Page 1 of 1
Are Krueger flaps bad?
Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:23 pm
by 3WE
I only read Flying and over generalize, and talk out of my ass a lot, but I thought they improved airflow over the wing, generated drag, reduced stall spèed allowed lower landing speeds and improved altitude control.
Please correct me, or better yet flame me for my misunderstandings.
Thanks in advance,
Signed 3BS.
Re: Are Krueger flaps bad?
Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:40 pm
by Not_Karl
I do not know anything about their efficiency/effectivity/reliabilty and/or performance when compared to other solutions -in fact I did not know what they are-, but they apparently are old technology so we should respect them.
And I think that it would be extremely cool to see the POTUS buzzing around in a DC-3.
Re: Are Krueger flaps bad?
Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2015 12:25 am
by 3WE
...And I think that it would be extremely cool to see the POTUS buzzing around in a DC-3...
Are you Evan?
The POTUS needs 4 engines...
A Connie or B-17 or B-29, maybe.
Re: Are Krueger flaps bad?
Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2015 1:00 am
by Not_Karl
The POTUS needs 4 engines...
A Connie or B-17 or B-29, maybe.
I
love the
Connie. How about a
DC-4,
-6 or
-7?
. I think there are
no Krueger flaps involved.
(A Ford Trimotor would be awesome, but it also lacks the necessary number of engines 
)
Re: Are Krueger flaps bad?
Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 2:13 pm
by flyboy2548m
I only read Flying and over generalize, and talk out of my ass a lot, but I thought they improved airflow over the wing, generated drag, reduced stall spèed allowed lower landing speeds and improved altitude control.
Please correct me, or better yet flame me for my misunderstandings.
Thanks in advance,
Signed 3BS.
Frankly, as a pilot, it matters not a hoot to me whether the airplane uses Kruegers or regular slats or both. As long as it works good and lasts a long time, I really don't care.