Tailwind takeoffs and landings.

J31 · Post by **J31** » Mon May 21, 2007 9:34 am

The other day I watched a Beech 200 take off with a 20-25 kt tail wind. Why I ask… as he/she had a choice off taking off into wind. There are no obstacles, and the taxi distance was the same to both runway ends, in fact he/she went against the traffic flow.

Does the Beech 200 have a max tailwind limit? Some aircraft do while others don’t. Some times it is operationally required as in one way strips with a mountain or obstacles on the other end. Up to 15 kts with a long runway or landing/takeoff I think is acceptable. But why would this individual take this kind of risk with 20-25 kts?

Brantford Beech Boy · Mon May 21, 2007 10:05 am

There is no tailwind limit listed in the limitations section of the BE20.

However, the performance charts only include numbers to a maximum of 10 kts tailwind. Effectively, anything more than 10 kts and you are a test pilot.

With that in mind, most companies (at least all the ones I've worked for) impose company limits of 10 kts.

cheers
BBB

desertduster · Post by **desertduster** » Mon May 21, 2007 12:46 pm

Why? was it you..

YACdirect · Post by **YACdirect** » Mon May 21, 2007 1:22 pm

J31 wrote:The other day I watched a Beech 200 take off with a 20-25 kt tail wind. Why I ask… as he/she had a choice off taking off into wind. There are no obstacles, and the taxi distance was the same to both runway ends, in fact he/she went against the traffic flow.

I have asked myself the same question over, and over, and over, and over and over again, and still don't understand.

J31 wrote:Does the Beech 200 have a max tailwind limit? Some aircraft do while others don’t. Some times it is operationally required as in one way strips with a mountain or obstacles on the other end. Up to 15 kts with a long runway or landing/takeoff I think is acceptable. But why would this individual take this kind of risk with 20-25 kts?

There should be a common sense limit rather than a operational limitation; I see no need (other than very exceptional circumstances) to ever takeoff or land downwind... up to 15kts on a long runway? No need! You're just going 15 kts faster when you hit the ground or need to be going 15 kts faster (on the runway) to get in the air! Throw gusts in there and that 15 suddenly might be 20...

Like I said, I still don't understand.

jjj · Post by **jjj** » Mon May 21, 2007 1:51 pm

Liability and common sense aside - perhaps you could appeal to this person's consideration of how hard he/she is on equipment.

If every T/O and landing was with monster tailwinds - you'd chew up brakes and tires like crazy.

I feel sorry for the king air.

jjj

sky's the limit · Post by **sky's the limit** » Mon May 21, 2007 2:25 pm

Oh boy.....

stl

oldtimer · Post by **oldtimer** » Mon May 21, 2007 4:18 pm

I think a max of 10 Kts tailwind and 20 Kts crosswind is a certification thingee. I see those numbers in a whole bunch of airplane limitations. With many, brake energy or tire speed becomes a limiting factor but tail winds and crosswinds are the max observed during certification. Don't know why.

BuckNiner · Post by **BuckNiner** » Mon May 21, 2007 4:59 pm

What about downwind landings on floats? Any rules of thumb there?

wasYKnowFJ · Post by **wasYKnowFJ** » Mon May 21, 2007 5:11 pm

It's always bugged me that the BN2 Islander manual states max 5kt tailwind, but allows a 30kt crosswind.

KAG · Post by **KAG** » Mon May 21, 2007 5:36 pm

25 kts up the ass is retarded, and the pilot(s) of that plane should be suspended. Grow up folks.

J31 · Post by **J31** » Mon May 21, 2007 5:40 pm

BuckNiner wrote:What about downwind landings on floats? Any rules of thumb there?

In to wind as much as practical but there are times..... On CAP floats in the Twin Otter 10 kts was about my max tailwind….handled poorly and she digs badly

. Same goes for the Cessna.

Jim N · Post by **Jim N** » Mon May 21, 2007 6:21 pm

wasYKnowFJ wrote:It's always bugged me that the BN2 Islander manual states max 5kt tailwind, but allows a 30kt crosswind.

No doubt. Having taken off in one with a five knot tailwind, I can honestly say it didn't feel any different than simply no headwind. Slow is slow any which way you slice it.

The only reason I did take off in a tailwind was because it was light. That and the fact the other end was lined up behind someone waiting for their IFR. The freight can't wait so off we went. But seriously twenty-five knots on the tail? I didn't get paid enough to try that...

Icebound · Post by **Icebound** » Mon May 21, 2007 7:13 pm

Jim N wrote:
The only reason I did take off in a tailwind was because it was light. ...

Yeah, but depending on the weather situation, you could get caught in a wind shear.... and thus 20 knots at just a bit above ground. If you gotta clear that tree, you might like that 20 into your face, no?

For landing and takeoff direction, I would argue that the 100-200 foot wind direction is way more important than what the wind sock says. If it is light up there, also, then maybe your direction of takeoff is not important... But if it has some strength up there, then maybe THAT is the direction that should be used.

Does anybody look at the Surface Atmospheric Pressure Charts before they go flying? .... just to have some idea of the strength and direction of the prevailing gradient? It is not uncommon, especially overnight or early morning, for surface winds to be nothing like those a little up above the surface friction.

...

WJ700 · Post by **WJ700** » Mon May 21, 2007 8:19 pm

jjj wrote:.

I feel sorry for the king air.

jjj

"You Crazy... its just a lamp"
IKEA Guy.

co-joe · Post by **co-joe** » Tue May 22, 2007 8:59 am

I think I did 25 kts t/o once out of YOD where the strip is around 1000', but really KAG is right. Pretty stupid idea. I was so much older then...

jedinite · Post by **jedinite** » Tue May 22, 2007 9:23 am

Headwind tailwind, its all relative to the wind speed and gusts, how heavy the a/c is, how long the runway is, surface friction, etc.. and how comfortable you are with the aircraft.
Calculated risk!!!!!!!!!

Besides tailwinds make you go home faster!

just curious · Post by **just curious** » Tue May 22, 2007 9:30 am

I think I did 25 kts t/o once out of YOD where the strip is around 1000', but really KAG is right. Pretty stupid idea.

Doing a launch out of 1000' would be as Kag described. Not realizing Cold Lake is like 10000 feet is ummm... ?

Four1oh · Post by **Four1oh** » Tue May 22, 2007 9:53 am

BuckNiner wrote:What about downwind landings on floats? Any rules of thumb there?

for takeoff, you had better have a light/good performer, or it'll be a very long takeoff run... some engines will get very hot doing something like that, and we all know about excessive heat.

I once landed a c-180 with a less than 10kt tailwind and I never did it after that... scared the crap out of me. I had the control column in my gut and it was still trying to nose over.

YACdirect · Post by **YACdirect** » Tue May 22, 2007 10:14 am

BuckNiner wrote:What about downwind landings on floats? Any rules of thumb there?

Don't

Switchfoot · Post by **Switchfoot** » Wed May 23, 2007 11:21 am

J31 wrote:The other day I watched a Beech 200 take off with a 20-25 kt tail wind. Why I ask… as he/she had a choice off taking off into wind. Does the Beech 200 have a max tailwind limit? But why would this individual take this kind of risk with 20-25 kts?

I once observed something very similar on a 3000' strip in B.C. one hot summer afternoon. Honestly I thought I was going to see an airplane accident that afternoon. First they landed with the tailwind and then departed half hour later in the same direction.

BE-20 taking off down wind with a steady 25 knots and close to full load of passengers. 25 degree day. No reason to do that. No obstacles, no weather to deal with; probably just didn't want to back-track to the other end (which would have taken a couple of minutes).

I do seem to recall the arrogant attitude of the PIC that afternoon....as he was climbing in he shouted to a couple of people standing at the ramp edge to get out of the way because they were about to start. I yelled back... "try taking off into the wind this time".

Lousy decision making on the crews part. They used up all of the runway on departure. And I mean all of it.

Switchfoot.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Wed May 23, 2007 12:09 pm

BE-20 taking off down wind with a steady 25 knots and close to full load of passengers. 25 degree day. No reason to do that. No obstacles, no weather to deal with; probably just didn't want to back-track to the other end (which would have taken a couple of minutes).

I do seem to recall the arrogant attitude of the PIC that afternoon....as he was climbing in he shouted to a couple of people standing at the ramp edge to get out of the way because they were about to start. I yelled back... "try taking off into the wind this time".

Lousy decision making on the crews part. They used up all of the runway on departure. And I mean all of it.

Switchfoot.

If true this is gross neglicence on the part of the crew.

No different than the pilot on trial now in Winnipeg, except they did not crash.

However any crew that bone headed are likely to crash sooner or later

pilot04 · Post by **pilot04** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:17 am

I wouldn't assume the pilot is stupid. The reason for taking off with a 20 knot tailwind could be simply that the regulations required it. Here at Edmonton with the closure of runway 34 if IFR you must meet spec visibility of I think about 2 1/2 miles in order to use runway 12 whereas you can take off with 1/2 mile visibility on runway 30. They have closed 34/16 and added high requirements of visibility to use 12. It is a stupid situation created by bureaucrats but if the wind is 120 at 20 and visibility is 1 1/2 if you want to depart and the airplane has the required performance you must go with the 20 knot tailwind or be violated. We have that exact situation today.

Big Pistons Forever · Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:29 am

Commercial operations involve managing risk against efficiency. There are times when a downwind takeoff or landing result in considerable time savings and thus are very operationally efficient. However a decision to do a downwind takeoff/landing has be preceded by a clear and dispassionate assessment of the risks and must be supported by POH/AFM data. Most smaller aircraft have published data for downwind components up to 10 knots, therefore as far as I am concerned that is the limit. Whether or not any downwind component should be accepted is pure pilot decision making and is situationally dependent. Given the facts in the original post on this thread I can only conclude that the pilot(s) took an unnecessary and IMO foolish, risk

BTW, I have always tried to get at least one downwind takeoff and landing for my CPL students as the aircraft will perform/respond differently and the ability to safely conduct a downwind takeoff and landing is IMO an essential tool in any CPL's toolbox of skills.

SII · Post by **SII** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:12 pm

jjj wrote:Liability and common sense aside - perhaps you could appeal to this person's consideration of how hard he/she is on equipment.

If every T/O and landing was with monster tailwinds - you'd chew up brakes and tires like crazy.
jjj

if runway length is not an issue you most likley won't wear the breaks out as you shouldn't be touching them. the only time I've ever seen tires being wrecked was from people new to the plane (couldn't keep their heels on the floor for touch down).

in short, no it's not a big deal for a tail wind T/O or landing in a king air

flame away

MichaelP · Post by **MichaelP** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:46 pm

One wonders why the moderator moved this to Flight Training?
I would hope we teach people properly!

Tailwind takeoffs and landings.

Tailwind takeoffs and landings.

Re: Tailwind takeoffs and landings.

Re: Tailwind takeoffs and landings.

Re: Tailwind takeoffs and landings.

Re: Tailwind takeoffs and landings.

Re: Tailwind takeoffs and landings.

Re: Tailwind takeoffs and landings.