MD80BOY From Italy, joined Dec 2004, 12 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 years 10 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5210 times:
Hi to everybody.
Yesterday I've flown on an Alpi Eagle's Fokker 100 and I've noticed that the take off was performed without settling the flaps, so with a clear wing.
The question I'd like to pose is when this could this procedure can be adopted? Are all the aircrafts allowed to a flapless take off?
Thanks in advance.
Rick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 59 Reply 1, posted (4 years 10 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5171 times:
No, most large jet aircraft are not permitted to adopt flapless takeoff (the Fokker 100 is one of only a few which springs to mind which can).
Some other aircraft can takeoff with no flaps but leading edge slats only extended (normally referred to as a flap setting like "Flap 1" even though no flap is actually extended). The 767-200 is like this, and I think the A300?
It of course is based on runway length, aircraft weight and ambient conditions, but generally for a long runway aircraft like the F100 will not need to use flap.
If you do a search on this forum there have been several discussions in the past which hopefully will give more detail than my vauge recollections above!
I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
AAR90 From United States, joined Jan 2000, 3001 posts, RR: 50 Reply 2, posted (4 years 10 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4961 times:
The question I'd like to pose is when this could this procedure can be adopted? Are all the aircrafts allowed to a flapless take off?
The F100 is the only airliner I've flown with a legal zero-flap takeoff configuration. All others require at least some flap/slat extention. Interesting to note that the F100 performance charts showed [circa 1995?] the zero-flap takeoff to provide the best performance option under virtually all situations at AA F100 airports... but AA standardized on 8-degree flap takeoffs in part to minimize passenger fears (at not seeing extended flaps during F100 takeoffs).
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
TWAMD-80 From United States, joined Oct 2001, 988 posts, RR: 6 Reply 3, posted (4 years 10 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4939 times:
I'll add a bit onto the previous posts. As Rick767 said, the majority of airliners need flaps for takeoff. They need the extra lift generated by the flaps and slats to lift off. If I remember correctly, in order for an MD-80 to takeoff with zero flaps, its airspeed would have to be in the neighborhood of 180-200 knots or so. In order to achieve that speed, a very lengthy runway would be required. That was the cause of a crash of a Northwest Airlines MD-80 a few years back. The pilots forgot to set the flaps and as a result the aircraft was never able to climb more than 100 feet. Sadly, not long after liftoff it crashed on a hill next to a highway.
TW
Three useless things in Aviation: 1-Runway behind you 2-Altitude above you 3-Air in the fuel tanks
PhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (3 years 9 months 13 hours ago) and read 3929 times:
From what little knowledge I have of the F100, I know it has a "hard" wing. By that I mean it has no LE devices. As such, the flaps do add lift, but not to the same degree as they do on an aircraft that has LE devices. Therefore, the 0 flaps takeoff isn't a very big deal since the flaps don't really produce a substantial increase in lift.
However, aircraft that have LE devices gain a substantial increase in lift with the extension of the LE devices. That's why in some cases you'll see a reduced flaps takeoff in the 737/MD-80 family of aircraft.
Aviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2355 posts, RR: 52 Reply 11, posted (3 years 9 months ago) and read 3642 times:
Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 4): If there is no advantage of using no Flaps,then why use it.
Because it saves fuel and doesn't stress the airframe.
If you have enough runway you can use a lower power setting because you don't have to overcome the drag generated by the flaps.
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 9): On most other airliners this less drag also means too little lift, but not on the Fokker.
Guess the F70/100 is one of the few with super critical wings which don't need slats.
Having said that Fokker did experiment with slats a long time ago on the F28(mk.5000 and 6000) for very short runway operations.
In the end none Mk.5000 and only 2 Mk.6000 were build.
The Mk.5000 was the basis for the F28-COD(carrier on-board delivery) a carrier version developed for the US Navy but after successful trials they choose improved versions of the Grumman C-2a Greyhound instead.
Another thing the F70/100 can do(not sure whether other A/C can do the same) is Take Off on autopilot.
Something I had to do all the time during my type rating course for licensed engineers which included 8 hours training on a fixed base simulator without any controls other then the autopilot.
This procedure is not certified though.
The story is maybe a bit of topic but hopefully still provides some nice info.
Kaddyuk From Wallis And Futuna Islands, joined Nov 2001, 4125 posts, RR: 38 Reply 12, posted (3 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3627 times:
Most aircraft are not rated for 0 flap takeoffs because either the runway required would be substantial or your tyres would risk explosion due to speed exceedence... perhaps both...
I've seen alot of aircraft do what appear to be 0 flap takeoffs however they have Leading Edge devices which help an awful lot...
Whoever said "laughter is the best medicine" never had Gonorrhea
Aviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2355 posts, RR: 52 Reply 13, posted (3 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3604 times:
Quoting Kaddyuk (Reply 12): I've seen alot of aircraft do what appear to be 0 flap takeoffs however they have Leading Edge devices which help an awful lot...
As explained the F70/100 does not have a leading edge device, they are really certified for 0 flap take off.
Quoting Kaddyuk (Reply 12): Most aircraft are not rated for 0 flap takeoffs because either the runway required would be substantial or your tires would risk explosion due to speed exceedence
There isn't much difference in take off speed with or without flaps on the F70/100 and of course there are no speed limits exceeded.
The risk of a tire explosion at take off is limited anyway due to the short period of heat build up.
As strange as it may sounds but the biggest danger for tire explosion is during taxi for sure with the F70/100 as it's taxi speed with 2 engines on idle is a bit high
For this reason on many occasions at AMS(and other airports) you can see them taxi on 1 engine only or with 1 thrust reverser in operation.
Kaddyuk From Wallis And Futuna Islands, joined Nov 2001, 4125 posts, RR: 38 Reply 14, posted (3 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3604 times:
AmericanAirFan From United States, joined Jun 2004, 316 posts, RR: 5 Reply 16, posted (3 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3575 times:
When flying in a Cessna 172 at a flight camp all weak we always used a flapless takeoff but our lift off speed was higher but I guess you could say we had a better climb.
American Flight 1881 to San Jose you are cleared for takeoff!
I have to take issue with this. Saying something doesn't stress the airframe as a benefit implies that stressing the airframe is a drawback. The use of flaps certainly stresses the airframe less than crashing into a hill. The use of flaps within design limits, that is, for which maneuvers (takeoffs and landings but not slips, for example), and which flap settings at which airspeeds the plane was designed, does not stress an airframe to the extent that avoiding their use would be better.
Bphendri From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3072 times:
Ahhh, which is actually a question about the A300 that I was going to ask after my flight on on TG A300. I noticed with some alarm/curriosity that only the Leading Edge Slats where deployed on the take off run, and I did notice that the Flaperon Droop.
Georgetown From United States, joined Dec 2005, 211 posts, RR: 1 Reply 21, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3015 times:
So I guess I'll jump in and ask a question as well. I was taking off from SFO on runway 10 R due to the weather on a 767-300ER, and honestly just as soon as the wheels were up the flaps were fully retracted. It worried me for a second as that was the soonest I'd ever seen a clean configuration after takeoff (it really couldn't have been more than 25 seconds). I know it probably depends on a number of factors including plane and runway length, but once you're airborne, what is the soonest the flaps can be retracted safely (on a plane that requires flaps for takeoff)?
USAFHummer From United States, joined May 2000, 10685 posts, RR: 63 Reply 22, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2977 times:
Quoting AAR90 (Reply 2): but AA standardized on 8-degree flap takeoffs in part to minimize passenger fears (at not seeing extended flaps during F100 takeoffs).
This is interesting...were passengers actually noticing no-flap takeoffs and writing AA or speaking with crews after the flight? While I know most of us a.netters would notice a no-flap takeoff, I wouldnt guess that your average John or Jane Doe pax would...thanks for the great bit of trivia there!
Greg
Chief A.net college football stadium self-pic guru
Bphendri From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 23, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2912 times:
Not related to this post exactly,
But I noticed on my Viet Nam Airlines flight in an ATR72 from Cam Ranh (Nha Trang) to Sai Gon (HCMC), that on the flap gear boxes-housing under the wings for the flap mechanisms (Sorry if I don't know the propper name for these), visual deployment markings for 10, 15, 30 degree's. Is this standard on other planes as well (And we can't see them because we sit above the wing?)
Starlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 13564 posts, RR: 68 Reply 24, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2880 times:
Quoting Bphendri (Reply 23): But I noticed on my Viet Nam Airlines flight in an ATR72 from Cam Ranh (Nha Trang) to Sai Gon (HCMC), that on the flap gear boxes-housing under the wings for the flap mechanisms (Sorry if I don't know the propper name for these), visual deployment markings for 10, 15, 30 degree's. Is this standard on other planes as well (And we can't see them because we sit above the wing?)
You see this on some aircraft, but not all. As you say, it's also obscured sometimes.
For the record the housings are called "flap track fairings" and are sometimes referred to as "canoes" or "Kurchmann Carrots".
Tact Is For People Who Aren't Witty Enough To Be Sarcastic
KALB From United States, joined Mar 2000, 573 posts, RR: 0 Reply 25, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2832 times:
On the F100 you can see the flap extension numbers near one of the fairings. Great bird, AA and US flew them into ALB very often. Now all we get from American are the AE Embraer 145 and CRJ 700s. Give me a Fokker or a Maddog anyday.
26 777236ER: Kuchemann Carrots tend to be Whitcomb anti-shock bodies. Flap-track fairings are to reduce parasitic drag and to bring the body closer to the area ru
27 Starlionblue: Thanks for clearing that up, and the spelling. On what planes would Kuchemann Carrots be found?[Edited 2006-03-03 19:51:21]
28 777236ER: Convair 990, Handley-Page Victor, Tu-95 are the ones that spring to mind.
29 Tbanger: Yes Molykote I can confirm that this IS an acceptable procedure in the Saab 340. Rarely is flap ever used for T/O in a Saab 340. It can be, but rarel
30 Tornado82: That might explain why the Saabs T/O roll (at least) seems to be a bit longish, by prop standards. I never noticed it before until I rode one 2 weeks
31 Starlionblue: I get the feeling that's just an impression. If they designed the plane for flapless take off, it means performance is fine without flaps. That is, t
33 MD-90: Probably because it also can't rotate very far without a tailstrike. Plus that wing ain't very big (this especially applies to the MD-90). Not on a r
34 Jetlagged: They certainly flew approaches to a carrier at sea. I had a small b+w photo cut from an old copy of Flight (in the Uncle Roger section) showing an F.
35 IDISA: Same thing happened on the LAPA 737-700 crash in Aeroparque, Buenos Aires. Crew didn't select flaps before take-off and continued take-off roll in sp
Sponsor Message: 
From Italy, joined Dec 2004, 12 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, 
From United States, joined Jan 2000, 3001 posts, 
From India, joined Jan 2001, 27738 posts, 
From Turkey, joined Sep 2004, 2227 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 13564 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2355 posts, 
From Wallis And Futuna Islands, joined Nov 2001, 4125 posts, 
)
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
