Did the 747 ever had a 15º flap position??? I think they were later re-"angled" since the pasted numbers.... Guessing from the numbers, they could have had positions 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 and 40 (the last where today lays the -30 flap setting)....
B747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2661 times:
Our friend AJ gave you the flaps settings for the 747...
One minor detail to mention, in the SP, the "25" setting was deleted...
The SP is 1 - 5 - 10 - 20 - 30
Flaps 10 and 20 are takeoff flaps settings -
Flaps 25 and 30 are landing flaps settings -
Some airlines (TWA as an example) prevented use of 30 flaps for landing...
They placed a "lock" to prevent selection of flaps beyond 25... (747-131)
(Yet the pilots could select 30 with electrical alternate flaps extension).
Happy flamebaiting contrails -
B747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2660 times:
Dear Mr.BA -
Apparently there were some structural problems with flaps and wings of the 747-100 series, requiring inspection after use of 30 flaps... TWA decided to block that setting. Funny is, they later acquired 747-200 series from another airline, who did not have that problem, but... with "standardization" motives, what did they do... they... blocked 30 flaps on these 747-200s too...
I wonder what they did with the few 747SPs they got... these did not have a 25 flaps setting... ha ha, they had to "learn" to use 30 flaps, I guess...
Ooops, hoping I do not flamebait a former TWA pilot here...
I certainly miss good old TWA... they lasted 12 years longer than PanAm...
Happy contrails -
B747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2647 times:
I try to remember here, it was a problem with the wing's aft spar and the flaps drive I believe, a problem that did not exist with later airplanes, not necessarily 200s but, (like PanAm) TWA had old airplanes... If 30 flaps was used it required an inspection...
At PanAm we favored 25 landings and many other airlines do... Unless other conditions requiring 30, I presently "recommend 25" as a suggestion, not a policy... Most pilots I fly with seem to agree with me... besides, there are other considerations: fuel burn reduction, and less noise...
What I did not like with TWA "block" for flaps 30, is that an airline deliberately decreases the alternatives left to the crews, who may be in need of that capability without restrictions, one day... I believe making a policy is a better alternative... i.e. "land with 25, but 30 is there if you need it"...
Mr.BA From Singapore, joined Sep 2000, 3423 posts, RR: 23 Reply 7, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2614 times:
Thanks B747Skipper for the help! I wonder what is the policy for your airline? I think at my home carrier they standardize everything. Every take-off at any weight is to be 20 and landing 30, even if conditions favoured 10 for take-off more than 20.
For airlines that allows pilots' discretion to which flap setting to use, must there be charts for difference flap setting performances?
B747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2598 times:
Dear Alvin -
For us flaps selection is "SCD" subject to captain discretion...
We use standard Boeing AOM with all data as to what favors what...
For each runways we use, we have "runway analysis" for the numbers.
(Computer generated - we look what is most favorable, then decide)
Often, sea level, shorter runays we will use 20 for takeoff...
High elevations, mountains around (MAD, MEX) we use flaps 10...
Happy contrails -