Incidentally, several people have repeated the common mantra of adding half the gust factor. I'm well aware that this is common advice, but I've come to believe that it's wrong - it doesn't work with the gust response equation I've quoted, and I've stopped using it myself for some years with no ill effects. Can anybody quote an authoratitative statement on this - preferably backup up by some maths and flight testing? I've yet to find one, and have come to conclude that - at least for our little aeroplanes - that it's just plain incorrect and seems to have just been made up by some FAA CFI one day and perpetuated.
G I intend to agree with you but see it more of a statement that in windshear and gust conditions to need to carry more speed/energy above the stall speed how much depends on the shear conditions on the approach
I really have seen plus and minus 25 Kts on IAS. Ok In a Citation but taking that as an example the normal sort of VREF IS 105 KTS
You could fly the approach at VREF but we wouldn't normally! we hold 180 Kts, Gear at 5 miles coming back to 160 KTS until 3 miles then its full flap and depending on conditions aiming to be at VREF over the fence.
In that situation say holding VREF with plus and minus 25KTS You would be jumping from 80 KTS to 150 KTS not very clever
So IMO a gust factor has to be added but at 200 to 300 feet the wind maybe very different from the GIVEN wind at the surface and that has to be taken into account for what you add to VREF as well as headwind component and runway length
I landed in Ostend this week and we had a manageable 32 KTS 80 degrees off watched an AIRBUS landing behind us and he was well and truly crabbed down the approach
Pace