When I trained in Canada (1956) we were taught the "wing down" technique which was much as Parkfell described except that the wing down was initiated after establishing on finals. This worked well on Chipmunk, Harvard and T33. On return to UK "kick off drift" was the RAF order of the day and QFIs insisted on it. I, even then, considered wing down preferable but sensibly did the latter. However, I never forgot the former. Much later, when I became a TP and resumed my love affair with the Harvard, I was able to resume the affair and was able to to some experimenting. I became even more convinced in my opinion. Subsequently I was tasked to cary out trials on Nimrod and Hercules in very adverse X wind conditions. I was able to compare the handling using both techniques. There was no doubt at all as to which resulted in the most consistent and accurate performance. Subsequently I flew the Lancaster which had an evil reputation in a xwind. Wing down allied to a "slow cut" made it a pussy cat. Unfortunately the RAF were unwilling to change the habit of a lifetime. Of course wing down is inadvisable with 4 engined jets but there is nothing to use it with 2 engine types. Indeed the Tristar autoland computer uses wing down, and why does the B52 crank its landing gear to avoid having to use KOD (wing down would not be practible)? Sorry to have gone on at such length but this is my lifelong hobby horse.