Instrument Approach Gear and Flap Sequence - A survey

dmspilot said:
Now do another thread for VFR. The AFH says to extend the gear abeam the touchdown point, but I never cared for that technique.
Click to expand...


SO..... yeah, you know what I'm going to say that how I was taught. Gear down and checked before entering the pattern if VFR. Maybe the club I'm in (and its instructors) is on the very conservative side of things related to retracts.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Completely different for each aircraft, and possibly for different airports.
Don’t want to drag along at 80kts 10mi out at Dallas Love, so no flaps, no gear way out there in a slow plane.
In actual (in imc) in a jet, many call for some flaps 10-15 mi out then gear, landing flaps & vref at faf,
Click to expand...
^^^This for me^^^

Home base is a (sometimes) busy class C, and I’m not gonna put gear and flaps down at the IF with 3 A320s climbing up my rear end (and probably not until well after the FAF also)…but a sleepy class G in BFE? Yeah, sure.
 
Last edited:
On the approaches where it's 10nm or so from the IAF to the runway and on the FAC and 5ish from the FAF to the runway, and no PTs I am at cruise speed to the IAF. So around 150kts. At the IAF, fuel pump and other initial checks happen and I start slowing and descending so I hit 120kts at the FAF. Gear comes out there and speed further reduces so when I'm at the next fix or halfway to the runway the first notch of flaps happens. Check gear again. A mile out, second notch and another gear check. Should be around 80-90 kts here. Last bit of flaps and final gear check when environment is visual.

For GPS Ts and no PT I keep speed up until the FAC.

I haven't any keep my speed up requests with this even when sandwiched in between UPS guys going into SDF.
 
midlifeflyer said:
For those of you who do use approach flaps to fly an instrument approach , what is your gear/flap sequence and does it affect your FAS (final approach segment) airspeed?

These are just examples to illustrate what I'm asking:
  • At target FAS airspeed clean in A. Gear first then flaps upon intercepting the glideslope. No airspeed change.
  • Gear down at target FAS airspeed in A . Flaps down upon intercepting the glideslope. No airspeed change.
  • Higher than target FAS. Gear upon intercepting the glideslope with no airspeed change. Flaps added after stabilizing to reduce to target airspeed.
There may be as many answers to this as pilots
:)




View attachment 132543
Click to expand...
I aim for power to be set at the IF or when getting vectored but I'm likely still fast and/or descending. Near the FAF (or GS/GP intercept, I'll almost always do that higher rather than dive & drive to the minimum FAF altitude), ie a dot or half a dot from intercept, throw the gear down, followed by a notch of flaps if I'm slow enough. Then just leave everything as is until breaking out, at which point I might go to landing flaps.

This is, of course, dependent on the aircraft and operation to some extent, but I feel like this technique works in many types and is easily modified for other types.
midlifeflyer said:
True, but less than one might think. I don’t fly twins or jets but my technique in retractable piston singles is essentially the same across makes and models with only one variation.
Click to expand...
I'm curious, what's your variation?
 
WDD said:
SO..... yeah, you know what I'm going to say that how I was taught. Gear down and checked before entering the pattern if VFR.
Click to expand...
If it helps, so do I. My visual SOP is reaching pattern altitude within 3 miles of the runway.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
I'm curious, what's your variation?
Click to expand...
First you have to know my standard :) I don’t use approach flaps. No flaps until breaking out. The variation is using approach flaps at all.

It started during my instrument training. My CFII tried in vain to get me to use approach flaps in a 172. I just couldn’t see the need. It carried through to all but two of the 30 or so types of singles I’ve flown (some Mooneys and Cirrus).
 
midlifeflyer said:
First you have to know my standard :) I don’t use approach flaps. No flaps until breaking out. The variation is using approach flaps at all.

It started during my instrument training. My CFII tried in vain to get me to use approach flaps in a 172. I just couldn’t see the need. It carried through to all but two of the 30 or so types of singles I’ve flown (some Mooneys and Cirrus).
Click to expand...
A very experienced CFII I flew with told me not to use flaps and to carry speed, as 'speed was your friend'. He demonstrated a fast approach in a 172 and didn't deploy flaps until we were in ground effect.
 
elvisAteMySandwich said:
A very experienced CFII I flew with told me not to use flaps and to carry speed, as 'speed was your friend'. He demonstrated a fast approach in a 172 and didn't deploy flaps until we were in ground effect.
Click to expand...
I don’t think they are necessary but I also don’t think there is a “problem” with approach flaps in most light singles. Nor a speed issue. You can fly an 90 kt approach in a 172 with or without approach flaps. That’s true of just about all of the others I’ve flown.

But yes, you can fly well above flap speed with no flaps. I one flew a 120 kt approach in a 172.
 
Last edited:
midlifeflyer said:
You can fly an 90 kt approach in a 172 with or without approach flaps.
Click to expand...
Careful there. 172N and previous models had an 85 kt max flap speed, with no allowance for partial flap settings. The 172P introduced the 110(?) knot limit for 10 deg.
 
RussR said:
Careful there. 172N and previous models had an 85 kt max flap speed, with no allowance for partial flap settings. The 172P introduced the 110(?) knot limit for 10 deg.
Click to expand...
Always subject to specific aircraft limitations. The older 172s are not the only ones.
 
chemgeek said:
Simple aircraft, simple procedure:
1. Slow to 90 kt at the IAF for the HILPT, PT or FAF transition. (Or slow to 90 kt when on final intercept vector for final approach)​
2. Gear down and welded​
3. Flaps up until runway environment in sight, landing assured. Then slow to 75-80 mph and go to full flaps. (If necessary, land without flaps.)​
​
In a busier airport environment, I might have to fly the approach a little faster. But at 90 kt I know all the numbers for level flight, approach descent.​
Click to expand...
This is basically the same procedure I was taught - but I use 10* flaps from the FAF.


@Lance F was my IFR instructor so I 100% blame him for this sequence in a C172 (which I still use).

FAF = 10* flaps / 90 kts.

Once you can visually land - you may add in flaps.

It's worked out really well for me in actual. Even in the little C172, you get that thing trimmed out doing 90kts with 10* of flaps - it fly's on rails.
 
elvisAteMySandwich said:
A very experienced CFII I flew with told me not to use flaps and to carry speed, as 'speed was your friend'. He demonstrated a fast approach in a 172 and didn't deploy flaps until we were in ground effect.
Click to expand...
I'm going to politely disagree with this one. 1) Speed is not necessarily your friend. Speed is kinetic energy that must be dissipated to land. Excess speed can send you off the end of the runway. (Example: The Dale Earnhardt Jr. crash). 2) Yes, you can get away with this in a 172 or a Hershey wing Piper. Try it in a Mooney, and you'll float forever.
The flaps are there for a reason. The fact that with a long enough runway you can in some circumstances get away without using them does not make it a good procedure.
 
1975 Piper Arrow II

I fly my approaches at 90 KIAS. To get that speed, I use 17"MP and 1 notch of flaps (gear up). I try to be configured and stabilized at that speed just prior to the IAF, or if being vectored, definitely before intercepting the final approach course. If there is a glideslope, all I do at intercept is lower the gear. No power change, no trim adjustment. The plane will descend at about 500 fpm like it is on rails. I usually add some additional flaps after breakout, and push the prop forward as I reduce the power a bit on very short final. If there is no glideslope, I drop gear, and pull power to 13"MP at FAF. This gives about a 700fpm descent. At MDA, I increase power to 21"MP, which will level the plane. No trim adjustments needed.

About 10 or 15 years ago I spent a few hours determining these power settings/configurations. It made all the difference in the world for me. One of the best things is the level-off at MDA. I was originally taught the "dive and drive" 1000fpm approach, but then leveling off was always a chore. Adding power, trimming, whoops too much power, adjust trim again, all while low and also while I need to be scanning for the runway environment. Now, I just push the throttle to 21" and monitor the altitude.

That's how I do it. I like it. It works for me. Some say I should fly faster until the FAF, but I don't mind flying the approach at 90 kts from the IAF. It keeps things nice and slow and I can stay ahead of the airplane. YMMV
 
@Lance F @pburger I see the value of what you're describing -- there's safety in a nice stable approach to landing with minimal changes. Would you consider an alternate technique if you had concerns about losing your engine on the approach or about a steep climb gradient if you had to go missed?
 
Flaps have varied depending on type of airplane, but have always dropped gear 1/2 dot below glide slope.
 
Kritchlow said:
Flaps have varied depending on type of airplane, but have always dropped gear 1/2 dot below glide slope.
Click to expand...
this makes no sense to me. What am I missing?
 
Salty said:
this makes no sense to me. What am I missing?
Click to expand...
You intercept the guideslope from underneath. Throw the gear out when you're a half dot (on the cdi/hsi) below and in many planes (including my lance) the plane will begin a 500fpm descent right on the GS. This assumes level flight at an appropriate power setting approaching the GS. Roughly 18"/2400rpm in my plane.
 
elvisAteMySandwich said:
@Lance F @pburger I see the value of what you're describing -- there's safety in a nice stable approach to landing with minimal changes. Would you consider an alternate technique if you had concerns about losing your engine on the approach or about a steep climb gradient if you had to go missed?
Click to expand...
The steep climb gradient will be published in the chart. If you can’t do it, you know in advance.
If you are worried about engines quitting on the approach, you will rarely fly any instrument approach for real.
 
Jim K said:
You intercept the guideslope from underneath. Throw the gear out when you're a half dot (on the cdi/hsi) below and in many planes (including my lance) the plane will begin a 500fpm descent right on the GS. This assumes level flight at an appropriate power setting approaching the GS. Roughly 18"/2400rpm in my plane.
Click to expand...
yes, makes sense. It’s early and I wasn’t thinking about BEFORE you intercept. I knew I was missing something obvious.
 
Salty said:
yes, makes sense. It’s early and I wasn’t thinking about BEFORE you intercept. I knew I was missing something obvious.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's just a variation of dropping gear at intercept which really means "as you intercept" to start the process of changing the momentum from straight and level to a descent.
 
In a Bonanza, it is dirt simple. Gear down to go down. I teach and fly instrument approaches with approach power (15 to 16 inches), 105 to 110 kts, no flaps. At the GP/GS intercept, lower the gear. Speed remains unchanged, pitch goes from +1 to -2. I only use flaps if I break out and have the field made or just land no flap. The advantages are that trim changes are not needed and if a missed approach is needed, all I need to do is power up, pitch up, positive rate, gear up. My Bonanza doesn't have an approach flap setting, but later models do. These pilots will often add the approach flap prior to the FAF and carry a few inches extra power, but otherwise lower the gear at GS/GP intercept. I still show that the no flap method is simpler as there is less for the pilot to do, KISS method, but many pilots prefer adding the extra power and using the approach flaps.
 
However you do it, I think it's more important that you do it the same way every time. Then you are less likely to forget something, like the gear.
 
Jim K said:
You intercept the guideslope from underneath. Throw the gear out when you're a half dot (on the cdi/hsi) below and in many planes (including my lance) the plane will begin a 500fpm descent right on the GS. This assumes level flight at an appropriate power setting approaching the GS. Roughly 18"/2400rpm in my plane.
Click to expand...
18 for you? Is that with a notch of flaps? I'm 15.5 but I don't do flaps.
 
NealRomeoGolf said:
18 for you? Is that with a notch of flaps? I'm 15.5 but I don't do flaps.
Click to expand...
Either way. I'm just slower with flaps. Notice I'm at 2400 and at least 100kn.
 
For those that always fly at the exact same power settings do you always fly at the same weight and atmospheric conditions?
 
One very respected CFII told me that flaps and/or gear down at the IAF is no good at busy airports (think Bravo or very active Charlie) who want you to keep maximum forward speed until the FAF (even if they don't request it). *shrug*
 
When the controller tells you (in VMC), 170 kts to the marker, tower at RUNTS, that is so you don't get EATEN by a 737. Dress appropriately /configure appropriately for whichever dance you are doing. In my bird, if the gear are out, I'm landing without gear doors. I bend my flap tracks at 160. So for MDW, it's clean until the last 200 feet.....
 
Trogdor said:
One very respected CFII told me that flaps and/or gear down at the IAF is no good at busy airports (think Bravo or very active Charlie) who want you to keep maximum forward speed until the FAF (even if they don't request it). *shrug*
Click to expand...
The IAF is definitely too early. Gear down, go down... Drop it at the FAF.
bbchien said:
When the controller tells you (in VMC), 170 kts to the marker, tower at RUNTS, that is so you don't get EATEN by a 737. Dress appropriately /configure appropriately for whichever dance you are doing. In my bird, if the gear are out, I'm landing without gear doors. I bend my flap tracks at 160. So for MDW, it's clean until the last 200 feet.....
Click to expand...
I've been thinking about this some more. I spoke with a friend of mine who flies for Southwest, and he said the highest approach speed he's flown was 155 excepting wind adjustments.

If everyone is getting 170 to the marker, Southwest is slowing to 155, and in the Seneca let's say you drop your gear at 129 KIAS at 1000 feet and keep that speed the rest of the way in. By my calculations, that's only about an extra 14-15 seconds for you to fly the approach compared to a 737 even when it's heavy. That means they only need your slot in the sequence to be about 3/4 of a mile wider. They could be doing better...
 
flyingcheesehead said:
The IAF is definitely too early. Gear down, go down... Drop it at the FAF.

I've been thinking about this some more. I spoke with a friend of mine who flies for Southwest, and he said the highest approach speed he's flown was 155 excepting wind adjustments.

If everyone is getting 170 to the marker, Southwest is slowing to 155, and in the Seneca let's say you drop your gear at 129 KIAS at 1000 feet and keep that speed the rest of the way in. By my calculations, that's only about an extra 14-15 seconds for you to fly the approach compared to a 737 even when it's heavy. That means they only need your slot in the sequence to be about 3/4 of a mile wider. They could be doing better...
Click to expand...
When pilots start talking about how fast they can go on approach, sometimes it’s about keeping up with other traffic. Other times it’s about bragging about having a bigger…um…car.

Ever notice how few threads there are by fast aircraft pilots bragging about how slow they can fly to mix with 152s in a traffic pattern?
 
RussR said:
Careful there. 172N and previous models had an 85 kt max flap speed, with no allowance for partial flap settings. The 172P introduced the 110(?) knot limit for 10 deg.
Click to expand...
Just an FYI Russ, the ‘79 172N I instruct in has an allowance for partial flaps. 110kts for 10 degrees.

Edit: I just checked the POH for the ‘78 172N, it does not have an allowance for partial flaps. Cessna must have made the change in ‘79
1725030976386.png
 
Last edited:
I had one CFII get mad at me for flaps down 3 miles from the FAF in a 177B. HE said it needed to be at the FAF not before. Not true, but some people are wedded to these things.
 
Trogdor said:
I had one CFII get mad at me for flaps down 3 miles from the FAF in a 177B. HE said it needed to be at the FAF not before. Not true, but some people are wedded to these things.
Click to expand...
I’ve found that a good phrase to use if you want to **** someone off is, “Got a reference for that?”
 
Trogdor said:
I had one CFII get mad at me for flaps down 3 miles from the FAF in a 177B. HE said it needed to be at the FAF not before. Not true, but some people are wedded to these things.
Click to expand...
People often confuse their personal techniques with requirements. I agree with @MauleSkinner. Asking for a reference is the best response to a CFI. If that ****** them off, it's time to say goodbye.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top