I fly my final at 50Kts/full flaps/stabilized approach. From that point I keep the plane level(to flare) and move the throttle in or out a necessary to touch down at a predetermined spot.

Very simple, and I like that. Never had to slip.

Flyengr,

I am totally sympathetic with your concern over maintaining gliding capability to the runway in the event of engine failure. You can do that by flying a higher pattern, by moving your pattern in closer to the runway, turning base sooner, etc. All those things will steepen your profile, and still permit you to glide to the runway from anywhere abeam the numbers on. The wild card, of course, is the guy ahead of you....

I do NOT teach power off landings, necessarily. We mix them up.

And, you should not have to slow a Cessna down to 50 kts with full flaps to get it to come down aggressively. Generally, in those steep approaches, I almost always have to arrest the sink with power when flown at 60.

Play around with different profiles, in any case. You can make a steep approach and make it short, or you can drag it in using power. Up to you. I'm not a fan of dragging it in, though, for the reasons you noted.

As to using a slip in a Cessna with flaps deployed, just don't be stupid. Again, my Cessna 170, which has precisely the same wing as early 172s, has no admonition on use of slips, nor do any of the big Cessna taildraggers. Perhaps the concern on the airplanes with swept tails is rudder blanking, but again, the placard does NOT say DO NOT slip with flaps deployed, it simply says "avoid" slips with flaps deployed. Obviously, as you noted, if slips were prohibited with flaps extended, Cessna would also have a prohibition on use of flaps in crosswinds, and they clearly do not.

Again, practice a LOT of slips at altitude with and without flaps till you're comfortable with them, and simply avoid the most dramatic full slip with full flaps, and I think you'll be fine.

If your technique to fly steep approaches involves the use of light to moderate slips, just make certain you do them competently, and go for it.

I shudder when students drag in a long, long, low final.....

Sounds like you have it figured out, so keep up the practice.

MTV

For the standard Sportsman STOL kit and installation without paint our average price is approximately $4200. We do alot of these installations and have templates and other items setup to aid in the installation process.

The most common installations we perform are on virgin wings however the removal of a previous STOL mod. to incorporate the Sportsman pops up and today makes for approximately 25% of sales.

Our findings with incorporating VG's with the Sportsman is that they do very little with reducing stall speeds or stall characteristics but do provide subtle enhancements with regards to control authority. Wether an owner wants to make the investment for the subtle enhancement is typically where the debate settles. Note: We run VG's on our own airplanes.

There is alot more than can be added in the form of details but that would cause the post to significantly draw out. However we are always available for questions.

Will Stene

Doth,

Where do you work out of?? I want to have this done to my 79 R172K with 210 HP. (sportsman cuff)

thanks

Well, finally got the Sportsman cuff and aileron gap seals placed. I had the Isham 210 HP STC done 3 months before the STOL kit. It has a very noticeable increase in ROC showing 1500 ft/min at 80-85kts, full fuel, two people. My first landing was less than perfect, floated and bounced a bit. Tried 20 and 40 degree flap landings, definitely slower landings. With 40 degree flaps the stall happens without any buffeting or should I say regular signs of an impending stall.

It will take a few more flights to get it down right as it flies much different now but think it will be very useful for flying in the woods.

Kit was placed at Johnston Co. airport in NC. Kit price 2K + 3500 labor. I had a cracked wing tip so now I have two new ones that came with the kit. total weight added is 22 lbs

gilbert

Sounds like a great combination of mods that you have on your plane. It took me a while to realize the extent of the improvement to the wing after the Sportsman modification. I can comfortably climb out of ground effect indicating low to mid forties in MPH. It consistently astounds me how predictable and well behaved it has become at low speeds. More horsepower and roll rate would make my 170B about a perfect back country plane!

I bought the plane in Wyoming way below market value with 1883 TTAF + engine. Had great compressions and did not burn any oil, but I proceeded with a full engine and prop overhaul + 210 HP STC. I then added a JPI EDM 700 engine monitor, JPI fS-450 fuel computer, changed two nav/comms. Changed the whole fuel injection and ignition system. Had the sportsman STOL placed and I am in the process of putting my 296 in the stack as well as a new Garmin 340 audio panel. The 296 will be rigged to the fuel computer for accurate fuel/waypoint values. I am having strobes placed and full corrosion X treatment.

June 14th I will be flying it from Miami all the way to Bolivia South America. I will have an experienced pilot in the route go with me.

It should be an interesting experience.

I flew the plane again yesterday by myself and once I got the correct mixture for max power, performed STOL take offs with 15 degree of flaps..... very impressive. Had it off the ground, let me refrase....the plane got off the ground by itself at around 42 knots and kept a 1500 foot ROC while quickly accelerating to 80 kts.

would definitely do it again, worth the cost.

Gilbert

A bump to the top as this is a good read for certain.

40 Deg. Full flap slips with a 1967 172 (same wing as a 170B) with and without the Sports Man STOL kit. Without the kit there is a pronounced Dutch roll, a bit unnerving but fully controllable, after the Sports Man kit the Dutch roll diminished by 80 to 90 %.

Although it's a bit old, this was an interesting thread to read.

When I was taking my CFI initial checkride back in 1976 (I think--that's a long time ago!), the FAA Inspector wanted me to do a full rudder slip with full 40 flaps in the 73 172 we were using. I balked, because of the placard which recommended no slips with full flaps. But he pointed out the language, so we did it. There was a bit of a pitch bobble, but no tuck under, no loss of control. Close to the ground (like within 50'), it would be disconcerting, but again not dangerous. 172s without the extended dorsal fin tend to bobble more. Mine has the extended dorsal fin and doesn't bobble at all.

The very best way to do short field landings, or any landings, is to keep the approach speed under control. 1.3 Vso on approach, 1.2 Vso over the fence, works really well for nearly all light singles. I leave the ultra short field techniques of hanging on the prop, extreme slipping, etc., to others. As it happens, with my airplane (P172D) with 180 hp, CS prop, flap gap seals, Madras tips, and an Alpha Systems AOA, I find that at light weights 1.3 Vso is about 55 mph and at full gross is close to book figures. Keep the speed down, touch down where you aim, and it's a pretty short landing.

Cary

I bought my 182 with a Horton kit, then added VGs (good improvement) then removed the Horton and added the Sportsman and since I had the VGs I added them, also removed the Horton flap gap seals.
Huge improvement!!!
Im glad I did changed the Horton to the Sportsman STOL.

Approaches for short fields are 50mph IAS ,(no wind and half tanks, 2 people) and its stable and enough elevator for the flare, really love the way the plane flies now, more fun, more safe.
Here is a video (before MT prop)


Then added the 2 blade MT prop and its even better (15 pounds less weight) and you can approach very very steep and slow, many times pilots flying with me tell me , we are to high, I say wait and see, it drops like a helicopter and its easier to nail the spot.
Amazing combination for a 182.