Cessna 172S model Flap settings

TCDS bitches.

Page 13 shows max flaps for the N model as 40 degrees, page 15 shows max flaps for the P model as 30, and page 29 shows max flaps on the S model as 30 as well. Anyone trying to tell you an S model has 40 flaps is smoking some wacky tobaccy.
 
pwttogfk said:
Had this debate today with my standardization pilot...he insists it's 40 and wants me to show him concrete proof of it being 30 (already checked...every POH reference is 10, 20, FULL). I'm considering going out to the ramp with a protractor :P Having flown a 172M quite a bit back home, I can say there's a big difference between the SP's flaps 30 and the flaps 40 barndoors hanging off of the M. Also, UND ignores Cessna's POH note saying to add 9 knots to final approach for flaps 0, we still drag it in at 61. Older UND guys--any explanation? The rest of our stan man seems to be in line with the POH.
Click to expand...
Your standz pilot doesn't know what a TCDS is eh?
Also, though the POH says faster for zero flaps, knowing the landing characteristics of the 172 I'd put even money on 61 working fairly well for a zero flap landing. That bird likes to flooooooat.
 
Yeah...I'm more concerned with someone trimming the plane waaaaay back to hold 61 with flaps 0 and then pulling even further back to flare. Boom, tailstrike.
 
The 172 S model I teach in says 10, 20 and 30 degrees of flaps right on the flap handle. No 40 degrees of flaps
 
Autothrust Blue said:
I guess I'll have to look at the school's 182T again, but I'm pretty sure they're Up-10-20-30, too. (That doesn't mean the actual angle of deflection is 30 degrees, but that's how they're placarded.)
Click to expand...

I might have that wrong, but I swear they look almost vertical when in the "Full" detent. :o
 
In fact, Out 172 S in the limitation section says that 30 degrees of flaps is all that is approved for landings.
 
Our year 2000 172S POH says:

Approved Takeoff Range: Up to 10 degrees
Approved Landing Range: Up to 30 degrees

Also the flap handle has a placard that says full down is 30 degrees. The flaps matches every 172 S I ever seen.


I can take a picture of it and send it to you if it helps win the argument ;)
 
Fly_Unity said:
Our year 2000 172S POH says:

Approved Takeoff Range: Up to 10 degrees
Approved Landing Range: Up to 30 degrees

Also the flap handle has a placard that says full down is 30 degrees. The flaps matches every 172 S I ever seen.
Click to expand...

Ok, I thought that you were implying the limitations section said you must land with 30 degrees of flaps and only 30 degrees of flaps.
 
The 150/150HP I fly has 40 and it is great, especially for precision landings. You just have to be on top of your airspeed and aware of the wind and you should be ok using 40. Now if I was flying a stock 100HP 150 at my home field (6348 MSL) I wouldn't use more than 20-30 degrees or even 10 on a long runway because of the possibility of a go around.
 
Cessna took the 40 degree flap setting from the 152/172 because of incidents with slips. During a slip with full flaps (40) the flaps could blank out the horizontal stabilizer.
 
We have 40 on our 206s. I hate them. Every time I use them, and anyone else for that matter, we always have to add power in the flare so we don't slam it down. 20 works just fine for the 206.
 
NJA_Capt said:
Cessna took the 40 degree flap setting from the 152/172 because of incidents with slips. During a slip with full flaps (40) the flaps could blank out the horizontal stabilizer.
Click to expand...

My understanding was that it was due to go-around performance. The issue with slips went away with the K model, according to "Cessna, Wings for the World."
 
tgrayson said:
My understanding was that it was due to go-around performance. The issue with slips went away with the K model, according to "Cessna, Wings for the World."
Click to expand...

Likewise. The 40 to 30 change happened when they moved the gross weight up to 2,400 pounds for the P model, IIRC. I'd have to look in part 23, but I believe it has to do with go around performance in landing configuration.
 
tgrayson said:
My understanding was that it was due to go-around performance. The issue with slips went away with the K model, according to "Cessna, Wings for the World."
Click to expand...
We've owned several SE Cessnas, I have never heard of many issues with go arounds.....I agree it takes a lot of force, but it is completely controllable.

Per the 172E POH (40 degrees):
Slips are prohibited in full flap approaches because of a downward pitch encountered under certain conditions of airspeed and sideslip angle.
 
NJA_Capt said:
We've owned several SE Cessnas, I have never heard of many issues with go arounds.....I agree it takes a lot of force, but it is completely controllable.

Per the 172E POH (40 degrees):
Slips are prohibited in full flap approaches because of a downward pitch encountered under certain conditions of airspeed and sideslip angle.
Click to expand...

Which model 172 did you get that out of? It's not in the 172M, N, R, or S model. (the POHs I have).
 
NJA_Capt said:
We've owned several SE Cessnas, I have never heard of many issues with go arounds.....I agree it takes a lot of force, but it is completely controllable.
Click to expand...

The issue is with performance.

Per the 172E POH (40 degrees):
Slips are prohibited in full flap approaches because of a downward pitch encountered under certain conditions of airspeed and sideslip angle.
Click to expand...

Note that I pointed out that this issue went away with the K model, and the E model preceded the K. The 40 degree flaps persisted long after the K model.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top