X/Wind corrections.

[Doc]

So, have we decided on the "correct" way to land in a cross wind?

[Colonel Sanders]

Yes. If no one uploads a video of it to youtube, you did ok

[Cat Driver]

When was the last time you saw a Stearman doing surface acro at your airport?

Colonel not only are they wonderful to watch doing acro they are wonderful to hear.

Some of my fondest memories of flying are remembering the sound of a Stearman taking off just as daylight broke when there were several of us at the same farm strip in tobacco country, beyond all doubt " crop dusting " was the best job I ever had.

[STOLskunkworks]

Wow.... Ok I have to Chime in here.

1) Every aircraft is different:
- A low wing vs high wing
- Tail wheel vs nose wheel
- Different sized rudders
- Different max control deflections
- Some have differential ailerons to reduce adverse yaw caused by ailerons
- Some aircraft can mask the air over rear control surfaces in high angles of attack
- single engine vs twin
- short gear vs big bush gear
- main bogies designed to actually flex while landing in a crab vs conventional gear
- aileron only roll surfaces
- spoiler only roll surfaces
- combination lift and roll surfaces
- flaps
- slats
- super critical wing
- flaperons
- turbines with reverse thrust
- pistons without reverse thrust (and some turbines too)
- high mounted engines
- pod engines under wing
- prop - small
- big
- good ground clearance vs close to ground
- Adjustable/beta/flapt pitch only etc...
- jet - High bypass
- mid bypass
- Turbojet
- STOL
- float
- AC with or without fuel tanks that can pump fuel in prolonged slips
Need I go on

2) Each person is different

3) no one technique works for all aircraft all the time > (> = a CAPITAL . ) on my keyboard

4) now for my personal opinion: Love the side slip / x ctrl method why its more fun!

5) I find it works great in certain ac mainly smaller light ac can slip the whole final. That being said I would not try that at work in a heavy jet ok just a tiny bit coming out of the crab in the flair.

6) If your AC rolls with spoilers you can cause a serious overall loss of lift and massive increase in drag by slipping in.

7) I know I am rambling

Some of the fancy crab to touch down videos you see test pilots flying in new jets are to certify the aircraft's ability to land in a crab. Is it right to say this is now how you should do it... Personally I think any undue stress on the ac is bad flying/piloting/airman ship whatever you want to call it. Should you slip a heavy jet and touch down on the into wind engine nacelle causing untold $$$ in damage risk and danger. I think not. So keep it somewhere in between.

9) I love flying a Cessna type ac for a long time on final in a side slip in a big x wind. Why wel cuz its fun!

10) I Instructed for years and I found that the best way to teach x wind landings was to teach side slips first. Also this can be done at altitude lined up with a road. The students loved it when they did it with a runway and it ended in a x wind landing. I also agree that you can then work to reducing the time in a slip so as to do it near the beginning of the flair.

11) With light air cooled piston singles if you come in with a bit of flaps a bit of slip and a bit of power on when its -40 deg C you can actually prevent the motor from shock cooling and if you lost the engine usually a flap reduction and coming out of the slip would alow you to make the field in the worst case scenario.

12) In one AC I flew the only way to do a max x wind landing was to approach with a crab keeping a little extra speed and kick the rudder in the flair. This aircraft had a small rudder (differential power can help but I will not say I recommend this to anyone)

13)Another Aircraft I flew was great Canadian built twin turbo prop big fat props that go to discing or reverse, massive rudder, high wing great wing tip and prop clearance with the ground etc. This AC was shown as "demonstrated x wind limitation of XXX" well I know we demonstrated the Aircraft was quite capable of almost double that. Hell you could almost land in a x wind that if it was too much you could just face the wind and land across the runway. (close to 50 kts x-wind might be an exaggeration but it might not )

I digressed a long time ago.

14) Dont knock instructors they are hard working and usually under appreciated. Many types of people out there and many types of instructors. Some are good fits other pairings are not.

Lastly for my long rant:

The best thing I ever did as an instructor was to stop doing it when I had lost the drive to give instructing everything I had.
I believe any student pilot deserves complete and unwavering professionalism from their companions and mentors of the sky.

If we belittle each other or give anything less than 100% to what we do we lower the whole field and profession of aviation.

Fly safe and keep an open mind.

I keep an open mind and am rewarded by learning something on every flight.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Can somebody explain why the light aircraft fatal accident rate was four times higher in the 1950's then it is today ?

.....so could you link the data to support the four times rate?

Since 1970, the number of aicraft in operation has been multiplied by 4:

http://www.1001crash.com/index-page-sta ... age-1.html


While the total number of fatalities remained constant:

http://www.1001crash.com/index-page-sta ... age-2.html


Therefore; the fatalities rate is now lower by a factor of 4 when compared to 1970.

I have to ask if you actually read your links. It clearly talks about Airline operations not General Aviation. There is plenty of accident data that clearly shows that the Rate of fatal accidents per 100,000 flight hours for General Aviation has steadily decreased with time. What has contributed to this is a legitimate area of debate and likely has many contributors. But I have to ask if today's instructors are so much worse then the sky gods of the 1950,s why is GA getting safer?

But anyone who has bothered to read my posting history will see I am not shy about pointing out areas where I think today's instructors can do better along with giving them practical ideas how they can IMO improve their teaching...and yes I can and have taught PPL students on taildraggers.

There is one other difference between myself and Cat Driver. He seems mostly only interested in trashing instructors on Avcanada. I maintain a current instructor rating and use it to make what I hope are better pilots one student at a time.....

I find it discouraging that yet again another thread has degenerated into a "old time instructors all knowing super pilots , today's instructors incompetent idiots" debate. Have we lost good pracitices for the old days ? I think so, but on the other hand are modern concepts like formalized PDM, SOP's, Learning factors, etc also improving today's pilots, I think so. So the challenge is how can we combine the best of both worlds ?

The whole debate about crosswind landings is, I think a good example. Clearly at the heart of this manoever is teaching good stick and rudder skills, and poor practices that you can get away with in a Modern trainer will result in bent metal in a taildraggers. However I think that using modern instructional concepts can also lead to a better understanding of the forces involved and better decision making on what to do in difficult decisions.

But hey I guess I am just another 99 percenter so what do I know.

[iflyforpie]

But hey I guess I am just another 99 percenter so what do I know.

Nothing wrong with being part of the 99 percent as long as you do your best and remain within your ability.

These 1%ers (more like 0.001%ers) both met their demise in relatively benign aircraft because of poor decision making.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Scott_Crossfield

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Fossett

Decision making > good hands and feet any day. Good decision making means knowing when to say no, even if you are a hot stick....

[Colonel Sanders]

Decision making > good hands and feet

This is a silly argument. According to you, someone who
makes the decision to never fly is therefore the best pilot.

I might mention that Jimmy Doolittle, . Yeager, Bob
Hoover (etc) lived to be very old, which contradicts your
position as well. All of those gentlemen lived very high-risk
lives, and had very good hands and feet.

[Cat Driver]

There is one other difference between myself and Cat Driver. He seems mostly only interested in trashing instructors on Avcanada. I maintain a current instructor rating and use it to make what I hope are better pilots one student at a Time.

Actully there is a very many broad differencee betweenus. We teach in a very different segment of avition and thus there is a considerble difference in what we get paid for our skills.

Ab-initio is the lowest end of the training hirarchary both experienc wise and pay wise.

I will not teach for entry level pay.

Therefore in my world we only deal with clients who are willing to learn from instructors who hold the highest teching credentils in aviation.

A canadian flight instructor is willing to drive to the airport and teash for around thirty dollsars per flight hour......i demanded and got ten times that pay.

Seems unlikely my qulifictions and teaching skills are sub par dosen't it?

[Cat Driver]

I can't decide if the Anson Mk5 or the Grumman Turbo Goose were the most demanding to land.

[Shiny Side Up]

who still don't have shoulder harnesses in their airplanes

um, it's not quite that simple. Without an STC, the installation of shoulder
harnesses is quite illegal. Not all older aircraft have the paper to do this.

In both cases a) the aircraft aren't that old and b) it was a factory option, but wasn't chosen by the first buyer and c) do have STCs available. One of the airplanes - since it on its second owner - severely injured the previous owner in what should have been a relatively minor metal bending. Whichever, you'd think people would learn, but I've ceased to count on it.

[Colonel Sanders]

if the Anson Mk5 or the Grumman Turbo Goose were the most demanding to land

One of these days, I hope to fly a Gee Bee Racer. That looks pretty demanding to land. Not many pilots are current on them, and not exactly a lot of dual models running around.

I have the sneaking suspicion that there will be plenty of experts on it here on AvCan, though, to fill in my knowledge gaps.

One of the AvCan experts here wrote:

I just don't like you

which I find a baffling reply. Really, who cares? I sometimes get the feeling that the median age on AvCan is 12 years old, because if you think that someone's IQ can be measured by how much you like them, well ... you have an awful lot to learn.

I have worked at many multi-national corporations populated by some very nasty, intelligent, unpleasant people whom I didn't like very much. But since they weren't in the AvCan world, that didn't meant that they were stupid, or didn't know very much, or weren't extremely dangerous, even if they were all smiles and chuckles in person. Generally, the two-faced ones are the most dangerous, who will stab you in the back when you have your guard down.

I can only wonder what will happen when some of the cherubs here run afoul of some reptilian characters that run large corporations. And then I read about Air Canada in the newspaper. Hmmm.

[Liquid Charlie]

Light plane flying was much different, 'way back when.

Most airplanes didn't have:

don't forget electrics --

. -- got the fly swatter -- just about the right size

[Old Dog Flying]

....If you remember away back in the Canuck training days there was only ONE seat belt that kept both you and your instructor quite cozzy..and it was a slip fit buckle.

In spite of this we all survuved without being mentally damaged...but in your case...

Just remember Old Cat that there is not a "One wayonly" to get the job done. Thankfully after 40 years of instructing I can sit back and watch you jokers duke in out in the playground.

Barney

[Cat Driver]

Just remember Old Cat that there is not a "One wayonly" to get the job done.

For sure there are different ways to get the job done Barney.

The issue I was getting at here is the pilots who fly the whole final approach using the slipping crossed control method to maintain the final approach track in a X/wind.......

........to me that is unorthodox.

[Old Dog Flying]

And as I said before ...to each his own..put 5 pilots in a room, give them any subject and you will end up with 7 opinions.

Ler's get on with something constructive.
Barney

[Cat Driver]

Barney, if you lock a pilot in a room with two steel balls.....in the morning you wil find he has broken one and lost the other.

[imarai]

This gear adds an extra factor for crosswind corrections:

[imarai]

Best to have wings level for a crosswind landing in this behemoth:(note the landing gear)

[Colonel Sanders]

Time to repost the classic:

[Gear Jerker]

Time to repost the classic:

Hoooly shit! Lol I'm guessing (hoping) that it's designed to do this...

[YYZSaabGuy]

Hoooly shit! Lol I'm guessing (hoping) that it's designed to do this...

Nope, 'fraid not. The U2 was by reputation notoriously difficult to land. Check out http://www.blackbirds.net for the following:

"Despite being exposed to serious threats and a hazardous physiological environment, our pilot is about to engage in the most challenging part of the mission-landing the U-2. The U-2 is without a doubt, the most difficult aircraft in the inventory to land. With its bicycle landing gear, long wingspan and its "desire" to keep flying (even with idle power), the pilot has his hands full putting it on the ground. The mobile officer also has a big role to play here. Keep in mind our pilot has been in a hazardous physiological environment for over nine hours. Not much to eat, no chance for a break, unable to get up and walk around. He is dehydrated, fatigued, and has a skewed depth perception from the high altitude. Still, our pilot brings the aircraft to cross the runway threshold at 10 feet precisely on centerline. The mobile chases the aircraft down the runway, making altitude calls at about every two feet. Deviations are also called out. To successfully land this aircraft, the pilot must achieve a full stall at two feet above the runway. I don't mean killing the engine. By stalling I mean to cause the aircraft's wings to stop generating lift. Our pilot does this through exact airspeed control. No easy task considering the condition he is in along with the bulkiness of the pressure suit.

As it slows, the tailwheel lowers to the runway and when the U-2 reaches a stall, the main wheel touches down. The maneuver looks graceful to onlookers, but tends to feel violent inside the cockpit as the pilot feels the stall, touches down and struggles to keep the wings level. But, it is not over yet. The pilot still has to "fly" the wings until the aircraft can stop. Remember, the pogos fell out upon takeoff so as long as the airplane is rolling and the wings are producing some lift, the pilot must fly the wings to keep them off the runway.

Finally, as the aircraft begins to stop, the pilot will gently put one wing on the ground. Each wing has a titanium skidplate so that the they are not damaged during this phase. The ground crews now reinstall the pogos so that the pilot can taxi back. The mobile is monitoring the whole event."

[Moose47]

G'day .

Off topic for a minute. Just got off the phone with Bob Grant and he said to say hello.

Cheers...Chris

[Beefitarian]

[BobBates]

I have landed a Cessna 185 in a 50kt 90 degree Xwind. Anybody here care to explain the best way to do it?
Bob

[justwork]

I have landed a Cessna 185 in a 50kt 90 degree Xwind. Anybody here care to explain the best way to do it?
Bob

Using runway width and not length, making that 50kt cross wind a head wind.