Originally Posted by
EGPFlyer
The wording of the crosswind limits in the manuals played a part as they discounted the gusts when they shouldn't have. It was interesting to note that half of the pilots surveyed for the report at the time thought that the crosswind limits were only guidance.
Quite.
And yes, I thought that discrepancy of understanding was strange...
For the record folks, Cool Guys didn't ask me to link the report - he asked me for supporting information regarding Lufthansa's crosswind minima. It was late, I was knackered, so I just Googled for the first relevant link that came to hand.
RRR - I concur totally about the somewhat quirky language of Airbus documentation, probably a result of their policy of writing first in French, then translating to English rather than writing them separately. I also agree that the systems response to the dual input during flare and touchdown was non-optimal - however the fact is that dual input during that final landing phase is a no-no, and I believe (again, correct me if I'm wrong) is trained as such.
(Incidentally, aside from the Hamburg incident, I'd be interested in your views on my post #59...)