Normally it’s a restriction which is aircraft specific. Ours is 50kts on the ground for us to not operate, and the crosswind limit for wet & dry runways is 32kts.
Coming back into EXT last night was hmm, “interesting”, wind was 280/30G47, the passengers loved it 😉

Great shots, flew G-JECX to EDI on Wednesday night, looks like an EXT crew on board. Love the Blue Islands DO328

Taking off and landing without flaps can be achieved yes, but each comes with it’s own set of issues. For take off, without flaps there is a performance issue on the runway, Vr increases meaning you may need a longer runway, which means V1 will increase, then in the event of a rejected take off Vmbe then comes into effect and will probably be limiting, obstacle clearance on climb out will become a factor, and also the faster speeds needed to remain airborne can effect turn radius’ etc in complicated SID patterns.
On landing, the LDA is a factor now, especially if it’s wet or icing conditions prevail, structural limits will play a part especially if heavy, Vmbe again for stopping, tire and undercarriage integrity.
There are many more issues associated with t/o & landing without flaps.

The correct definition of what flaps do is it enables you to have the same amount of lift at a slower airspeed rather than “gives you more lift”, technically it equates to the same thing but the former is the correct one.

If you take the lift formula CL = ½R V² + S
Where CL = coefficient of lift, ½ = a constant, R (Rho) = Density, V² = Indicated airspeed & S = wing area you can see that to keep CL the sums have to add up, so if you take from one you need to add to another, so if we take away the flaps, which in this case is S you have to increase something else, you have no control over R, and ½ is a constant, so the only one you can change is V² being airspeed. But as you can see with this, because V is squared it will have the biggest change on the formula.
Next for landing the same formula applies (obviously), but you also have to consider your kinetic energy, and the formula for this is K = ½MV² where ½ = a constant, M = Mass & V² is indicated airspeed. So it figures that because V is a square it must have the biggest factor on Kinetic Energy, so if you are coming in fast your kinetic energy is rather large.

So in summary you can deduce from the 2 formulas that you can indeed take off and land without flaps so long as the lift formula is met, but it doesn’t come without secondary (or even primary) issues associated with it.

arnab

Please do not resurrect old threads, you can start a new topic if there’s anything to add.
I assume you are a new forum member? in that case I would well advise you to read the Forum Code Of Conduct located here

Please do not post 4 posts one after the other, you can edit your original post and add anything you want.

Dean

Application is in the post 😉

caaaardiff, you need the right to live & work in Australia, plus you need an Australian ATPL if you haven’t got one, you’ll need to convert your JAR license into a CASA license

This is an incident, not a crash 🙂

Sorry Lance I don’t see how you can keep religion out of it, this country has a leader that is sworn to office under the laws of the Church of England, and the head, or Supreme Governor of the Church of England happens to be our Queen.

The day Sharia law is beset on this country is the day I pack my bags and leave.