Recently I have started to practice using 30 degrees of flaps for landings, the stall speed is slower, the approach speed is slower, no need to use that much power, and landing seems smoother.

Cons
its a bit harder to slow down the plane, so need to anticipate the way landing in advance (might be a matter of practice and getting used to).
Steep approaches are harder to do.

Difference between full flaps and 30 degrees is about 4 mph slower approaches, just started to test this, not proficient at it.

Does any Cessna pilots here use 30 degrees of flaps for landings? what are your findings?

I always used 40 degrees, even in windy conditions, because the pitch angle for the same airspeed was less, more power was required sending more prop blast over the wing, and I never needed to use brakes. I never looked at the airspeed indicator, but pilots I flew with who preferred 30 degrees landed way too fast. Some of those mods must be making stall airspeed with 30 degrees less for you. Did I understand you correctly on that?

Also it is easier to get all the way down without having to reduce throttle, lots of throttle, to touch down slowly and softly on the numbers every time.

I Also use 40 degrees of flaps 99% of the time, unless real windy and gusty (I use no flaps then, or else the Sportsman STOL kit keeps the airplane flying).
Experimenting with 30 degrees (we pilots are always learning, right?) , 40 degrees with power seems easier , but exploring 30 degrees of flaps techniques since allows for slower approaches, but not totally convinced of the effectiveness of this yet.

30° is my normal landing. 40° is just more drag that I keep in reserve in case I need to correct a mistake. 40° provides no additional lift and makes a go around a bit tougher.

Flaps on a 185 are frequently found with cracks. I’m told that over gross weight deployments are a factor, but the buffeting felt with 40° make me wonder if more damage occurs at 40° than at 30°.

4 mph between 30 degree and full flap is a HUGE difference in stall speed that is usually the difference between full and not flap stalls. The first thing I would ask is what are you calling a stall? Second is how are you measuring this speed? Are you using the same power settings? Are you trying to land power off? If your landings seem smoother than I suspect you are landing faster not slower.
DENNY

I use 40 primarly because I prefer to hit Mother Earth going as slow as possible. She seems to have a very good memory and very will to deliver a "payback" message on occasion, usually when I'm least expecting it.

I’m not a big fan of 3-pointers, but if I were, I’d notice that they’re more difficult with 40, especially with forward cg.

GPS ground speed MPH,stall for me is when the nose drops.
In slow flight with 40 degrees of flaps, ground speed 50MPH, during that same exercise I just reduce 10 degrees of flaps to 30 degrees and ground speed decreased to 46MPH so definitely 30 degrees reduces some drag and adds lift, the angle of attack also decreases, so I can keep the 50MPH ground speed in a flatter attitude, or fly the same attitude as before at 46MPH.

Not trying to land power off, coming with power 30 degrees of flaps requires a lot less power than 40 degrees, and actually its not easier so far, might need to get used to it, or might be just be more difficult, not sure yet.

Just started to explore this, want to see if I can take advantage of the slower stall speed with 30 degrees.

Interesting findings here. I almost always use 30 degrees in my 185 (Sportsman STOL, Wing-X, VG). As Pinecone said, 40 degrees does not provide as predictable control inputs and makes go-arounds more challenging. I haven't tried documenting speed differences however if I'm going to bounce a landing, it seems more common if I've got 40 pulled in.

We are rather circling around to a recent thread on flap usage. Full flaps vs 30°. Full flaps are more of an added drag position, so much so, on floatplane rigging on a 206 for example, you limit the flaps to 30° since you do not achieve more beneficial lift vs drag. The floats give you all the drag you can want. Again pointing out, in many cases, especially with electric or hydraulic flaps, the retract rate is so slow to preclude safe go around if things do not work out on your landing. In the Twin Otter, unless it was a super short field we would not use full flaps, go around was not possible on single engine. If it is gusty, a slightly higher speed keeps your controls more effective and you are less susceptible to a low level wind shear causing a, let's call it, gust induced momentary stall.

So yes, your flaps are a kind of flight control that most people never explore. Johnson bar flaps allow a better exploration of what you can achieve with differing flap setting. I do use reduced flaps up here at altitude, where my landings will normally be at a density altitude of over 10,000', to be much more controllable. One of my good friends taught mountain flying in Colorado for several years, also uses the same technique. Stick to what the book tells you until you have the experience to recognize what is going on aerodynamically. Then explore it in a safe environment. You will discover a lot of different aspects to the aircraft and it does not apply pan-galactaiclly to all aircraft and models. What is good for a 206 is not necessarily applicable to a 185 nor what my Twin Otter in New Guinea does in STOL has virtually no relationship with what you can do in a Cub.

Compare 30 to 40 in hover taxi in low ground effect. The main complaint from pilots I work with is the need for more aggressive rudder movement and more elevator work with 40. Once I convince them of the ease and safety of gross dynamic proactive control movement, both rudder to direct course (also keeps wing level) and elevator to strictly maintain low ground effect, they get comfortable. Once we have gone a hundred feet or so, in low ground effect, we have worked the amount of throttle (lots) out. Once we get behind the power curve, tailwind or no wind, higher pitch and more power equals slower hover taxi. In headwind component, even crosswind with gusts, the free relative wind makes hover taxi easier. I have never understood avoiding wind. Wind is my friend. As Maplefit said, the earth and the airplane appreciate we hit as slow as possible. Pulling 10 degrees more air and free relative wind seems to help with that. And as Dogpilot points out, other things hanging out so that we pull more air have the same effect as more flap, slat, spoiler,drag shute,flying wires, etc.

I actually experienced an elevator stall (tail stall) a few weeks ago. Lucky I was high above ground to recover. It is a very violent, fast pitch forward...more like a quick rotation of the plane around the center of the wing chord. Got it on my go-pro. Should have had a net up as everything in the back came flying to the front. Was heavy with 40 flaps and idle power attempting to get to pattern altitude from an entrance way to high. Turning left, then placing the plane into a forward slip and BANG... for a moment, all I saw was the ground. Neutral rudder, wheel forward and it rotated and began flying again with a loss of about 500' in the process.
The plane is my '55 C170B with Sportsman STOL , 180+ HP Lyc engine and MT 3-blade prop upfront.
John

I land with 30 degrees (of 40) in my 205 regularly when forward CG (Solo or with a passenger up front). Landing with 30 degrees reduces the pitching moment of the airfoil, and thus less downforce required from the tail to offset the pitching moment. This results in more authority available to flare, with less physical effort, and helps keep the nose off the ground during landing. I find that I float more with 30 degrees, a natural consequence of less drag. I also run out of trim on approach when forward CG. The trimmed approach speed at 30 degree is about 5 mph faster than at 40. If I want to approach at the same speeds, I have to hold backpressure continuously with 30. I use 30 specifically to help keep the nosewheel off the ground when landing.

Dogpilot sorta explained the logic I use....though I carry it a bit further...maybe.

Look, flaps are a tool in the pilot's toolbox. You can land a flap equipped airplane with any flap setting you like. With manual flaps, you're limited to the specific flap settings cut into the system, but that's okay.

I use whatever flap setting seems appropriate where and in the conditions I'm landing in. In routine flying, I land with various flap settings, varying from 20 to 30 to 40, at least on occasion.

Gusty crosswind? 20 flaps will make life a LOT easier in that context.

Short, short field, and calm wind? Full flaps....it's a tool, and this situation suggests use of ALL the tools.

Etc. Learn to use the flaps in various settings to accomplish what you need to do in that circumstance.

Why limit yourself to one flap setting for landings?

As dogpilot noted, the 206 is limited to 30 flap max on floats. One one of the 206s I flew, the mechanics just put a little bar across the flap switch travel, that limited the flaps to 30 max. When the plane went on wheels, the little bar came off, and now you had full flaps again, if you chose to use them.

One spring, the mechanics forgot to put the little bar across the flap handle's track.....which I noticed some time after I'd departed maintenance facility..... So, of course, I needed to experiment with go arounds with full flaps on floats. Worked fine, but took some fairly precise and smooth flying, and at gross weight, you needed to get some of that flap up fairly soon after initiation of the go around.

But, I was able to go around even at close to the plane's max weight of 3800 AUW.

As I said to start, flaps are just a tool. Learn to use the tools to your advantage.

MTV

john54724 wrote:I actually experienced an elevator stall (tail stall) a few weeks ago. Lucky I was high above ground to recover. It is a very violent, fast pitch forward...more like a quick rotation of the plane around the center of the wing chord. Got it on my go-pro. Should have had a net up as everything in the back came flying to the front. Was heavy with 40 flaps and idle power attempting to get to pattern altitude from an entrance way to high. Turning left, then placing the plane into a forward slip and BANG... for a moment, all I saw was the ground. Neutral rudder, wheel forward and it rotated and began flying again with a loss of about 500' in the process.
The plane is my '55 C170B with Sportsman STOL , 180+ HP Lyc engine and MT 3-blade prop upfront.
John

John, What was your IAS when you got the tail stall? I did a bunch of Flap/Slip testing and never could get a reliable stall. I could occasionally get a tail blanking, but it was only at higher speeds in the flap range.

Thanks Jughead

Lots of factors here to talk about!! I have had a nice supper and into second bottle of whine so may have to correct some stuff tomorrow. first is that you have a nose wheel aircraft which should be able to achieve a better AOA on takeoff and landing than a taildragger. So everyone has to take that into consideration. The problem I have with your story is you say that you have a flatter attitude with 30 degrees of flaps. 40 degrees should be be better. But it will take more power/drag. That drag turns it into a power landing not a wing landing. By going to 30 degrees you are now flying the wing somewhat more than the prop. Due to the fact that you can get a much better attitude on landing (AOA) without a tailwheel you can use the flair much better. So you are using the wing more than the prop. Go to altitude and stall at both flap settings with different power settings. See if 30 degrees really gives you a better stall at same power setting. Now go back to ground level and drag the tail at 30 degree and 40 degree of flaps with power, which is slower? I think what you are dealing with is an issue of a smooth approach allows for an easy flair/slowdown for a slower touchdown speed. I do to a lot of the STOL comp stuff in May/early June. Once it is over I spend some time getting back to good off field landing technique. I give up some landing distance to make sure I hit my spot!!!! FOR ALL THE NEW PILOTS!!! THE STUFF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT CAN COST A LOT!!!!! DON'T THINK YOU CAN GET INTO SOME SHORT STRIP JUST BECAUSE YOU USE 30 DEGREES OR 40 DEGREES OF FLAPS!!!!!! I think the pilot that started this thread is a much better pilot than myself I am just trying to help with understanding why things happen.
DENNY

I see it the way you explain here, Denny. I like 40 because it gives me better visibility over the nose during deceleration on short final, it requires more power to arrest the greater sink rate which gives more prop blast over the wing root and on the elevator and rudder, and allows touchdown on the numbers slowly and softly every time. I didn't fly big Cessnas,182 and up, much so didn't have heavy yoke problems.

Like MTV, I never had more than the normal Cessna nose tuck and oscillating with 40 degrees of flaps and rudder to the stop forward slip. I didn't fly 170Bs except with pilots I was training, but the same as 150 through 180/182.

Many pilots I fly with accept greater sink rate during deceleration on short final and get over the fear of 40 degrees flaps when they realize they can use as much power as necessary to control sink rate and still pitch as necessary to decelerate (by maintaining the apparent brisk walk rate of closure to touchdown.) Feel the wing not watch the gauges is required to prevent stall. Throttle movement, not just adjustments may be necessary, especially in gusty conditions. Think of the bird flapping hard to decelerate on short final to touchdown on the numbers slowly and softly. Or the helicopter. We can't get turns in Cessnas, but because of
40 degrees of flaps and reliable engines we can get really close.

Like Jughead, I only got the tail blanking and normal nose oscillation with 40 degrees flaps and rudder to the stop forward slip in all Cessnas from 150 through 180/182.

It's been my experience that in aircraft with only trailing edge flaps more landing flap selected always lowers the nose and affords better forward visiability. The same isn't true for aircraft with leading edge devices however there are not many of them to be found "off strip". For me and this may just be a personal quirk but I highly value forward visability when landing off strip, once I'm configured and stable the last place I'm looking is "inside". The other feature gained with reduced speed is reduce landing distance required. That's not so much an issue if your landing on or within a known space, wheels or floats but for a virgin site the shortest ground roll possible limits unknown surface risks.

Motodave, all your videos would indicate you have a solid "feel" for your airplane and this will serve you very well in the low speed phases of flight.

I'll admit when I first saw this thread my obvious reaction was "No, 30 degrees of flaps will not land slower (or shorter) than 40 degrees of flaps". Drag trumps lift in landing slow and short.

So then I tried to think of some edge cases where lift might trump drag and one came to mind. And that would be spot landing against a strong headwind.

The video of my SQ2 on the Knick doing a zero foot landing on an exact spot. Now that's actually around 40 degrees of flaps but it is only the third notch of a four notch flap system. Remaining on the third notch against a strong headwind allows the plane to remain in flight and sneak up on the landing spot at perhaps 5mph ground speed. Cutting the throttle at the precise moment drops the plane to a zero foot landing.

My Robertson STOL equipped Cessna 185 can achieve similar (not zero feet but staggeringly short) on the third notch of flaps- 30 degrees- because that's the setting the droops the ailerons the furthest providing the maximum lift possible- against a strong headwind. Landing against a 40mph wind in west Texas once and the 185 was easily down and stopped in less than the length of the fuselage.

But these are both edge cases for specific aircraft and conditions.

Which are actually two illustrations of exactly what MTV talked about "...flaps are a tool in the pilot's toolbox. You can land a flap equipped airplane with any flap setting you like.".

Flying by the numbers, any numbers (as in hitting specific speeds or altitudes or angles or settings or etc) has no place in backcountry flying and is deadly in off-airport flying.

Dynamic aircraft control is what is REQUIRED. And that's being dynamic on wind, temperature, weight, center of gravity, air speed, power, propellor pitch, approach angle, altitude, flaps, slips, descent rate, touchdown attitude, runway surface, runway obstacles, one-ways, brakes and a bunch of other stuff I'm forgetting I'm sure. Essentially every single thing that the plane has available both on the ground and in flight, and every single thing that's part of the environment, both in the air and on the ground.

And oh yes, let's not forget about the pilot. Proficiency, currency (not logbook), physical health, mental health, tiredness, distractions, risk aversion, and how fat the wallet is.

Go out and practice and forget about speeds and settings. Learn to fly the plane by the seat of your pants. Let the airplane tell you what it wants and react accordingly.

Example. Learn how your plane responds to flap application during landing (and takeoff). Want to maintain your glide path but slow the plane up? As you feel the plane about to (as in just before) start sinking add a notch of flaps. What happened? Ballooned up a bit? Then you applied the flaps too early. Continues to sink? Then you applied the flaps too late. Do this every single landing under every condition that presents itself.

Want to drop it in with the final notch of flaps? Practice what it takes to do that. Lightly kiss the ground on landing? Practice what it takes to do that.

No two aircraft, no two pilots, no two conditions are the same. The backcountry and off-airport are always dynamic. Learn to fly that way all the time.

(And re-read DENNY's warning).