There are good arguments on both sides
Clean, closer to approach speeds you'll fly in bigger aircraft, especially if you try to fly it fast. Dirty, have to manage configuration changes, speeds, workload, etc. You'll be doing this in big aircraft too. Popping out partial or full flaps at MDA/DH, unstabilized approach, can probably work just fine in a slow airplane, but a bad habit for bigger and more complex aircraft, but could be helpful for shorter fields. I don't really see a "right" answer with what you should do in a lighter aircraft. As said before, they land clean or at partial flaps just fine. If I took students to a class B airport, I'd tell them to fly it clean and keep it fast, that way we'd get the least amount of complaints from ATC, but slowing up and putting in configuration changes, especially in the more complex light aircraft, was good for workload management, especially when flying NP approaches and relating altitude to lose to distance to go. The one thing I didn't like doing was changing configuration upon breaking out, I was always of the mind that you should already be configured and at speed, but chopping to idle at DH because you're at 115kts in a 172 isn't stabilized either... |
Originally Posted by Excargodog
(Post 3147762)
Anyone who has ever had a Cessna 172 flap motor go out in full flap configuration (or even just pop a circuit breaker while you are otherwise busy) will tell you they would MUCH rather fly IFR approaches clean until landing is assured than have any possibility whatsoever of having to go missed approach with flaps out.
Ask me how I know... I do find it interesting how the FAA preaches the ‘stabilized below 1000 feet’ bit, but also has ‘forward slip to landing’ as a testable private pilot maneuver. It’s almost as if they understand that different situations call for different techniques ;) Anyway, that’s my justification for slipping the nuts off a 172 over the approach lights after flying a 110kt ILS, but I digress. Probably not the best technique for a 141 syllabus :) |
The flap motor argument is mute as you would use approach flap and not landing flap until break out.
Also when you break out and continue VFR...well the ‘stabilized approach’ drops down to a recommended 500’ Flap motor? What if you have a vacuum pump failure the moment you go missed? Alternator failure? Or any other single system? Simple single engine single system aircraft are not suited for hard IFR. Been there done that, flown approaches down to the ground in 40 year old junk when I was a CFI. Never again thank you. Approach flap at FAF, if you break out above 500’ AGL you can consider adding flap as required. |
Originally Posted by TiredSoul
(Post 3147892)
Been there done that, flown approaches down to the ground in 40 year old junk when I was a CFI. Never again thank you.
|
Originally Posted by firefighterplt
(Post 3147897)
Where’s your sense of adventure?!? 😂
I’m obviously not the smartest as it took me a handful of events to learn from it. Had an Instrument student lose it and go unusually funky attitudes on me in real IMC in a C172. To this day don’t know if we rolled It or not. I lost 1000’ in the recovery. Stone cold Steve Austin true story. |
Originally Posted by TiredSoul
(Post 3147899)
Bro.... I could tell you stories about events that have had me waking up screaming at night.
I’m obviously not the smartest as it took me a handful of events to learn from it. Had an Instrument student lose it and go unusually funky attitudes on me in real IMC in a C172. To this day don’t know if we rolled It or not. I lost 1000’ in the recovery. Stone cold Steve Austin true story. |
Originally Posted by ChinookDriver47
(Post 3141765)
I work at a flight school teaching 141 instrument students in 172's. I recently raised concerns about configuration settings from the FAF inbound. I have been teaching approach flaps FAF inbound and holding about 80KIAS. I am getting told, "shoot all approaches clean. Add flaps at breakout or land clean. That's whats in the SOP" . I either forgot that, or don't recall reading that.
This blows my mind that this an accepted method and there is an AC that contradicts this exact practice. I am raising it as a safety concern. Thoughts? Am i being to knit-picky? Should I just ****? Is there something regulatory I can fall back on to facilitate a change? |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:52 PM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands