Flaps during approach

[SToL]

Why do you care about ground speed? Are you landing with tailwinds?

 

[N1120A]

Why do you care about ground speed? Are you landing with tailwinds?

It is nice to maintain category A status, and there are frequent wind shifts on final in Southern California.

 

[SToL]

Are you sure about that?

 

[chemgeek]

It is nice to maintain category A status, and there are frequent wind shifts on final in Southern California.

?? Isn't IFR approach category determined by IAS?

Maybe a target GS is desirable if timing approaches, but in the world of GPS/WAAS is timing approaches exactly really that important these days? If I'm flying a VOR-A approach in a tailwind at 90 kt IAS and the GPS says I'm over the airport, and it's not in sight, I'm outta there.

 

[SToL]

Yes, that is what I was alluding too. GS has nothing to do with maintaining IFR Approach Category status.

 

[BrianNC]

The use of any flaps on an instrument approach is pretty much a technique issue which varies from pilot to pilot and model to model. Same with when. I only use flaps in two (and 1/2) of the models I fly. In one it is before the FAF, in one it is at the FAF, and inthe 1/2 it is after the FAF.

If there is any consensus, it is to avoid using any more than "approach flaps" if for no reason other than to make a missed approach less work.

On my IPC not too long ago in a Warrior owned by the instructor he didn't believe in using them at all and to be honest I really couldn't tell a difference. I think he said something about once being stable not introducing anything else into the equation.

 

[George Mohr]

No flaps on approach means that you will have a rather large configuration change when you break out. If that's pretty low, you can see how that would really destablize an approach. Too much flap too early just makes your groundspeed really slow, and guarantees you will be very short if you have a power issue. So most CFI's I've talked to say use "one notch" of flaps during the approach. Put in one more when you've broken out, or two if you really need it. This procedure makes sense to me, and works well in the planes I've flown.

 

[Caramon13]

I put a notch of flaps in on the approach in instrument conditions because slower = better in my mind. Yes I want to get down out of the layer but why rush the approach? Also agree with configuration changes mentioned by @George Mohr and alluded to by @BrianNC when he mentioned not introducing anything new. FAF on in you should be configured. Sometimes it's hard enough to maintain a stable approach, you don't want to be flipping switches or anything else. Trim it up and watch the needle.

When you breakout you can add in another notch of flaps if you really must, but I've landed perfectly fine with a notch of flaps and nothing more. I've done no flaps approaches in IMC and just makes me feel more rushed. Not to mention everything you may need to reconfigure when you breakout. It's plane/pilot dependent though I suppose.

VFR it's a completely different situation. In really windy situations I don't use flaps at all if I can avoid it.

 

[Robin Hood]

My approach to landing is simple. Best reasonable forward speed until base and final, then target 80 all the way down. I normally use 10 to 20 degrees of flaps just to keep everything stable.