No flaps? No problem

Two pilots are sharing an airplane rental, taking turns practicing maneuvers, instrument approaches -- and now, takeoffs and landings. Flight instructors both, they are comfortable flying from either seat, so no time is lost to taxiing clear and switching around. The right-seat pilot is flying. He has made the downwind turn and is running prelanding checks when the left seater idles the throttle and declares, "Lucky you! Engine failure." As the pilot flying begins to deal with the "emergency," the left-seater decides to spice up the situation even more. She points to the flap switch and announces, "Those don't work." Then she points at the intersection of the 5,200-foot-long active runway and the airport's second runway. The intersection is about 1,100 feet from the threshold of the runway in use. "That's not an intersection," she says. "It's a brick wall."

"Anything else?" quips the pilot flying, knowing that all of this is payback because he made her fly her last instrument approach with some of the instruments covered to simulate a vacuum-pump failure. But without waiting for a response he is already adjusting his traffic pattern. What exactly must he do to successfully carry off the approach and landing?

The elements seem to be as follows: The runway has shrunk from 5,200 feet to 1,100. It is going to have to be a no-flap landing, without power. There is a 12-kt breeze blowing from the southwest, giving a slight crosswind component for this final approach to Runway 22. So it's a power-off, no-flap, crosswind, short-field landing. There's no known or reported traffic in the air or taxiing.

And in the event of an unsuccessful outcome of either the overshoot or undershoot variety, it is understood that the brick wall can be retracted at the last moment to spare the need for unreasonable braking (although perhaps the left-seater might indulge her sense of humor in making some imitation crunching noises as they roll though the imaginary point of impact), or a go-around can be flown. This is, after all, just practice.

Like most "emergencies," this one is a good-news/bad-news situation. The bad news, of course, is the power loss and added challenge of a short runway, plus the surprise of the sudden flap "failure." But there's good news too. Although the runway is now short, it is also "made," and the trick will be not to unmake it during the gliding approach. The wind is another asset. Mostly a headwind, it will allow touchdown at a slow groundspeed (if well flown, about V_S minus 10 over the ground), shortening the roll toward the imaginary brick wall and reducing the need for aggressive braking. Best is that the pilot has recently demonstrated and taught dozens of no-flap landings, at this airport and others that present real-life short-field challenges similar to those being simulated here. And he has observed, when flying with students and when administering flight reviews to rusty pilots, the errors of those who haven't. Carrying off the approach will consist mainly of avoiding several common lapses. But right now there are other things to attend to.

The airplane is midfield on the downwind leg, without power, a thousand feet above the runway, gliding downwind in a slightly quartering tailwind. This is a dynamic part of the situation. Inattention to the drift would push the aircraft from the final approach course; this must not be allowed. Establishing the aircraft in a trimmed glide at a normal airspeed for the approach (not necessarily best glide speed because the runway is already made) will have to be accomplished by setting pitch and then trimming when the correct airspeed is reached; the familiar pitch, flap, and rpm combinations for flying the pattern with power available are out the window.

The pilot decides to fly the entire approach at 60 kt. If necessary, he can perform a forward slip to lose excess altitude. The slipping aircraft presents more aluminum to the relative wind, in effect using its fuselage to manufacture the drag flaps would otherwise provide. At this moment the pilot pays some homage to the question of the engine failure -- adding carburetor heat, placing the mixture full rich, checking the position of the fuel selector, and simulating an attempted restart -- but landing on that "made" runway is the top priority. Nothing he does must put him in a position where he cannot land on that strip of pavement.

Minus flaps, the rate of descent is lower than usual. Knowing this, there is some temptation to extend the glide farther downwind than he normally would. But that's a trap: Groundspeed will slow considerably on the base and final legs of the pattern to an extent that is hard to judge. That base leg must also be crabbed in toward the runway lest downwind drift push him away from the threshold. When to turn base will be the trickiest judgment to make during the approach.

He begins the turn to base after the airplane has passed the threshold heading downwind, but a good deal closer in than normal. (Had he been lower than 1,000 feet agl when the engine "quit," he might have begun the gliding turn before flying past the touchdown zone.) The turn itself is banked less than the turn to final will be -- then, the crosswind component will be pushing the airplane from the extended centerline. If it appears that this effect is more than anticipated he will shallow his bank even more to reduce his rate of turn.

This proves unnecessary. So during the brief, wings-level base leg, he has time to glance at the airspeed, observe his vertical speed (which shows about a 400-feet-per-minute rate of descent), check altitude, and then begin the turn to final. Rolling out, he judges his position as being slightly high. But reacting to that would be premature; first let the effect of the direct headwind take over before slipping away altitude.

Here the well-known method of judging whether your planned touchdown point appears fixed in the windscreen applies. Remember this method? If your touchdown point seems to be sliding under the nose, you are going to land long. If it appears to be moving up in the windscreen, you will land short. If it is fixed, you are on target. This technique is useful with or without flaps. The only difference is that without flaps, sky occupies more of the view ahead through the windscreen.

With the final approach stabilized and about 500 feet of altitude remaining, the runway numbers seem to be moving slightly under the spinner. Time to make adjustments. The crosswind component down this low has become negligible. The pilot lowers the right wing a few degrees and simultaneously pushes the left rudder pedal, which prevents the nose from turning toward the lowered wing. Held in this slip, the airplane is presenting more surface area to the wind, increasing drag. Pitch is not changed -- airspeed should neither increase nor decrease in the slip.

As the rate of descent increases as shown on the vertical speed indicator, the touchdown point reverses its downward movement in the windscreen. When it returns to full center of his view, the pilot reduces the crossed control inputs slightly to moderate the descent rate, but maintains a reduced slip. There is a burble of surface-friction turbulence as the ground approaches.

Now the airplane is over the threshold in ground effect; he neutralizes the slip as the descent rate momentarily melts to nothing. When the descent gently resumes, he keeps the longitudinal axis of the aircraft aligned with the runway centerline with rudder inputs and begins a roundout. The long white numbers slither beneath as the pilot slowly feeds in back pressure, just enough to prolong the sink to the pavement -- no ballooning or skipping allowed! The pitch attitude in the flare will be higher than normal, but so will the stall speed, by about 5 kt. Touchdown and stall-horn music occur as one.

With plenty of room before the brick wall is reached, the pilot holds full back-pressure, letting aerodynamic drag slow the rolling aircraft. When the nose starts down, he switches to a modified short-field deceleration method, helping the nose down with forward yoke pressure, then holding it there and braking firmly. The brick wall is safe.

Not all no-flap landings must be performed without power, of course. But a strong case for practicing them this way on occasion is that too many real emergency landings end in damage or injury because the pilot adds flaps too soon and fails to make the runway. Or he pushes the nose down during the glide to compensate for excess height above the runway, allowing airspeed to build to an unmanageable level, resulting in an overshoot. (Numerous official accident reports include this kind of pilot action in the narrative.)

An additional strategy for deriving maximum educational benefit from your no-flap landing practice is to perform some at airports that you use for your short-field landing work. Yes -- airplanes without flaps use short fields, too. Except in cases where obstructions on final demand a much steeper than normal approach, you'll be surprised how little performance is lost when you correctly arrive flapless.

Airspeed control and a sharp ability to judge your rate of descent on final (adjusting with power changes, and then, once the power is idle, with slipping as necessary) are key to success. If the view out the windscreen with the nose higher than usual (relative to the horizon) for a given airspeed in the pattern or during that final descent is daunting, climb to airwork altitude for awhile and practice no-flap slow flight -- level and in descents -- until the picture seems more natural, and you know what rates of descent to expect at your airspeed and power combinations.

Some mistakes to avoid on the approach: Power tends to cancel the effect of a slip; you can use slips to fine-tune a power-on glide, but if a significant increase in descent rate is needed, dump power and then slip as needed. Don't underestimate the effect of even slight amounts of power; manage it aggressively. Avoid poking the nose down during your slip, as the acceleration response of the aircraft will also negate the slip's higher sink rate. During your roundout, monitor your track with peripheral vision, resisting temptation to lower the nose; here again, increased airspeed will translate to excess float. Be patient during your flare, adding just enough back-pressure to soften your rate of descent. Keep that yoke back at touchdown! Aerodynamic braking is the reason: This too would have been a function of flaps.

It's not necessary to fly a long, flat final approach as a hedge against the shallow glide you may be expecting -- this is the most common misimpression of all, and it often ends in the pilot's hauling the airplane to the threshold on the ragged edge of aerodynamic insolvency. Your three resources of power management, slipping, and any headwind component on final can be combined to bring off a very normal-looking and -feeling approach.

Practice will make your no-flap landings into routine events -- indeed, you might own an airplane some day, such as an Aeronca Champ, Cessna 120, or other old-timer, that has no flaps. Could there be a no-flap landing on your flight test? Possibly. Private pilot flight test Area of Operation X, Task B, Systems and Equipment Malfunctions, requires that applicants be tested on emergencies related to three of 14 listed aircraft systems, including "landing gear or flap malfunction."

Master the no-flap technique while you are sharpening your other landings skills, and know that you always have an alternative method of bringing your ship to Earth.

Dan Namowitz is an aviation writer and flight instructor. A pilot since 1985 and an instructor since 1990, he resides in Maine.