Less flaps for XWind landings

[TCABM]

…Based on this, I'm willing to call it an OWT for crosswind landings.…

Before you do that, I suggest reading the POH. Mine has a section in the expanded operations details chapter that discusses landings of each type. For Crosswind Landing, it states

 

[PaulS]

Another thing to consider is that wind reports are for that moment, or an average over a short period. What you experience could be much different than what is reported or what you see on a wind sock some distance away. Alway be prepared to go around, always. If you can't stop the sideways movement, go around, even if the wheel is about touch down. I was never so shocked as when I read on a different forum an instructor saying that if he had his way pilots would commit to landing when they are within 50 Ft agl of the runway. If your instructor ever said this to you, find another instructor. Always be prepared to go.

 

[EdFred]

As has been highlighted, at slower speeds, the crab angle to correct for a given xw drift is higher, which leads to a loss of relative rudder availability when attempting to wing low. Airplanes that land in a crab by gear structural design allowance (b-52, t-38) dont care about that, but typical trikes with the wing low method are going to run out of rudder authority with full flaps at a lower xw component than not using flaps. This has nothing to do with pilot proficiency, this is vector math that doesnt care about your opinion. The cezznas poh actually mention this correctly and succinctly as the driving reason for their recommendation.

You also don't need to land straight down the runway. I've landed crooked in relation to the runway a number of times to reduce/eliminate side loading. I've done crosswind 25G45 without issue. Yes, with full flaps. 100' wide runway, xwind from the right, put it on the left side with the nose pointed right, and when you start to roll out, just give it some left rudder to keep it on the runway.

 

[PaulS]

You also don't need to land straight down the runway. I've landed crooked in relation to the runway a number of times to reduce/eliminate side loading. I've done crosswind 25G45 without issue. Yes, with full flaps. 100' wide runway, xwind from the right, put it on the left side with the nose pointed right, and when you start to roll out, just give it some left rudder to keep it on the runway.

I've never done that, but have had instructors tell me they've done it. In a short roll small airplane maybe not such a big deal, but would you do it in a 3,600 pound single that touches down at 70 mph? Also, doesn't turning on the ground to get aligned with the runway at speed side load the gear?

The only time I had to go around on a cross wind landing was during a quartering tail wind, how I got myself there isn't important (inexperience) but when I realized I was out of rudder and was drifting excessively I was just about to touch down, so I poured all 100 hp in, and waited. The right wheel touched down, and started singing it's squealy song across the runway before lifting back off in a few seconds. I'm convinced I would have crunched that airplane that day if I had not gone around.

 

[Bill]

Most people fly approach speeds at book numbers - which are max gross. But how often does one land at max gross? Oh, you're 20% under max but seem to float at book numbers? Oh, maybe because you're way too fast!

My 201 POH calls for 71kts on short final, which is laughable in my particular example. Unless you're gross, you're gonna be floating a LONG way. I like 65kts short final, and in calm air with let it drop to 60kts short final on a short field approach.

 

[RussR]

Some say to make your flaps match the wind sock.

Wind sock straight out: zero flaps.
Wind sock limp: Flaps down full.

A "normal" windsock is a 15 kt windsock. Which means it's straight out at 15 kts.

That's not a lot of wind, certainly not enough to have an effect on your flap selection (if you do choose to vary your amount of flaps).

 

[Mongoose Aviator]

That's not a lot of wind, certainly not enough to have an effect on your flap selection (if you do choose to vary your amount of flaps).

Everybody obviously flies different. Each aircraft should be flown appropriate to that aircraft.

For me and in my aircraft, 15 kts is a big difference depending on if it is headwind, crosswind or tailwind.

 

[EvilEagle]

That's not a lot of wind, certainly not enough to have an effect on your flap selection (if you do choose to vary your amount of flaps).

Way too much of a blanket statement. Many warbirds need less flaps in a 15knot direct cross and in some that’s more cross than recommended to fly.

As with most things in aviation - it depends!

 

[brcase]

I've always been told to land with full flaps

That is a rather blanket statement that gets abused quite a bit. I have very little time in the Cirrus but I seem to recall that it is one the few planes that really lands best with full flaps.
My logbook now has 120+ different type of airplanes and gliders in it. I have helped a number of people land better by learning that some airplanes land better with less than full flaps.
The most common excuse/reason for using full flap landings is to land is slow as possible. What I have found in a number of aircraft is that it is harder to get the nose up with full flaps so people actually land flatter, faster, and or with more power with full flaps than they do with 1/2 flaps. They also put a lot more wear and tear on the nosewheel. Many Cessna's and Cherokees are like this.
If you check your POH often the difference in stall speed between 1/2 flaps and full flaps is less than 5kts. So if you do a good full stall landing, 5kts difference isn't going ad much wear and tear on the airplane, and will have minimal effect on your roll out distance.

Also, if the landing is not going well you can go around...partial flaps is desirable in this situation.

I also evaluate the risk vs reward, especially when train new low time pilots. Forgetting raise the flaps on the go around is often a lot less risky at 1/2 flaps. And the learn how to land faster and better because it is easier to pull the nose up for a nice full stall landing. They can also easily do them power off so excessive floating isn't and issue. If really need a steep approach or minimum roll out landing then of course I will use full flaps as the POH recommends.

This accident probably wouldn't have happened if he had approached with 1/2 flaps or less. but just my opinion.

I Always land a PA-28 with less flaps and a little more speed…it’s a positive control thing and go round ease for me…got to be some reason there is three notches from flat to full… but we are talking real crosswind close to the limits and maybe gusting higher…

I do this to for the same reasons mentioned above, Hershey Bar PA-28 especially are hard to get the nose up and land on the main wheels, a little more speed and less flaps help with this. Power helps as well, but then you get in to that longer landing/floating scenario. As for the discussion of floating a PA-28, get them slow, even with out flaps, and the drop only a little bit slower than that "greased crowbar", they are easy to land short with out flaps if you have good airspeed control.

My son was a CFI at a larger mill, oh the discussions a roomful of instructors could go round & round about, with no end in sight

BTDT

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

 

[ArrowFlyer86]

Yea, that puppy should glide like a greased crowbar. All day, every day. Are you leaving too many RPMs?

"Greased crowbar" . Nice brick comic by the way, surprised I haven't seen that before!

Re: RPMs.. I leave on a little but not much. I think it's more b/c I'm coming in at a little higher speed on a gusty day and I'm almost always flying a nearly empty plane (just me + a little gas). Once you add in ground effect and max flaps you're going to float a little bit even with the brick-ish Arrow tendency. On gusty or high-xwind days I want to minimize the time I spend floating. Not saying 25* flaps is best practice, but in my experience it does make for consistent, comfortable landings.

(But apparently I'm doing it wrong )

 

[Zeldman]

This accident probably wouldn't have happened if he had approached with 1/2 flaps or less. but just my opinion.

In my humble and unsolicited opinion,whatever that is worth, this accident would not have happened if the pilot had control of his airspeed and had better understanding of go around procedures. The first hint is the brief touchdown followed by a big balloon/bounce. Way too fast, the airplane was still flying. That landing was recoverable at that point by just reducing throttle and leveling out allowing the plane to slow down, then a normal landing.

Next hint was the failure to reduce flaps on the go around. That part of the checklist should be memorized. Next hint was the pull up to a very nose high attitude, which may have been a result of panic or at least a great over reaction to get away from the ground.

Back when I was actively instructing, I did a number of BFRs (as they were called back then) with private pilots in their plane. I noticed the majority of the pilots landed fast. Most explained they landed fast because they felt like they had more control. Then I would ask for spot landings and not a single one could touch down close to the pre-planned spot. At that point I would take them up to altitude and do slow flight, usually 10 knots above stall speed. Man those guys would sweat...

I tried explaining that landing at airspeeds suggested by the POH would give them more control, but I guess they would rather be a passenger instead of pilot.

When I started flying bush, I really learned about being on airspeed +0 -0, even in winds, gusty or sustained.

 

[Jaybird180]

As has been highlighted, at slower speeds, the crab angle to correct for a given xw drift is higher, which leads to a loss of relative rudder availability when attempting to wing low. Airplanes that land in a crab by gear structural design allowance (b-52, t-38) dont care about that, but typical trikes with the wing low method are going to run out of rudder authority with full flaps at a lower xw component than not using flaps. This has nothing to do with pilot proficiency, this is vector math that doesnt care about your opinion. The cezznas poh actually mention this correctly and succinctly as the driving reason for their recommendation.

Here's the section on Crosswind Landing in the C172S POH:
When landing in a strong crosswind, use the minimum flap setting required for the field length. If flap settings greater than 20°are used in sideslips with full rudder deflection, some elevator oscillation may be felt at normal approach speeds. However, this does not affect control of the airplane. Although the crab or combination method of drift correction may be used, the wing low method gives the best control. After touchdown, hold a straight course with the steerable nose wheel and occasional braking if necessary.

What section of the Cessna POH are you referring?

 

[Rgbeard]

This accident probably wouldn't have happened if he had approached with 1/2 flaps or less. but just my opinion.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

The accident wouldn't have happened if the student hadn't tried to point the bird to the moon.

 

[brcase]

The accident wouldn't have happened if the student hadn't tried to point the bird to the moon.

Correction wouldn't have happened if he had continued to fly the airplane.ie. stopped it for heading for the moon. The airplane did exactly what that airplane will do when trimmed for a full flap approach and then full power is added. aka a trim stall.

1/2 flaps it wouldn't have done that to that extreme.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

 

[RussR]

For me and in my aircraft, 15 kts is a big difference depending on if it is headwind, crosswind or tailwind.

Way too much of a blanket statement. Many warbirds need less flaps in a 15knot direct cross and in some that’s more cross than recommended to fly.

As the post I quoted discussed flap settings with both a straight windsock and zero wind, I responded as if we were discussing the "flaps with various headwinds" scenario, since obviously if the wind is calm, there's no crosswind.

So my statement still stands, that this method of determining how much flap to use (for headwinds) isn't a good one, since for the vast majority of airplanes, 15 kts (of headwind) just isn't enough to warrant changing flap settings.

And even if the wind is a direct crosswind, this "rule of thumb" would have you using partial flaps with just 5 knots of crosswind. Yes, maybe for some aircraft, but for the vast majority of airplanes, there's no need to adjust your flap settings for just 5 kt of crosswind.

 

[Rgbeard]

Correction wouldn't have happened if he had continued to fly the airplane.ie. stopped it for heading for the moon. The airplane did exactly what that airplane will do when trimmed for a full flap approach and then full power is added. aka a trim stall.

1/2 flaps it wouldn't have done that to that extreme.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

passenger masquerading as PIC?

 

[MajorTurbulence]

When I was a student pilot I was taught no flaps in crosswinds for all the reasons people say. No one ever pointed out that if you have a crosswind accident, you will be going faster and the result might be worse.

When I was working on my CFI, we were going to go up in a 150 when the crosswind component was 15G20. My instructor asked me what I will do. I replied as I was taught. "I would never land in a crosswind like this with full flaps."My instructor replied, "let's go up and do some full flap landings." We did. No bigger deal than any other gusty crosswind landing.

That was probably 25 years ago. I stopped making crosswind flap adjustments.

So, over those years. ever had regrets at using full flaps. I’ve had ride’m cowboy moments that sure could have benefited from a modification.

 

[Mongoose Aviator]

I responded as if we were discussing the "flaps with various headwinds" scenario,

I misunderstood that. In which case, I may be agreeing with you. lol
15 kt headwind with no or minimal crosswind component sounds like a normal and easy landing. Flaps I would consider for me and my aircraft that scenario to be full flaps as standard but really in that situation, probably anything is going to be just fine.

for the vast majority of airplanes, there's no need to adjust your flap settings for just 5 kt of crosswind.

And this also, for me and my aircraft, I would also agree. 5 kts crosswind component is quite reasonable and not something that I would make a change in flap setting based on that alone.

 

[Mongoose Aviator]

The airplane did exactly what that airplane will do when trimmed for a full flap approach and then full power is added. aka a trim stall.

I never heard of that. Not arguing. Just asking. Can you explain further? Perhaps this is another item that is different aircraft to aircraft?

The go-around that I have always used is carb-heat off and full power and leave the flaps alone where ever they are which most typically is full flaps (3rd notch). Recommended for Archer is carb heat off for landing [unless needed] specifically so as to not have to turn it off prior to a go-around. Anyhow. Leave flaps alone, full power, climb and watch airspeed. Confirm positive rate of climb and airspeed @ 65 kts for Vx. Then (and specifically not before) smoothly and deliberately fully retract the flaps.

On this point, my instructors were all the same. For go-around, leave flaps alone until positive rate confirmed and Vx established.

 

[chemgeek]

As always, the first step is to RTFM. The POH may provide some guidance for xwind landings. On the AA-5, the flaps don't do that much in terms of lift, just drag and improved visibility due to lower deck attitude, so there is little reason to not use full flaps for any landing. The flaps do not significantly alter control characteristics. The POH specifies that any flap setting may be used for landing (in any conditions). A Cessna will have different operating recommendations.

 

[midlifeflyer]

So, over those years. ever had regrets at using full flaps.

Not really.

 

[Daleandee]

I never heard of that. Not arguing. Just asking. Can you explain further? Perhaps this is another item that is different aircraft to aircraft?

I'm flying a low wing experimental. When approaching with full flaps the trim is usually full up at approach speed. With that trim setting if going around (carb heat cold, mixture rich, full throttle) pushing and holding the stick forward is required or the airplane will pitch up and climb noticeably.

 

[brcase]

I never heard of that. Not arguing. Just asking. Can you explain further? Perhaps this is another item that is different aircraft to aircraft?

The go-around that I have always used is carb-heat off and full power and leave the flaps alone where ever they are which most typically is full flaps (3rd notch). Recommended for Archer is carb heat off for landing [unless needed] specifically so as to not have to turn it off prior to a go-around. Anyhow. Leave flaps alone, full power, climb and watch airspeed. Confirm positive rate of climb and airspeed @ 65 kts for Vx. Then (and specifically not before) smoothly and deliberately fully retract the flaps.

On this point, my instructors were all the same. For go-around, leave flaps alone until positive rate confirmed and Vx established.

This is particularly specific to the Cessna Fowler Flap models. And something anyone flying one should have demonstrated to them at a safe altitude. Trim for full flap Approach Speed with the power off. Add Full flaps with hands off of the controls, just keep it straight with the rudder and you will see the same profile you saw in the video.

Cessna's are also a bit odd, it is actually kind of a nice feature, that the 1st 10 degrees of flaps lowers the trim speed about 10kts. I don't recall if the Cherokees are the same but the majority of other planes as you add flaps will increase the trim speed unless they have some mechanism to retrim as flaps are extended, which a few do. I know my glider has that feature, I was thinking Stinson 108's have a similar feature.

One other general feature of full flaps is the stall characteristics typically get more aggressive as you add more flaps, as does power. The Stall is more likely to break to the Left or Right and require a more aggressive recovery, I have surprised a few SuperCub drivers with this that thought the Super Cub had very benign stall characteristics. So the worse case for a stall is usually full flaps and full power, a scenario that is most likely to happen on a go around. One summer I had 3 different 172's fail to retract flaps. Manual flaps are better but recently flew a C-170 were the flaps jammed in the extended position. Turned out to be FOD is the flap mechanism.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

 

[Mongoose Aviator]

Cessna's are also a bit odd, it is actually kind of a nice feature, that the 1st 10 degrees of flaps lowers the trim speed about 10kts. I don't recall if the Cherokees are the same but the majority of other planes as you add flaps will increase the trim speed unless they have some mechanism to retrim as flaps are extended, which a few do. I know my glider has that feature, I was thinking Stinson 108's have a similar feature.

Not sure I follow trim speed concept. But in the Archer, on approach, adding first notch of flaps will cause a noticeable balloon upwards of the nose. Better technique is anticipate, hold the nose down while adding the first notch of flaps then trim for the change in configuration.
The Archer is manual flaps using the Johnson-bar handle.

 

[bnt83]

What's the most wind you would taxi a 172 in? Assume you are making 360 on the ground with no protection, just 1 person aboard, no bags, full gas, and no wing walkers.

 

[brcase]

So, over those years. ever had regrets at using full flaps. I’ve had ride’m cowboy moments that sure could have benefited from a modification.

Not really, because it is usually one of the things I try to figure out when flying a new airplane is how it lands with various flap positions and I usually only use full flaps if the airplane just lands better that way or I have specific need (Steep or short/shorter approach) for full flaps. I also like the option of adding flaps if I do come in a bit high, i.e for my normal landing fly in the middle of envelope as opposed to the edge and learn how to use the flaps as a tool instead of just a checklist item.

I have watched a few people that did regret it. I started training a guy in an experimental with Junker style flaperons after his previous instructor refused to fly it any more. Turned out the previous instructor was one that always taught full flap landings. It was one of the 1st aircraft I had flown with they kind of flaperon also. I flew it a few times and determined that it had a severe downward pitching tendency with full flaps, so I just set the flaps where it would approach hands off and a reasonable amount of up trim at the speed I wanted and had no trouble. I later met the builder who said he just used the Flap portion of the flaperon like a trim lever. The trim tab was really just for fine trimming in the approach speed. So essentially what the previous instructor was doing was rolling in full forward trim and trying to land it that way. No wonder he didn't like how it landed.

I have been happy a few times that I didn't have full flaps. One of the failures to retract was on a touch and go from a shorter runway away from my home base. I was happy to fly back home with 20 degrees flaps. Would not have even considered it with full flaps.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

 

[Pi1otguy]

I've heard some pilots say they don't use full flaps when the XWinds are high, gusts are high, or other conditions where they are concerned about control authority.

Is this another OWT?

The poh sometimes recommends reduced flaps as others pointed out. Probably the "avoid slips with full flaps in a 172" thing at play.

Think of what we do on normal landings. We fly to a few feet of the runway then flare harder and harder until it stops flying. Otoh, during windy days I (gently) fly it into the runway.

 

[MajorTurbulence]

You also don't need to land straight down the runway. I've landed crooked in relation to the runway a number of times to reduce/eliminate side loading. I've done crosswind 25G45 without issue. Yes, with full flaps. 100' wide runway, xwind from the right, put it on the left side with the nose pointed right, and when you start to roll out, just give it some left rudder to keep it on the runway.

I’ve heard stories of pilots landing their STOL aircraft “cross-wind” on wide runways. Obviously, if not exaggerations, the crosswind would need to be extreme and the STOL aircraft exceptional. It might even help if those landings occurred where a perpendicular taxiway was present to give more landing space. But those anecdotes and stories aside, I have used the offset runway landing to minimize crosswind component, and offset takeoff to maximize headwind component, successfully to alter the effects of the wind present. Usually when landing, I have selected, in the case of an extreme right crosswind, the proximal leftward edge of the runway and try to align with the extreme distal rightward edge of the runway. But in my mind, selecting an aiming path that would lead to a premature off runway excursion if not corrected to be something that would make me go elsewhere, barring an emergency. And Yes, that would require altering the nose wheel to the left to avoid that undesired eventuality. However, the biggest problem I find in that big a right crosswind is to remember to take out the large left rudder for the side slip when the nose wheel comes down. Often I’m scrubbing the nose tire with a surge to the left until the rudder is neutralized so I can track straight down the runway to that oblique aiming point.

 

[Gilbert Buettner]

The T-38 did not really care much about crosswinds, but with 145 knots on final, it took a massive crosswind to be that noticeable.

Well... we landed in a crab.

 

[Gilbert Buettner]

Use of flaps will vary with the airplane. I generally use full flaps for almost all of my landings in Cessnas, Pipers and Beechcraft. In the big airplanes I flew long ago, it was always full flaps "when landing is assured." We did a lot of "maximum effort" (short field) landings.

Cessnas float a lot more than others if you are a bit fast on final. I think most Cessna pilots like to use a reduced flap setting because the slightly higher speed makes the controls a bit crisper. In general, most of the pilots I have flown with are too fast on final. And on long runways, it isn't usually a concern.

 

[Fearless Tower]

I've heard some pilots say they don't use full flaps when the XWinds are high, gusts are high, or other conditions where they are concerned about control authority.

Is this another OWT?

Depends on the airplane.

I do not use full flaps in the T6 or Twin Beech in situations where I’m near the x-wind limit.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Presuming that .2 Vso is as much crosswind as you want to deal with.

Bingo.

If we’re talking .2 Vso, then yeah, even in the T6 and Twin Beech I’m at full flaps.

But many of us fly airplanes type certified long before 1962 with limited data.

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had to land with far greater than a .2 Vso x-wind.

 

[FastEddieB]

I’ve heard stories of pilots landing their STOL aircraft “cross-wind” on wide runways. Obviously, if not exaggerations, the crosswind would need to be extreme and the STOL aircraft exceptional. It might even help if those landings occurred where a perpendicular taxiway was present to give more landing space. But those anecdotes and stories aside, I have used the offset runway landing to minimize crosswind component, and offset takeoff to maximize headwind component, successfully to alter the effects of the wind present.

I have used that technique on both landings and takeoffs of really windy days. Especially useful in aircraft with fairly low landing speeds.

Here’s a landing example in my Sky Arrow on a very windy day with lots of crosswind spilling over the trees to the left of the runway:

Bear in mind, the GoPro at wide angles makes approaches seem much flatter and lower than they really are.

 

[L J Donelson]

‘it takes fuel to carry fuel’

Possibly the greatest single quote in all of POA quotages. I'm going to log off now and open a bottle to contemplate the ramifications of exposure to such greatness.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

The Comanche is very light on its feet full flaps. I like to use full most of the time, but even touching down in a full stall it helps to retract on rollout for braking and just to get the full weight on the mains quickly. It doesn't take much of a gusty crosswind if you're just a little fast to get you sideways. Anything over 20 knots and 30 deg off the nose and I use half flaps. A bit more of an "arrival", but she stays planted.

In a Hershey bar Cherokee? Full flaps all day long, because once down, she stays planted.

 

[Arrow76R]

Full flaps until I run out of rudder keeping the track straight then repeat until no flaps at which time find a different runway (at my base the runway is not very wide!)

 

[EdFred]

The Comanche is very light on its feet full flaps. I like to use full most of the time, but even touching down in a full stall it helps to retract on rollout for braking and just to get the full weight on the mains quickly. It doesn't take much of a gusty crosswind if you're just a little fast to get you sideways. Anything over 20 knots and 30 deg off the nose and I use half flaps. A bit more of an "arrival", but she stays planted.

In a Hershey bar Cherokee? Full flaps all day long, because once down, she stays planted.

And I am always full flaps no matter what. But I have J-bar flaps, so I can dump them immediately/instantly on touchdown. It's definitely "skaty" when you hit the brakes with the flaps down. I think you have electric though??

 

[Dan Thomas]

Simple vector math.

Higher speed on final means less cross wind affect. Let's take it to extremes. If you came down final at 600 knots, a 20 knot cross wind has almost no affect.

Come down final at 20 knots, a 20 knot crosswind, without correction gives you a flight path that is 45 degrees off.

No flap means a higher approach speed, which lessens the affect. Plus, when you do flare, you will have less float, meaning less time at slow speed, close to the ground, with more crosswind affect.

That's it right there. What angle of relative wind are we willing or able to deal with? Getting the airplane onto the runway with less angle, meaning more speed, then reducing speed while maintaining control, is easier and probably safer than trying to touch down at minimum speed with a larger angle.

I am always amazed at the number of airplanes that get bent in crosswind conditions, it's a lot. Better to practice with an instructor, get your method down, rather than read about it then have to do it and find out you're doing it wrong.

Those accidents are mostly due to the mistaken idea that the flight is over once the wheels are down. And yet, we have airspeed and therefore lift, maybe not enough to fly the airplane again, but certainly enough to lift a wing or weathercock the airplane and wreck it anyway.

 

[Dan Thomas]

One summer I had 3 different 172's fail to retract flaps.

Bad maintenance. Some mechanics squirt oil all over the flap jackscrew, and it drips into the travel limit microswitches and fouls them. They're supposed to clean off the jackscrew and wipe a small amount of No. 10 oil on it. Just a film, no more, but reading the manual is too much work or something. The oil gets into the up-limit switch, preventing its closing in preparation for flap retraction, and so the flaps won't come up. In a 150 this can be deadly on a high-DA day in an overshoot. If the oil gets into the down-limit switch, the flaps won't come down.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

And I am always full flaps no matter what. But I have J-bar flaps, so I can dump them immediately/instantly on touchdown. It's definitely "skaty" when you hit the brakes with the flaps down. I think you have electric though??

Yep. Ain't nothing immediate/instantaneous about them. A strong gust at the wrong moment will get you sideway. I used to be a full flaps devotee in the Cherk, not so much anymore.