Scudrunners

Going back in time and likely because I started my career flying floats/skies we always used flaps for take-off on all types, even the ones that stated no-flap T/O. I guess the question comes to bear when flying twins. Standard procedure was to us flaps on the Beech 18 and DC-3. The beech we set the flaps where they disappeared when looking from the pilot's seat for floats, wheels and skis. The DC-3 wheels was 1/4 flap for sure but on skis 1/3 flap and personally I always used 1/3 except on the Basler DC-3 T and used 1/4 there since there were warning horns going off at more than 1/4. I also used flap on the 402 series cessna for gravel ops and most operations. I know of 2 402B''s which crashed due to runway conditions which would have been a non issue if they used flap and fly it off a little slower.
Why are most pilots fixated on VMCG when engine failures at that split second of time is a far less likely to happen than a loss of control or running out of runway is far greater. -- ah silly me SOP and aircraft manual written in stone for modern pilots. Damn what a concept, bio-automation.

No one in out new generation wants to think anymore, why is that and for the coronal yup TC dumbing things down and piss poor flight instruction teaching the automatons.

When I look back at my 50 years doing it for a living I always get most excited about the big round engines. My regret is I never got to fly a DC-6 -- damn

Flaps create lift at the cost of drag. Some designs of flap create more lift than others -
older split flap is a good example of lots of drag. Newer fowler flap is a good example
of lots of lift.

For me, flap usage on takeoff was first determined by how much excess thrust I had. If
you don't have lots of extra power to overcome the drag, great attention is required to
maintain sufficient airspeed. Winter temps sure help with the power, though.

Flaps are really good when you have a shitty / draggy surface, and no obstacles to get over,
and all you need to do is pop it up into ground effect and accelerate. Float guys are experts
at this. Just don't hit the trees on the approaching rising shore.

When I look back at my 50 years doing it for a living I always get most excited about the big round engines. My regret is I never got to fly a DC-6 -- damn

A great airplane, like flying a four engine cub with a cock stiffening instrument panel.

L Charlie were this effective?

perfect - my most enjoyable aircraft. I far preferred the 72 to the 73

Fell in love with it a long time ago when I took a FE correspondence course [yes, snail mail]

You had me at 727.

The Flaps 40 setting was locked out on all the ones I flew, the old timers would say that at flaps 40 if correctly flown would stop shorter than a 172.

Sadly I never got to try, however Flaps 30 that machine was simply awesome. I feel very fortunate that at my young age I got to drive such an amazing piece of machinery. Sadly not many new 727 pilots are being made these days.


Think it was the Cessna 205 (C210-5) that on the ground I would turn the Aileron full deflection and eye ball the flaps to half that to make 7 degrees for take off. Pretty sure this was due to the flap position indicator being broken or non existent.

The most fun in extending and retracting flaps was in the Norseman. Overhead crank so on the first wrap the dude(fisherman) in the right seat would look up the next wrap got his hat and the 3rd on got him -- I would just quietly piss myself laughing --.

Old time whoredyne drivers made a joke about setting 4 wraps of flap first float trip of the season and retracting them at freeze up. The Norseman also had interconnected ailerons, the company I started with removed it but I did fly several with it. Best sailing a/c I ever flew. I would take a norseman over a beaver or an otter any day. It must of been the noise.

PS flap 40 on the 72 could be a very humbling experience. The flap were locked out any where between 28 and 30 degrees max for landing depending on noise kit.

I did see a high bypass fan conversion, too bad it came so late because it was amazing performance and able to get to high 30's instead of 290 at max weight. #2 was there just to carry the accessories and was reduced as far as flight idle in cruise. I'm old and I like multi engines (more than 2) and an F/E When I converted to the 73 it was the first time in 17 years I had filled in a log book or did a w/b -- haha -