EZFlap wrote:
Sorry Dirtstrip, there will be none of those zip-flaps in the taildragger 172 kit... Last time I improved the aircraft wing flap, I got redneck keel-hauled.

But I already bought the popcorn.

Not trying to hijack the thread but EzFlap, do you have an update on the 172 tailwheel kit? I keep looking for info on it but I'm not finding anything. Maybe a new post with the details and updates??? My '56 might want the nose wheel put back on the right end!

I got to looking at a 195 today (what a sweet looking bird!) and noticed that there are small, almost tiny for the wing, split flaps. Can anyone explain why the tiny split flap on the 195 but a Fowler on 172,180, etc.?

FiddlerPilot wrote:I got to looking at a 195 today (what a sweet looking bird!) and noticed that there are small, almost tiny for the wing, split flaps. Can anyone explain why the tiny split flap on the 195 but a Fowler on 172,180, etc.?

There is a separate thread for the 172 conversion, I'll post any significant progress on that thread when appropriate. But it's coming along well.

Split flaps are more for drag than lift. The 195 has a whole lot of wing area and was very clean for its day... I have zero 195 experience... but I believe the problem they were trying to solve was slowing it down and not floating on landing, not making more lift. When Cessna figured out that well-designed Fowler flaps would do that job on landing, PLUS give more lift for takeoff and climb (at low to moderate extension) they made the most of it and the rest is history. If memory serves, I believe that the flaps were originally developed for the Bird Dog, to land in small fields for the Army L-bird competition. Cessna coined the phrase "para-lift" for their Fowler flaps, which I'm guessing signifies a parachute for landing, and lift for climbing.

The 195 flap is only 2 mph difference from full to none.
What it does is raises the tail and gives you a bit of better sight picture through the big front window when you get close to the ground!!
GT

FiddlerPilot wrote:I got to looking at a 195 today (what a sweet looking bird!) and noticed that there are small, almost tiny for the wing, split flaps. Can anyone explain why the tiny split flap on the 195 but a Fowler on 172,180, etc.?

The 195 was designed a bit ago, and I think they were all the rage at the time. Like the DC-2,-3...

Flaps when properly designed ( split, slotted, plain, fowler, etc) will lower the Lift to Drag ratio of the airplane, which can be advantageous for various operations. Particularly for landing, you get a better out the window view and slower landing speeds. Don't discount the amount of lift that a split flap can produce though.

Cessna used split flaps on many of the Cessna 300 and 400 series airplanes which were designed after the 170 and 180. A split flap might produce more drag for a given amount of lift (I say might because unless you can see the wind tunnel or flight test data), but it would be hard to say definitively.

It depends on the overall airplane configuration if the split flap would make sense, but it can be a cheap and elegant solution.