus has added a few inches to the chord, therefore on the flap dimensions. The result is a somewhat "flatter" attitude during the approach than on a 320.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bangkok Thailand
Age: 53
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my company, there are 3 of A320s and 7 of A319s, I did not often use Flap 3 landing unless appllied noise restriction in BKK airport.
Pesonel Tech. is little late in thrust reduction ( thrust is not much to keep Vapp ) and my flare is changing pitch not as much as Flap full ( attitude already high so margin for tail strike is not much ).
Every time I do Flap 3 landing, I have to prepare my configuration earlier than Flap full coz' speed not reduce nicely when do ILS Decel. App.
Pesonel Tech. is little late in thrust reduction ( thrust is not much to keep Vapp ) and my flare is changing pitch not as much as Flap full ( attitude already high so margin for tail strike is not much ).
Every time I do Flap 3 landing, I have to prepare my configuration earlier than Flap full coz' speed not reduce nicely when do ILS Decel. App.
On the CFM A319 that I fly the stabilised Flap FULL/Vapp total fuel flow is normally 30-32kgs/min. and Flap3/Vapp gives 26-28kgs/min.
With decellerated approach techniques normally one is only fully spooled up from 1000ft. AAL. - so the question remains - where does your 75kgs /landing come from?!!
With decellerated approach techniques normally one is only fully spooled up from 1000ft. AAL. - so the question remains - where does your 75kgs /landing come from?!!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please refer to QRH 2.18A
Please refer to QRH 2.18A....Unreliable Speed Indication / ADR Check Proc
This will give you a pretty good idea of pitch angles on approach. Figure
adding four degrees for a nice flare, and I think you'll find, with wings level, you still have almost 2 degrees to spare (assuming struts compressed....struts extended, you have almost 4 degrees to spare).
FCOM 3.03.22 P3 shows how these margins are reduced with increased bank angle.
In theory, you can scrape metal with FLAPS 3, a significant bank angle at touchdown, and improper flare. However, by following
SOP, a FLAPS 3 landing should not force a meeting and subsequent carpet dance in the chief pilot's office.
Fly safe,
PantLoad
This will give you a pretty good idea of pitch angles on approach. Figure
adding four degrees for a nice flare, and I think you'll find, with wings level, you still have almost 2 degrees to spare (assuming struts compressed....struts extended, you have almost 4 degrees to spare).
FCOM 3.03.22 P3 shows how these margins are reduced with increased bank angle.
In theory, you can scrape metal with FLAPS 3, a significant bank angle at touchdown, and improper flare. However, by following
SOP, a FLAPS 3 landing should not force a meeting and subsequent carpet dance in the chief pilot's office.
Fly safe,
PantLoad
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: EU
Posts: 961
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but company SOP is F3 unless F full is required.
SOP must be full flaps unless F3 is required. that's the correct procedure. Not the reverse. I think some airlines think they save money, less flaps=less drag=less fuel...
ok, but you get less lift=more power to get same amount of lift=more fuel
I doubt you save money with F3.
same thing with N1 taxi to your gate:
1 engine taxi =less power= less fuel(airline thinking!)
ok,...but 1 engine=more power on the engine=more rudder and steering to turn due to asymmetric thrust = more fuel(airbus thinking)....
conclusion: to save real money, follow airbus procedures
.if an airline was saving money with their "new" procedure, all airlines would do the same.
They don't, so when I hear of a new SOP procedure, we can just laugh at it!
Last edited by dartagnan; 30th May 2009 at 16:15.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Miami
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dartagnan:
Flap 3 landing and 1 engine taxi ARE Airbus procedures.
The option exists for the operator and Capt and it is on the FCOM's.
1 engine taxi is not only fuel savings, but also brakes and engine life.
G
Flap 3 landing and 1 engine taxi ARE Airbus procedures.
The option exists for the operator and Capt and it is on the FCOM's.
1 engine taxi is not only fuel savings, but also brakes and engine life.
G
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Glorious West Sussex
Age: 76
Posts: 1,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dartagnan..
Correct..
Complete rubbish!
I think some airlines think they save money, less flaps=less drag=less fuel...
ok, but you get less lift=more power to get same amount of lift=more fuel
