Centaurus I am not an airline pilot. I am merely an airport worker. I genuinely can't recall the document which I read about 737 crosswind limits, except the details I related but since I read this only in the last week i will retrace my steps and try to find it for you.
My recollection at the time was that it was either a Boeing document or someone citing from one. I will make the effort for you, because I found it interesting to note from what I read that the limit was not aerodynamic, but rather a function of what would break the gear if you fail to de-crab.
Put in a more accurate way, Mr Boeing would not certify the gear wouldn't break if you landed in an un-decrabbed manner above certain limits. Obviously finding the document will help us all have a look and an opinion.
The inference I took however was that if you de-crab in effect limit is not an issue. My humble opinion. Anyway you can take it from my equally humble efforts as a test pilot that this aeroplane (Cheetah) handles a damn sight more than the placarded limit.
I plead ignorance as a thirty something hour SPL at the time.
Whilst Wellington airport only sees 733s land in 50-60 knot crosswinds a few days per year, I can say I have had a ringside seat on the Ramp to many hairy landings and these appear de riguer at WLG. I suspect there is a lot of commercial pressure on these guys that if the airport company does not close the airport due to high winds (which it rarely does) then the onus is on pilots to defy their employer.
SuperRanger's document is very helpful indeed. Tongue in cheek I was thinking this proceedure is obviously written by the same test pilots who failed to de-crab in that youtube video earlier.
What it says however re-states what I mentioned. Ailerons just provide some slip to keep tracking the runway. Unlike these 777 jocks, I would de-crab before hitting the pavement.
PS Hey guys little request if you can help about 732 holding speed, please don't ignore my little post here... please?
Also this PDF file touches upon somethingelse which is relevant to the debate:
http://www.gulfstream.com/product_su...20Rev%2000.pdf
That is, the crosswind limits on most aircraft are only the demonstrated limits and not the actual aerodynamic limits. Thing is FAA or CAA certifiers can not conjure up 50 knot crosswinds to test an aircraft. They demonstrate the aircraft to the maximum crosswinds they can find and then certify that as a demonstrated limit.
Bring all your protypes to Wellington in October and you could certify double the demonstrated limits.
Hey Centaurus I object to the unnecessary personal insult in your post. My recollections of the facts are perfectly accurate. Your personal attack on me is a cheap shot.
I take some pride in the landing which I performed. I did that landing well. I touched down very gently and properly aligned to the centreline. I did not bend or overstress the airframe. The CFI had implicit faith in me and was using me to demionstrate technique to another student who was having difficulties. Unlike most here, I don't sit and speculate about crosswind landings outside my personal experience.
I was only an SPL at the time. I turned up at the airport for a flying lesson that day not expecting the booked session to proceed. Airlines had stopped flying anything smaller than 737s that day, so i expected my 8am flying lesson to be cancelled. I couldn't reach the CFI by phone so i decided to drive to the airport. My CFI at the time and I will not name him because he is the most amazing pilot I have ever known, was then also an ATPL Captain flying F.27s.
I think you'll find Centaurus that when the runway is 16 and winds are 240 gusting to 55 knots there is little difference between component and actual crosswind.
I think if you had some common decency you'd publicly withdraw that walter mitty comment and apologise.