Gust or no gust?
Having followed this interesting thread, I still have some questions (no pilot, just engineer, airframes):
- in nearly all post, it seems to be a given, that the A/C was hit by a gust or even two. But was it really? Or could the same, let say, 'manoeuvre', also be explained for a steady crosswind and pilot 'actions'?
- was the late turn into the wind just before touch-down a 'active' pilot manoeuvre to correct an otherwise misaligned approach back to the centreline? Or was it an manoueuvre to compensate a gust? The latter possibility seems unlikely to me, as no additional drifting of the A/C can be observed prior to the manoueuvre and there would always be a time lag between a gust and the reaction to it....
- given, that it was a late corrective effort to get back to center line (regardless if due to gust or not enough crab angle before), would the need for such a 'significant' corrective action shortly before touch-down commonly be regarded as a trigger for a 'go-around' or would you try to proceed anyway?
- To me the A/C seems already slighty banking to the downwind side during de-crab. Wouldn't a strong de-crab manoeuvre by rudder-input not necessarily result in a roll-moment to the down-wind-side due to yaw-roll coupling (again no pilot, just rough flight mechanics knowledge....)? And, secondly, could it be that this roll-moment just has not been compensated sufficiently and thus letting the A/C bank, exposing the upwind wing, and so on .....So there would be no necessity for a gust during de-crab to explain the drift downwind?
Just my thoughts following your discussion. I guess only the pilots themselves will exactly know the chain of events. But, bottom line, for me it would interesting, if the same incident can be explained without the alleged gust, but also with a nearly steady crosswind component and too late and maybe too strong corrective actions of the crew?
Regards, ihg
Last edited by ihg; 4th Mar 2008 at 21:36.