Turbulent Approach Less Flaps

[sevenstrokeroll]

please remember that I said it might be harder off an ILS to see the runway...the nose is upp a bit more

and that flaps 25 on the 757...I know a guy who did that and ended up pranging the tail

so...good luck brave airman...don't float, panic and pushover too much...but don't hold off too much and prang the tail

there is wisdom in knowing how much wind affects your plane at particular airports too and if the annemometer is mounted at a non standard height...knowing how the trees, buildings etc can suddenly blank the wind is worthwhile too

[sevenstrokeroll]

pontius...colleagues in high regard...I am a realist...if it can go wrong, it will...too many ''incidents'' of less than perfect airmanship

as to assymetric thrust...if you don't have it in your bag of tricks woe to you if you are in a sioux city situation or a rudder hardover and out of options, or otherwise faced with something unusual

and using a bit of assymetric thrust, whether in the manual or not (it does say that the manual is for an experienced pilot) on a crosswind landing, allows for a reserve of controlability.

ahhhh...those across the pond...hmmmm

[sevenstrokeroll]

chally604

what kind of plane did you have in mind with your original post?

[Lord Spandex Masher]

SSR you've gone from landing on the nose wheel to pranging the tail. Do you actually know what you're talking about?

Sioux City?! I thought we were talking about landing in turbulence and not catastrophic failures.

[Centaurus]

Boeing say bleed of the steady headwind addition at some point before landing (i.e. between the threshold and the flare) but keep the gust addition.

So how do you bleed off 15 knots (1/2 the HW component) in the few (seven seconds?) between crossing the threshold and the flare? On the other hand, the 737 FCTM does say (if landing with ice on the wings) that 10 knots should be added to the final approach speed. It further states this 10 knots should be bled off from 200 ft down - not between crossing the fence and flare. Some inconsistency by Boeing, maybe?

[Chally604]

The Original Problem was in relation to a Challenger 604.
So believe me.. I can see the runway as long as I do not crap 90 degrees
We are coming with almost negative attitude and need to do a serious flare to get the nose up for a main gear landing.

But this is not the problem.

I am more worried about the "bouncing around" in the wind. we have 20 meters and 35.000 lbs weight during landing.

So there is nothing like "energy" which will keep you going no matter what.

Out of my point of view now, it doesnt make too much sense for us for speed reasons:

Flaps 30 max 197
Flaps 45 max 189

When you add the additional 7 knots to F45 for less flap setting you end up with you won 1 single knot. 189+7=196

Guess it might be more comfortable anyways as you are further away from Stall speed and have a little more energy.

[sevenstrokeroll]

spandex...yes,I do know

I know that when you do ''different'' things you open yourself up to errors...heard all the excuses...well that's the way i do it with flaps x



and it is different, in different types.

so good luck to you spandex...have lots of fun

oh and original poster...

one way to make turbulence easier to cope with is for the PILOTS to make sure they have their seat belts on very tight, becoming ''one'' with the plane. it can reduce turbulence induced over controlling.

[Robert G Mugabe]

Airbus 319 and 320 FCOM recommend CONF 3 ( less flap ) for turbulent conditions.

Some folk would prefer to use Flap Full mind.

[Dg800]

Flaps will increase coefficient of lift and wing area so it's opposite what you want. So the airplane will feel any gust and will be even more difficult to control. So that's why in gliders we land with landing flaps in normal days and +2 in windy days.

What you're saying there is only half true, actually. Bigger planes do indeed have lift augmentation devices that increase both the camber and the surface area of the wing, thus a higher flap setting will really give you a larger surface area and so a lower wing loading, which makes the plane more susceptible to turbulence. Vice-versa a lower than full flap setting will give you a higher wing loading which makes it somewhat more manageable in severe turbulence, also because of the small increase in speed, which gives you higher kinetic energy, a smaller crab angle and increased control authority, as already mentioned in previous posts.
On gliders you only change the camber and hence the lift coefficient, the surface and the corresponding wing loading does not change. Ideally with severe turbulence you should retain your water ballast (=higher wing loading) until you've landed, this is however discouraged if not outright forbidden in most glider's POH for structural reasons, so you just set the flaps to "full minus 1 stop" for the increased speed and aileron authority.

Ciao,

Dg800

[yippy ki yay]

I would not change the flap setting at all. I would use the maximum flap setting authorized by the manufacturer/FAA all the time.

flying for years using full flaps for landing and now , for the first time in years you use less flaps...you're doing something not routine...and you are more likely to screw it up.

as to assymetric thrust...if you don't have it in your bag of tricks woe to you if you are in a sioux city situation or a rudder hardover and out of options, or otherwise faced with something unusual

IMO being competent at landing with any of the recommended landing flaps for your aircraft type should be extremely routine! In my bag of tricks I'd much rather have the ability and confidence of landing with any of the landing flaps than being proficient at using asymmetric thrust! What if you can't select maximum flaps for whatever reason?

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Originally Posted by sevenstrokeroll

spandex...yes,I do know

Strange then that you warn us of hitting the nose wheel first if we use less flaps and on the other and regale us with a story of a guy you know who had a tail strike.

So which is it?

[ImbracableCrunk]

IMO being competent at landing with any of the recommended landing flaps for your aircraft type should be extremely routine! In my bag of tricks I'd much rather have the ability and confidence of landing with any of the landing flaps than being proficient at using asymmetric thrust! What if you can't select maximum flaps for whatever reason?

I agree. I recently flew with two Captains who nearly had a conniption when the computer suggested a F1 takeoff, rather than our usual F5. I'd rather take every opportunity to perform the F1 takeoff or vary F30 and F40 landings.

[sevenstrokeroll]

dry clean your spandex

so, I know a DC9 incident of striking the nosewheel
and a 757 incident of hitting the tail. both reduced flap settings
and of course you can't realize my point...change something and you are closer to a problem...unless you are on top of things...and of course I can see you on top spandex

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Your odd vision aside how do you know that "they" had "changed" something?

Do you always use exactly the same everything?

[sevenstrokeroll]

trying for a correct landing all the time is something worthy of a pilot's attention...changing an element may, i say again, MAY lead to a problem.

[blind pew]

Can't believe the posts here from professionals!

Use Full flaps on a jet in turbulent conditions only.

Main Reason. - faster thrust response....

You win with wind shear and when you touchdown it is easier to kill the bird.
And if you need to go around the engines are already spooled up.

The rest is a load of cods wallop.

[bubbers44]

I never felt the need to use less than normal landing flaps unless a procedure was required to preclude using normal flaps. Sometimes in a small GA aircraft it made landings easier but not in an airliner. I only had one FO change flap settings to less than normal when I pointed out a rain squall close to our landing runway and to be prepared for some possible shear on approach in a 757 so he asked for flaps 25. I gave it to him but wouldn't have if it were my leg. It got a bit sporty when he floated down the runway trying to get it on the ground.

Every pilot needs to fly so he feels comfortable using his technique as long as it is approved. 23,000 hrs with no dings makes me stick with what works for me.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Bubbers, if you were the captain it was your leg. Anyway it was his technique that lead to the float not less flap. Also I believe flap 25 is normal on a 757.

Faster thrust response hey. What difference does a few percent here or there make? Measure it, if you can!

Windshear. No config changes. So you're happy to carry extra drag when you could do without are you!? Riiiiiiiight. The aircraft can also handle higher gust loads with less flap. Besides my FCOM says use flap 30 NOT 40.

[9.G]

the levels of education and technical understanding seems to vary significantly among the so-called professionals, why not simply follow FCOM?

[bubbers44]

Spandex, your I am the captain attitude has shown throughout your posts. I always let the FO fly the way he wanted to. I only intervened when it was outside my comfort zone. Why couldn't you. Sometimes you learn from what your FO does differently.

I don't think you learned anything from your FO's, I did by watching. They had a different learning experience and sometimes you can learn from other pilots if you are not obsessed with yourself.

Try it sometime. You might learn something.