C150 or 152 IRL?

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

From recent posts about a good C150, I got the impression that the C152 is
much better modelled for sim than C150. Is there much difference between
them IRL and, if I have the chance to take a lesson or two, would those with
RL experience have reason to recommend one over the other?

John P.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

can you pleasse tell me where can i get CESSNA 152 for free aand also
it should be realistic

_________________________________________________________
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!
 

william

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2004
474
0
18,780
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"JohnSP" <petriejj@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:1%Jze.28482$oJ.13281@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> From recent posts about a good C150, I got the impression that the C152 is
> much better modelled for sim than C150. Is there much difference between
> them IRL and, if I have the chance to take a lesson or two, would those
> with
> RL experience have reason to recommend one over the other?
>
> John P.
>
Grab the free 172 from here :- http://www.realairsimulations.com/

Its pretty darn good and good to learn on. My real life training was in
172s, piper Cherokee and tomahawk

Bill
 

Steph

Distinguished
Apr 14, 2004
283
0
18,780
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"JohnSP" <petriejj@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:1%Jze.28482$oJ.13281@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> From recent posts about a good C150, I got the impression that the C152 is
> much better modelled for sim than C150. Is there much difference between
> them IRL and, if I have the chance to take a lesson or two, would those
> with
> RL experience have reason to recommend one over the other?
>
> John P.
>
>

There really isn't much difference.
The 152 engine has 10HP more. There is an aerobatic 152, but the basic model
is almost indistinguishable from the 150
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Steph" <steph@vancouvers.island> wrote in message
news:00Lze.1916044$Xk.645207@pd7tw3no...
>
> There really isn't much difference.
> The 152 engine has 10HP more. There is an aerobatic 152, but the basic
model
> is almost indistinguishable from the 150

That plus the flaps and the fact that the 152's have a few years less
sweat in them from nervous students! <G>

Earl
--
Earl Needham
Clovis, New Mexico USA
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Must be the 152.... it's got a bigger number... or am I easily fooled by
marketting ploys?

"JohnSP" <petriejj@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:1%Jze.28482$oJ.13281@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> From recent posts about a good C150, I got the impression that the C152 is
> much better modelled for sim than C150. Is there much difference between
> them IRL and, if I have the chance to take a lesson or two, would those
> with
> RL experience have reason to recommend one over the other?
>
> John P.
>
>
 

Steph

Distinguished
Apr 14, 2004
283
0
18,780
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Earl Needham" <munged@3lefties.com> wrote in message
news:11cvn3vrslt9314@corp.supernews.com...
> "Steph" <steph@vancouvers.island> wrote in message
> news:00Lze.1916044$Xk.645207@pd7tw3no...
>>
>> There really isn't much difference.
>> The 152 engine has 10HP more. There is an aerobatic 152, but the basic
> model
>> is almost indistinguishable from the 150
>
> That plus the flaps and the fact that the 152's have a few years less
> sweat in them from nervous students! <G>
>
> Earl
> --
> Earl Needham
> Clovis, New Mexico USA
>
>

What's the difference with the flaps, Earl?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"amangill" <amangill@forums.simradar.com> wrote in message
news:1120891654.26296@forums.simradar.com...
> can you pleasse tell me where can i get CESSNA 152 for free aand also
> it should be realistic
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
> Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

See the thread A good Cessna 150? on 6.7.05
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

check out the FREE Cessna 152 II at www.carenado.com.
Tom
"amangill" <amangill@forums.simradar.com> wrote in message
news:1120891654.26296@forums.simradar.com...
> can you pleasse tell me where can i get CESSNA 152 for free aand also
> it should be realistic
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
> Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

The 150 has 40° flaps, the 152 has a max of 30°.

Early 150s also had a straight vertical stab vice the swept version that was
carried through to the end of the 152 production. The early 150s also had
no rear window, just small port-hole windows and triangular shaped doors
that were carried from the Cessna 140/140A line.
 

Rookie

Distinguished
Feb 6, 2002
25
0
18,530
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

<NOBODYIMPORTANT@nobodyimportant.biz> wrote in message
news:yf9Ae.3059$us5.1324@fe06.usenetserver.com...
> The 150 has 40° flaps, the 152 has a max of 30°.
>
> Early 150s also had a straight vertical stab vice the swept version that
was
> carried through to the end of the 152 production. The early 150s also had
> no rear window, just small port-hole windows and triangular shaped doors
> that were carried from the Cessna 140/140A line.
>

That 40° flaps works like speed brake and is great for steep approaches if
you know what you are doing.
I've never been into C152, but from pictures I've seen change in flaps
switch & indicator. Much easier to operate I believe.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:24:38 +0200, "rookie" <enes@jware.hr.nospam>
wrote:

>
><NOBODYIMPORTANT@nobodyimportant.biz> wrote in message
>news:yf9Ae.3059$us5.1324@fe06.usenetserver.com...
>> The 150 has 40° flaps, the 152 has a max of 30°.
>>
>> Early 150s also had a straight vertical stab vice the swept version that
>was
>> carried through to the end of the 152 production. The early 150s also had
>> no rear window, just small port-hole windows and triangular shaped doors
>> that were carried from the Cessna 140/140A line.
>>
>
>That 40° flaps works like speed brake and is great for steep approaches if
>you know what you are doing.
>I've never been into C152, but from pictures I've seen change in flaps
>switch & indicator. Much easier to operate I believe.
>

The 152 was a bit more forgiving if the student left the flaps down on
a go around or touch and go. The 150 with 40 degrees climbed like a
brick and more than one student met his demise when forgetting to dump
the flaps on climb out.....

Bob
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

I always liked the 40° myself... the switch on the 150s was a simple
up/off/down switch with a long indicator behind the windshield. You had to
use them blindly (by "feel") or look over at the indicator. The 152 has a
4-position paddle switch. Full up is "up", then it has three detent
positions for 10, 20, and 30 degrees. You can select ANY position you want
(5, 15, 25 degrees, for example) but the detents let you push the paddle
down to a know position without looking. The indicator is built into the
side of the paddle assembly and moves with the flaps.

The landing gear is different too by the way. The 150s (not sure if this
applies to the whole line or not, I can't remember) used a flat bent steel
gear, the 152 has a tubular steel gear with streamlined metal farings
covering the tube.
 

Rookie

Distinguished
Feb 6, 2002
25
0
18,530
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Capt Bob" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:5g46d15eecg49e2mb7n43i16bdabbmta1m@4ax.com...
>
> The 152 was a bit more forgiving if the student left the flaps down on
> a go around or touch and go. The 150 with 40 degrees climbed like a
> brick and more than one student met his demise when forgetting to dump
> the flaps on climb out.....
>
> Bob


I believe that.
C-150 with 40 flaps bleeded airspeed almost instantly. There is no way one
could climb out over any obstacle (not to mention standard 50 feet one).
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 18:19:20 +0200, "rookie"
<enes.handzar@vip.hr.removethis> wrote:

>
>"Capt Bob" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:5g46d15eecg49e2mb7n43i16bdabbmta1m@4ax.com...
>>
>> The 152 was a bit more forgiving if the student left the flaps down on
>> a go around or touch and go. The 150 with 40 degrees climbed like a
>> brick and more than one student met his demise when forgetting to dump
>> the flaps on climb out.....
>>
>> Bob
>
>
>I believe that.
>C-150 with 40 flaps bleeded airspeed almost instantly. There is no way one
>could climb out over any obstacle (not to mention standard 50 feet one).
>

Hence the reason for the high fatality rate. Stall, possible spin
entry , crash. Saw it happen to a student in Real Life.
 

Rookie

Distinguished
Feb 6, 2002
25
0
18,530
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Capt Bob" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:ubh8d1d9gava9loe2af9h84lf26iig0go4@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 18:19:20 +0200, "rookie"
> <enes.handzar@vip.hr.removethis> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Capt Bob" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> >news:5g46d15eecg49e2mb7n43i16bdabbmta1m@4ax.com...
> >>
> >> The 152 was a bit more forgiving if the student left the flaps down on
> >> a go around or touch and go. The 150 with 40 degrees climbed like a
> >> brick and more than one student met his demise when forgetting to dump
> >> the flaps on climb out.....
> >>
> >> Bob
> >
> >
> >I believe that.
> >C-150 with 40 flaps bleeded airspeed almost instantly. There is no way
one
> >could climb out over any obstacle (not to mention standard 50 feet one).
> >
>
> Hence the reason for the high fatality rate. Stall, possible spin
> entry , crash. Saw it happen to a student in Real Life.

On the other hand, other aircraft I flew during my PPL training was
PA-28-161, also having 40 flaps (0-10-25-40). So instructor really insisted
on learning me the proper use of flaps.
 

ditch

Distinguished
Jan 17, 2005
11
0
18,510
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Capt Bob" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:5g46d15eecg49e2mb7n43i16bdabbmta1m@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:24:38 +0200, "rookie" <enes@jware.hr.nospam>
> wrote:
>
>>
>><NOBODYIMPORTANT@nobodyimportant.biz> wrote in message
>>news:yf9Ae.3059$us5.1324@fe06.usenetserver.com...
>>> The 150 has 40° flaps, the 152 has a max of 30°.
>>>
>>> Early 150s also had a straight vertical stab vice the swept version that
>>was
>>> carried through to the end of the 152 production. The early 150s also
>>> had
>>> no rear window, just small port-hole windows and triangular shaped doors
>>> that were carried from the Cessna 140/140A line.
>>>
>>
>>That 40° flaps works like speed brake and is great for steep approaches if
>>you know what you are doing.
>>I've never been into C152, but from pictures I've seen change in flaps
>>switch & indicator. Much easier to operate I believe.
>>
>
> The 152 was a bit more forgiving if the student left the flaps down on
> a go around or touch and go. The 150 with 40 degrees climbed like a
> brick and more than one student met his demise when forgetting to dump
> the flaps on climb out.....
>
> Bob

You wouldn't want to "dump" them on climb out, you want to do that before
you leave the runway.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 00:42:44 -0700, "Ditch" <goverticl@aol.compost>
wrote:

>
>"Capt Bob" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:5g46d15eecg49e2mb7n43i16bdabbmta1m@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:24:38 +0200, "rookie" <enes@jware.hr.nospam>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>><NOBODYIMPORTANT@nobodyimportant.biz> wrote in message
>>>news:yf9Ae.3059$us5.1324@fe06.usenetserver.com...
>>>> The 150 has 40° flaps, the 152 has a max of 30°.
>>>>
>>>> Early 150s also had a straight vertical stab vice the swept version that
>>>was
>>>> carried through to the end of the 152 production. The early 150s also
>>>> had
>>>> no rear window, just small port-hole windows and triangular shaped doors
>>>> that were carried from the Cessna 140/140A line.
>>>>
>>>
>>>That 40° flaps works like speed brake and is great for steep approaches if
>>>you know what you are doing.
>>>I've never been into C152, but from pictures I've seen change in flaps
>>>switch & indicator. Much easier to operate I believe.
>>>
>>
>> The 152 was a bit more forgiving if the student left the flaps down on
>> a go around or touch and go. The 150 with 40 degrees climbed like a
>> brick and more than one student met his demise when forgetting to dump
>> the flaps on climb out.....
>>
>> Bob
>
>You wouldn't want to "dump" them on climb out, you want to do that before
>you leave the runway.
>

Oh really, you mean you are supposed to retract the flaps before
lifting off again on a balked landing or touch and go?? Well I'll
be darned. I must remember to tell that to all the student pilots I
meet :)


Bob
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Capt Bob <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

> Oh really, you mean you are supposed to retract the flaps before
> lifting off again on a balked landing or touch and go?? Well I'll
> be darned. I must remember to tell that to all the student pilots I
> meet :)

I see your point about the balked landing, but what is wrong about
retracting flaps while still on the runway during a T&G? It's not like the
few extra feet of used runway is going to make a difference to a C150/2 or
even a C172.

Seems very prudent to me.

--
Peter


















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Peter R." <pjricc@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2wc8k002sp43.dlg@ID-259643.user.individual.net...
> Capt Bob <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> Oh really, you mean you are supposed to retract the flaps before
>> lifting off again on a balked landing or touch and go?? Well I'll
>> be darned. I must remember to tell that to all the student pilots I
>> meet :)
>
> I see your point about the balked landing, but what is wrong about
> retracting flaps while still on the runway during a T&G? It's not like
> the
> few extra feet of used runway is going to make a difference to a C150/2 or
> even a C172.
>
> Seems very prudent to me.
>
On the newer Cessnas with electric flaps, it can sometimes feel like a very
long time waiting for the flaps to retract as you see the trees coming up.
( Of course, this assumes poor technique to get into that situation in the
first place, but those who fly little Cessnas are definitely not immune to
such things.)

On the older versions with a big ol' manual handle between the seats, you
could get a clean wing in a second or so if needed.

Also, those 40 degree flaps weren't called "Para-Lift" just for marketing.
They did make it seem you were coming straight down.

Bob McKellar
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 09:06:14 -0400, "Peter R." <pjricc@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Capt Bob <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> Oh really, you mean you are supposed to retract the flaps before
>> lifting off again on a balked landing or touch and go?? Well I'll
>> be darned. I must remember to tell that to all the student pilots I
>> meet :)
>
>I see your point about the balked landing, but what is wrong about
>retracting flaps while still on the runway during a T&G? It's not like the
>few extra feet of used runway is going to make a difference to a C150/2 or
>even a C172.
>
>Seems very prudent to me.


Peter,

You seem to be missing the entire point of this discussion about the
150 vs 152 and flap usage by non-experienced pilots. When you are
teaching someone to fly, they need all the help they can get to try
and keep them out of trouble. Cessna made a conscious decision when
they designed the 152 and the newer 172's to limit flap extension to
30 degrees. There had been quite a few accidents with the 40 degree
flap capability, where the newbie pilot would inadvertently forget to
retract the flaps after either a touch and go or balked landing. He
would see that for some strange reason the aircraft would not climb at
all even with full power. He would also see that the trees at the end
of the runway were coming up fast, so the only thing he could think of
doing ( not realizing that he had forgotten to retract the flaps)
would be to try and climb anyway by applying more back pressure to
raise the nose. The result was a stall, and a crash and one more dead
pilot. This is risk is reduced to some extent by limiting the flap
extension to 30 degrees This allows the plane at least to fly with a
little bit of climb capability and hopefully the pilot will realize in
that time that he needs to slowly raise the flaps to establish a safe
climb. If a pilot needs 40 degrees of flap in either a 150 or a 172,
then his approach is way to high and he should learn how to fly a
proper approach.

Bob
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Capt Bob <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

> You seem to be missing the entire point of this discussion about
> the 150 vs 152 and flap usage by non-experienced pilots.

Bob, thank you for your concern but I completely understand this particular
issue of flap usage in small aircraft. This is the particular line of
conversation to which I was responding.

You stated this:

> more than one student met his demise when forgetting to dump
> the flaps on climb out.....

Ditch stated this:

>You wouldn't want to "dump" them on climb out, you want to do
> that before you leave the runway.

Then you replied:

> Oh really, you mean you are supposed to retract the flaps before
> lifting off again on a balked landing or touch and go??

Now, upon rereading your comment above I suppose you could have been
sarcastic, but sarcasm doesn't work too well in this medium and often is
misinterpreted.

Without any clues to the contrary, I read the above literally and
interpreted your point that one can retract flaps while in the air. In a
balked landing situation that is obvious, but I thought you were implying
that during a T&G one should also retract the flaps while climbing out,
rather than on the runway.

--
Peter


















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 09:41:41 -0400, "Bob McKellar" <bob@coastcomp.com>
wrote:

>
>"Peter R." <pjricc@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:2wc8k002sp43.dlg@ID-259643.user.individual.net...
>> Capt Bob <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Oh really, you mean you are supposed to retract the flaps before
>>> lifting off again on a balked landing or touch and go?? Well I'll
>>> be darned. I must remember to tell that to all the student pilots I
>>> meet :)
>>
>> I see your point about the balked landing, but what is wrong about
>> retracting flaps while still on the runway during a T&G? It's not like
>> the
>> few extra feet of used runway is going to make a difference to a C150/2 or
>> even a C172.
>>
>> Seems very prudent to me.
>>
>On the newer Cessnas with electric flaps, it can sometimes feel like a very
>long time waiting for the flaps to retract as you see the trees coming up.
>( Of course, this assumes poor technique to get into that situation in the
>first place, but those who fly little Cessnas are definitely not immune to
>such things.)
>
>On the older versions with a big ol' manual handle between the seats, you
>could get a clean wing in a second or so if needed.
>
>Also, those 40 degree flaps weren't called "Para-Lift" just for marketing.
>They did make it seem you were coming straight down.
>
>Bob McKellar
>

Watched a guy once in a Piper Warrior with the instant release
mechanical flap handle , do a touch and go at Ft Lauderdale's 9R.
He was about 3/4 of the way down the runway and realized that he had
forgotten to retract the 30 degrees of flaps he had deployed. So he
apparently grabbed the flap handle and released them in one fell
swoop.. we were all waiting for parts of his airplane to come rolling
down the runway... lucky for him, he missed the fence at the end of
the runway by inches as his aircraft sank like a brick. I'll take
the electric flap anytime ............ :)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Capt Bob" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:dvdjd19tf06k36r2embgeuconlleqc4m92@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 09:41:41 -0400, "Bob McKellar" <bob@coastcomp.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Peter R." <pjricc@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:2wc8k002sp43.dlg@ID-259643.user.individual.net...
>>> Capt Bob <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oh really, you mean you are supposed to retract the flaps before
>>>> lifting off again on a balked landing or touch and go?? Well I'll
>>>> be darned. I must remember to tell that to all the student pilots I
>>>> meet :)
>>>
>>> I see your point about the balked landing, but what is wrong about
>>> retracting flaps while still on the runway during a T&G? It's not like
>>> the
>>> few extra feet of used runway is going to make a difference to a C150/2
>>> or
>>> even a C172.
>>>
>>> Seems very prudent to me.
>>>
>>On the newer Cessnas with electric flaps, it can sometimes feel like a
>>very
>>long time waiting for the flaps to retract as you see the trees coming up.
>>( Of course, this assumes poor technique to get into that situation in the
>>first place, but those who fly little Cessnas are definitely not immune to
>>such things.)
>>
>>On the older versions with a big ol' manual handle between the seats, you
>>could get a clean wing in a second or so if needed.
>>
>>Also, those 40 degree flaps weren't called "Para-Lift" just for marketing.
>>They did make it seem you were coming straight down.
>>
>>Bob McKellar
>>
>
> Watched a guy once in a Piper Warrior with the instant release
> mechanical flap handle , do a touch and go at Ft Lauderdale's 9R.
> He was about 3/4 of the way down the runway and realized that he had
> forgotten to retract the 30 degrees of flaps he had deployed. So he
> apparently grabbed the flap handle and released them in one fell
> swoop.. we were all waiting for parts of his airplane to come rolling
> down the runway... lucky for him, he missed the fence at the end of
> the runway by inches as his aircraft sank like a brick. I'll take
> the electric flap anytime ............ :)
>

Well. there is no known cure for stupidity.

If you have any feel for the habits of air molecules (and one should, in
this business) you can grab that big old handle, depress the top button, and
use it as another control surface, bringing up the flaps in a prudent
manner, feeling the pressures as you go. Of course, this assumes the
throttle is already advanced, or you run into a shortage of available
extremities.

BTW, I discussed the flap deal with my umpteenth instructor ( I went 13
years from solo to PPL) and asked him why I was expected to use full flaps
all the time on my 150 when it was both unnecessary and potentially
dangerous. He said "I'm not teaching you to fly a 150." He wanted to
instill flap habits for bigger iron. But when he were'nt lookin', I didn't
use that much flap very often.

It was fun once, when I had a C-130 in the pattern behind me. High cruise
speed[1] down final, idle throttle and full flaps just before the numbers, a
solid plant on the concrete and a left turn off the active after about 12
feet of ground run.

I do feel the biggest lack in FS is the lack of pressure feel in the
controls. I don't bother with it much, just fly on AP most of the time.

Bob McKellar

[1] In 150 terms, barely into 3 digit knots range
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 11:58:41 -0400, "Peter R." <pjricc@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Capt Bob <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> You seem to be missing the entire point of this discussion about
>> the 150 vs 152 and flap usage by non-experienced pilots.
>
>Bob, thank you for your concern but I completely understand this particular
>issue of flap usage in small aircraft. This is the particular line of
>conversation to which I was responding.
>
>You stated this:
>
>> more than one student met his demise when forgetting to dump
>> the flaps on climb out.....
>
>Ditch stated this:
>
>>You wouldn't want to "dump" them on climb out, you want to do
>> that before you leave the runway.
>
>Then you replied:
>
>> Oh really, you mean you are supposed to retract the flaps before
>> lifting off again on a balked landing or touch and go??
>
>Now, upon rereading your comment above I suppose you could have been
>sarcastic, but sarcasm doesn't work too well in this medium and often is
>misinterpreted.
>
>Without any clues to the contrary, I read the above literally and
>interpreted your point that one can retract flaps while in the air. In a
>balked landing situation that is obvious, but I thought you were implying
>that during a T&G one should also retract the flaps while climbing out,
>rather than on the runway.


I was being sarcastic and I would have thought that it would have been
obvious. Sorry for the misunderstanding. The person that I was
replying to obviously didn't understand the ppoint that I was trying
to make , that the 30 degree flap situation was decided on because of
the safety factor, especially in a training aircraft like the
152-172..... because of people that have been killed mismanaging the
aircraft flaps

Bob