Date: 06 Jan 97 01:41:44 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Larry Stone) Organization: InterServe Communications, Inc. References: 1 2
View raw article or MIME structure
In article <airliners.1997.115@ohare.Chicago.COM>, kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz) wrote: >>I've ... NOT yet acquired any certainty about RAT alone being or not >>able to deploy flaps or/and slats, them being essential to a safe landing! >... >>The 767 of Air Canada had a huge amount of time running on >>the RAT to be able to deploy them, even slowly. > >Flaps add a *lot* of drag. If you are gliding and aren't sure you'll >be able to make it to an airport, deploying the flaps long before you >actually get to the airport is the last thing you'd want to do. To add to what Karl said, flaps are *NOT* essential to a safe landing although they make it easier. In the landing configuration, flaps add mostly drag (takeoffs, when done with flaps, are with much less flaps - adding lift but not so much drag - for the light planes I fly, take-offs are normally flap less but for some conditions, you would use 10 to 25 degrees of flap. Landings are done with full flaps - usually 40 degrees). The two advantages of flaps for landing is a lower approach speed and a steeper approach angle. The lower approach speed of course translates to less runway used. In a "dead-stick" situation, flaps are typically not added until landing is assured. I have landed every model in which I have been checked out at least once (for practice) without flaps. Not difficult at all and improves controllability in high cross-winds. -- -- Larry Stone --- email@example.com http://www.interserve.com/~lstone/ Belmont, CA, USA My opinions, not United's.