What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

RV12 - No flap landing

Does this really require an inquiry? Vans lists stall speeds with and without flaps which will give you some idea about the expected difference. Your airplane has supposedly undergone Phase I testing to determine the actual numbers? You are currently flying it? There is no reason an RV-12 cannot be landed from around a typical 1.3Vso approach. What "procedure" are you asking about? I do not recommend the no-flap procedure a fellow at my airport uses for his RV-12 - 80KTS and power on all the way to the runway. I always lose sight of him as he floats down the 7000' runway.
 
I do not recommend the no-flap procedure a fellow at my airport uses for his RV-12 - 80KTS and power on all the way to the runway. I always lose sight of him as he floats down the 7000' runway.

Well, I have to say it because I?m old and cantankerous.
I?ve flown almost 80 different types of aircraft from cubs, champs etc. to jumbo airliners, military trash haulers and supersonic jets, corporate twins, turboprops and jets and I have yet to strap ANYTHING on that you had to land with power.
Heck, even didn?t need power in the shuttle simulator!
 
Well, I have to say it because I?m old and cantankerous.
I?ve flown almost 80 different types of aircraft from cubs, champs etc. to jumbo airliners, military trash haulers and supersonic jets, corporate twins, turboprops and jets and I have yet to strap ANYTHING on that you had to land with power.

Try zero thrust landing with F-18 on Nimitz Class Carrier and let us know how it works out...
 
The RV-12 lands quite nicely without flaps. No need for power if you control flight path correctly. Certainly no need for 80 kts ...
 
Try zero thrust landing with F-18 on Nimitz Class Carrier and let us know how it works out...

Another airplane that comes to mind is the F7U Cutlass. I've been told by its' pilots, it needed afterburners to land. Power to weight ratio was somewhere below 0.5.
 
Another airplane that comes to mind is the F7U Cutlass. I've been told by its' pilots, it needed afterburners to land. Power to weight ratio was somewhere below 0.5.

I don't know for sure, but I believe F-18 is making about 80% power on approach to ship with everything that makes drag hanging out...
 
Well, I have to say it because I?m old and cantankerous.
I?ve flown almost 80 different types of aircraft from cubs, champs etc. to jumbo airliners, military trash haulers and supersonic jets, corporate twins, turboprops and jets and I have yet to strap ANYTHING on that you had to land with power.
Heck, even didn?t need power in the shuttle simulator!

It comes down to how your flying the approach. Backside naval aviation, without power you'll be crashing into the back of.the ship. But in theory you keep enough snack on the jet you could time a perfect flare and maybe catch a wire; I wouldn't try it. Landing a hovering jet will require some power as well, idle will probably result in some bad things.
 
All I said was I never strapped into ANYTHING that needed to be landed with power on. You macho Naval Aviators obviously needed some assistance getting aboard. Push it up.
 
The only time I land without flaps is when I want to keep my speed up for gusty conditions. Usually I use one notch. That?s a holdover from flying the Cherokee where I use two notches. My reasoning is that without full flaps I am set up for a go around if necessary. Probably isn?t as big a deal in the RV, but the last notch in a Cherokee is more air brake than flap.
 
. . . . I’ve flown almost 80 different types of aircraft from cubs, champs etc. to jumbo airliners, military trash haulers and supersonic jets, corporate twins, turboprops and jets and I have yet to strap ANYTHING on that you had to land with power.
Heck, even didn’t need power in the shuttle simulator!
Sorry to inform you . . . but unless you are rated in helicopters . . you haven't done it all.

They are more fun than a barrel of monkeys! . . :D
 
"...corporate twins, turboprops and jets and I have yet to strap ANYTHING on that you had to land with power."


I found that with the Shrike Commander and the Commander 1000 yielded better landings with a touch of power. The former about 12" MP and the latter about 10% torque. You adjusted your final approach accordingly...


:D:D:D
 
I have landed and taken off with no flaps, 1 notch of flaps, and full flaps. I generally take off with no flaps and land with full flaps. In a no wind condition by myself, I set up at 50 kts on final. The airplane does sink at this speed and you have to start your round out a little sooner. But I like this type of landing the best. In gusty winds, or with two people, especially if the passenger is heavier, I will come in at 65 and usually slow to 60 on short final. I just like landing with full flaps better than no flaps.
 
Can you land no-flap, yes, but why? Only if you like longer ground runs, excessive brake wear, and possible nose wheel strike.

I land with one notch unless I need full flaps to adjust my flight path. But I guess all of the above applies to this also.:D
 
... a fellow at my airport uses for his RV-12 - 80KTS and power on all the way to the runway. I always lose sight of him as he floats down the 7000' runway.

Landing at 80kts! Now there's an RV-12 pilot who likes a challenge. I think the best I've ever managed in my 12 was landing at about 70kts once (just). Not one of my better arrivals. That's a very long runway, too. Maybe his hangar is down at the far end?
 
I land with one notch unless I need full flaps to adjust my flight path

The flaps on the 12 are more for adding lift and reducing stall speed in order to meet LSA requirement. Not much drag is added and not much change in pitch angle either. Very unlike what you experience in Cessna or Piper...
 
The flaps on the 12 are more for adding lift and reducing stall speed in order to meet LSA requirement. Not much drag is added and not much change in pitch angle either. Very unlike what you experience in Cessna or Piper...

Just a note; The stall speed requirement for LSA compliance is "Clean" stall speed. i.e. Flaps up!
 
Originally Posted by TomVal View Post
I land with one notch unless I need full flaps to adjust my flight path


The flaps on the 12 are more for adding lift and reducing stall speed in order to meet LSA requirement. Not much drag is added and not much change in pitch angle either. Very unlike what you experience in Cessna or Piper...

The procedure has served me well for making shallow adjustments to flight path on short final. YMMV
 
The flaps on the 12 are more for adding lift and reducing stall speed in order to meet LSA requirement. Not much drag is added and not much change in pitch angle either. Very unlike what you experience in Cessna or Piper...

Just a note; The stall speed requirement for LSA compliance is "Clean" stall speed. i.e. Flaps up!

Like Mel said, to qualify as an LSA an aircraft must meet the gross weight max. stall speed requirement of 45 kts, with no "lift enhancing devices" used (which the RV-12 does).

The flaps on the RV-12 do reduce stall speed though, so landings made with less than full flaps will always be faster/longer than they need to be.
 
Back
Top