B727-200
Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Engineer
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 105; Flight Crew Total 19000; Flight Crew Type 1800
Human-Machine Interface
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
General None Reported / Taken
Human Factors; Aircraft
I was the pilot not flying during our approach to the runway. We were vectored for the ILS; reported the field in sight and then were cleared for the visual approach. ATIS winds were reported at 030/10G14. During the approach brief we decided to plan on VREF+10 for our landing speed and I would get a current wind report on short final. Flaps 25 and the landing checklist were called for around 1;200 FT. I called '1;000 FT; cleared to land' and started the landing checklist. At approximately 800 FT during the landing checklist it was discovered that the TE FLAP DISAGREE light was on and both flaps were indicating 20. The wind check reported the current wind at 030/8. I asked the First Officer if he was comfortable continuing the approach with the intention of landing with flaps 20. He said 'yes and we already have a higher Vref speed set.' The flap handle was repositioned to 20 to match the indicated flap position. At 600 FT we decided to continue the approach and did not reference the QRH. The GPWS did report its' 'FLAPS-TOO LOW' warning on short final several times. The warnings were attributed to a known reason - as not having the flaps set at 25 or 30 for landing - and not having run the checklist to override the GPWS oral warning system.
B727 Captain discovers a flap disagree light during approach with the flaps selected to 25 and indicating 20. With Vref set at plus 10 for a crosswind the crew elects to continue to landing without referencing the QRH. The GPWS flaps warning sounds several times prior to touch down.