Crosswind Landing Accident.

[RichardJones]

BBC News - London Stansted Airport: Plane damaged while trying to land

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-67600872

I am interested to know the wind including gusts when that happened.

[Cloudee]

BBC News - London Stansted Airport: Plane damaged while trying to land

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-67600872

I am interested to know the wind including gusts when that happened.
It’s all in the report.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6566ffc7312f40000de5d556/Bombardier_CL-600-2B16_Challenger_604_N999PX_01-24.pdf

[RichardJones]

Thanks.
In that wind the PF should have been able to manage, without bending it.
The pilot handing skills near the ground in a decent x- wind are not there anymore.

[Rt Hon Jim Hacker MP]

Thanks.
In that wind the PF should have been able to manage, without bending it.
The pilot handing skills near the ground in a decent x- wind are not there anymore.

Excellent. That's it then. We are all now considered deficient because of one incident.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPn3MBNt7Rc

[Consol]

Thanks.
In that wind the PF should have been able to manage, without bending it.
The pilot handing skills near the ground in a decent x- wind are not there anymore.

Well my last limiting crosswind landing was pretty sweet, I still must have it.

According to the BBC article the crew has a strained relationship and had been up for 17 hours and seemed to be determined to land rather than go around so probably fairly standard biz jet ops. That might be more relevant.

[RichardJones]

Excellent. That's it then. We are all now considered deficient because of one incident.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPn3MBNt7Rc

There is this performance.
Not their fault as they havent been taught, as there are none around to teach them

https://www.facebook.com/reel/245688734908158?s=yWDuG2&fs=e

As for the 757. Not a bad effort but the PF didn't touch down with zero drift. He certainly has the capabilities to have carried that out.

Just mu 2 p's worth.

[Sue Vêtements]

I guess Wilbur and Orville must have sucked then

[treadigraph]

There is this performance.
Not their fault as they havent been taught, as there are none around to teach them

https://www.facebook.com/reel/245688734908158?s=yWDuG2&fs=e

As for the 757. Not a bad effort but the PF didn't touch down with zero drift.

Need to log in to Facebook to see that. Not me...

[DaveReidUK]

Need to log in to Facebook to see that. Not me...

Nor I. But you don't need to - just close the login popup, and you can view the video.

[treadigraph]

Ah... fair enough! With the rudder that far behind P/F's feet not surprised there's some lag... :p

[xetroV]

As for the 757. Not a bad effort but the PF didn't touch down with zero drift.
Nor should he with a 26G40 kts crosswind.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1083x481/757fctm_eed7fe46f71b8bfe5a11b7abe0da15a2d6857d66.jpg

[RichardJones]

Well I have put a B707 down with 360/ 28 gusting 33 kts. Straight across. Zero crab. I long time ago. If it can be done Zero crab in a 707 surely it can be done on a 737. 707 less forgiving,
admittedly the 707 was at max landing weight which makes it easier. Cargo.
That was one of my best efforts. X wind.

[Consol]

Okay, first the thread drift. The 757 guy nails it, great job.

Richard J, did they build the hump on the 747 to accommodate you?

Does anyone realise that a long lens (300-400mm likely for many spotters) makes objects look closer and thereby exaggerates angles?

Back to the thread, it's actually worrying because once again it seems to indicate biz jet lack of handling skills, safety awareness, CRM and what not. Oh and you must give the boss a smooth landing no matter what. Anyone care to comment?

[RichardJones]

Okay, first the thread drift. The 757 guy nails it, great job.

Richard J, did they build the hump on the 747 to accommodate you?

Does anyone realise that a long lens (300-400mm likely for many spotters) makes objects look closer and thereby exaggerates angles?

Back to the thread, it's actually worrying because once again it seems to indicate biz jet lack of handling skills, safety awareness, CRM and what not. Oh and you must give the boss a smooth landing no matter what. Anyone care to comment?

The answer is no!
Look I've made more than my share of stuff ups. Domt worry about that. No I am not an ace by any stretch of the imagination, either.
What I have tried to do is maintain my standards. Tried to show a bit of finesse.
It does sadden me when I' see very e experienced Captains for example, throw the aircraft on the deck in anything resembling a crosswind.
Ok you would expect a graduate of a sausage factory to do that..
As for the aircraft handling notes. They are a legal backside covering exercise to protect the aircraft manufacturer. In basic training did we try and land sideways in a crosswind? No of course not.
A lot of these skills died when they did away with tailwheel/conventional U/C training aircraft. The way some of these people throw the aircraft on the deck, in a tricycle U/G., the tailwheel aircraft would bite.
I got on the sause one night with the chief pilot of a major European carrier. He told me that flying skills are well down on his list of selection criteria. I knew then, we were in trouble.

[First_Principal]

Richard J, did they build the hump on the 747 to accommodate you?


At the risk of not contributing anything useful to this thread, and with apologies to Richard, I have to say this was very funny! :D

(would have simply 'liked' the post, but seemingly not available on this particularly forum...)

[RichardJones]

At the risk of not contributing anything useful to this thread, and with apologies to Richard, I have to say this was very funny! :D

(would have simply 'liked' the post, but seemingly not available on this particularly forum...)

Whipper Snappers! No respect for the old guard! 😊

[markkal]

The answer is no!
Look I've made more than my share of stuff ups. Domt worry about that. No I am not an ace by any stretch of the imagination, either.
What I have tried to do is maintain my standards. Tried to show a bit of finesse.
It does sadden me when I' see very e experienced Captains for example, throw the aircraft on the deck in anything resembling a crosswind.
Ok you would expect a graduate of a sausage factory to do that..
As for the aircraft handling notes. They are a legal backside covering exercise to protect the aircraft manufacturer. In basic training did we try and land sideways in a crosswind? No of course not.
A lot of these skills died when they did away with tailwheel/conventional U/C training aircraft. The way some of these people throw the aircraft on the deck, in a tricycle U/G., the tailwheel aircraft would bite.
I got on the sause one night with the chief pilot of a major European carrier. He told me that flying skills are well down on his list of selection criteria. I knew then, we were in trouble.

Perhaps a bit out of topic as it would not apply to big jets, with low wings and low mounted engines, Way back in the past as you pointed out, tailwheel aircrafts required precised skills among those one was required to slip on final to bleed of altitude as most of the time there were no flaps.

So the slipping technique became ingrained and in general aviation allowed pilots to be mentlaly and tactically connected during the flare to allow the aircraft by slipping it, to lower the wing upwind and applying oppostite rudder so to be able to keep runway centerline in between the flare and touchdown without drifting to the downwind side.

"cross controlling" is considered dangerous and not tought anymore. Few pilots know the difference betwen the slip and the skid. And the slip contrary to the skid is not a dangerous maneuver. While it does not apply to big jets, all those handling skills now gone would have certainly helped better awareness, finesse and timing during the decrabbing before touchdown.

The result is that most pilots in general aviation often land too fast, without decrabbing, they are not tought to keep "flying" during the flare, they just flare and wait whatever happens.
If you want to land a tricycle properly, not only during a crosswing but at all times, without throwing it around, it requires the same skills as a taildragger, i.e. having it point down the runway without crab with cross controlled inputs, and letting the mains touch the ground just before stall keeping the nose wheel off the runway until loss of lift gently eases it into the ground.

Furthermore there is often a parallax problem not corrected at touchdown in side by side aircrafts, whereby the longitudinal axis is right in front of you and not passing through the prop spinner at the center of the cowling.

All these techniques may not be applicable to big jets but certainly would help be coordinated, sharp and focussed during the flare with correct timing inputs to decrab at the right moment.
Different skill may apply to different types of aircrafts, but the confidence each one of those skills provides makes anyone a better pilot.

[RichardJones]

Perhaps a bit out of topic as it would not apply to big jets, with low wings and low mounted engines, Way back in the past as you pointed out, tailwheel aircrafts required precised skills among those one was required to slip on final to bleed of altitude as most of the time there were no flaps.

So the slipping technique became ingrained and in general aviation allowed pilots to be mentlaly and tactically connected during the flare to allow the aircraft by slipping it, to lower the wing upwind and applying oppostite rudder so to be able to keep runway centerline in between the flare and touchdown without drifting to the downwind side.

"cross controlling" is considered dangerous and not tought anymore. Few pilots know the difference betwen the slip and the skid. And the slip contrary to the skid is not a dangerous maneuver. While it does not apply to big jets, all those handling skills now gone would have certainly helped better awareness, finesse and timing during the decrabbing before touchdown.

The result is that most pilots in general aviation often land too fast, without decrabbing, they are not tought to keep "flying" during the flare, they just flare and wait whatever happens.
If you want to land a tricycle properly, not only during a crosswing but at all times, without throwing it around, it requires the same skills as a taildragger, i.e. having it point down the runway without crab with cross controlled inputs, and letting the mains touch the ground just before stall keeping the nose wheel off the runway until loss of lift gently eases it into the ground.

Furthermore there is often a parallax problem not corrected at touchdown in side by side aircrafts, whereby the longitudinal axis is right in front of you and not passing through the prop spinner at the center of the cowling.

All these techniques may not be applicable to big jets but certainly would help be coordinated, sharp and focussed during the flare with correct timing inputs to decrab at the right moment.
Different skill may apply to different types of aircrafts, but the confidence each one of those skills provides makes anyone a better pilot.

Well said. Good post. You know your stuff. You are probably the right stuff.
The basics are the same. Doesn't matter the size of the aircraft. The big jets I have flown, were low wing monoplanes. The basices are the same as a PA 28. It's not rocket science. Don't try and reinvent the wheel.
Juggling the rudders, especially on a sweeped wing aircraft you are inviting trouble. Ease a bootful in and hold it. Some leeward rudder is better than none!!
I rest my case.

[Discorde]

How are crosswind landings taught these days? Even with low wing pod engines it's possible to safely dip the wing slightly into wind during the flare while ruddering off some of the drift, which will reduce the strain on the gear and ease directional control after touchdown. It also helps to approach with the flight deck itself tracking slightly upwind of the centreline so that at touchdown the main gear straddles the centreline.

[RichardJones]

Pilot Induced Osilation?

If it ain't Boeing I Ain't Going.

BBC News - 'Oh stop!' - Storm Gerrit causes plane's bumpy landing
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67830595

[Rabbit 1]

Grand to know also you can buy his T-Shirts.

https://www.bigjettv.shop/listing/stop-that-black-design?product=46

My guess a pensioner who is dependent on welfare.

[RichardJones]

Grand to know also you can buy his T-Shirts.

https://www.bigjettv.shop/listing/stop-that-black-design?product=46

My guess a pensioner who is dependent on welfare.

Haha!! I thought he was a pilot, albeit broken down, but I didn't know he was a star. 🤣

[Consol]

Pilot Induced Osilation?

If it ain't Boeing I Ain't Going.

BBC News - 'Oh stop!' - Storm Gerrit causes plane's bumpy landing
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67830595

Wasn't there but yes, does look like PIO. Always interesting to look at the comments on these things, loads praising the skills of the pilots on landings that are less than good. Look at a video of someone nailing a difficult approach and landing and there will always be someone saying it's terribly dangerous.

[H Peacock]

Okay, first the thread drift. The 757 guy nails it, great job.

I’m not sure he does ‘nail it’! Relatively smooth touchdown I grant you, but I don't see any evidence of him removing the drift during the flare. The undercarriage does the job of aligning the aircraft with the runway track.

Demanding skill especially in a strong crosswind, but surely the objective is to de-crab just before the mains settle! 🤔

[421dog]

My understanding from a few 747 jocks of my intimate acquaintance, is that the received knowledge was to never transition to a slip upon landing, rather, let the undercarriage sort it out. All of them privately acknowledged that they kicked in enough rudder to make the landing more or less in line with the centerline in actual practice.

Two of the three are now retired, but still active GA pilots, and the other flies for a global cargo concern.

none of them ever dinged a 747 as far as I know.

[punkalouver]

I find this quote from the report interesting:

"CL-604 Operating Manual The manufacturer’s Operating Manual (OM) stated in ‘NORMAL PROCEDURES, Approach and Landing’ that VREF+X is calculated by adding a wind correction of ‘half steady state crosswind plus all gust (regardless of direction). Maximum correction is + 20 KIAS’ to the VREF. For the reported wind of from 300° at 13 kt gusting 25 kt, and a VREF of 123 kt, this equates to a VREF +X of 142 kt".

On most airliners, it has traditionally been half(or a third) the steady state headwind plus all of the gust.

Anybody seen this before on other aircraft?

[RichardJones]

I’m not sure he does ‘nail it’! Relatively smooth touchdown I grant you, but I don't see any evidence of him removing the drift during the flare. The undercarriage does the job of aligning the aircraft with the runway track.

Demanding skill especially in a strong crosswind, but surely the objective is to de-crab just before the mains settle! 🤔

Right on the money Sir. 👍

[punkalouver]

Finished the report. First they started off with not enough speed additive for gusts. Seems like he flared too high and was then holding off for the smooth landing(as suggested by the report) resulting in them stalling above the runway and dropping it on. The power was added but so was enough up elevator in response that the aircraft hitched very high nose up and stalled again, this time landing hard enough to cause damage to the nosegear added to the wing strike. They went off the side of the runway and then initiated a go-around.

I suppose in the initial flare that was too high, they might have been able to save the day with some power added earlier(while struggling with the crosswind) but the Operations Manual does say to go-around if power is needed to save a landing.

Bottom line.....too much elevator during a high flare and/or bounce can result in a stall. You may have to operate the elevator in such a way to neither stall or be too nose down. And perhaps even more so in challenging conditions, be willing to go-around earlier.

[wiggy]

421dog

"My understanding from a few 747 jocks of my intimate acquaintance, is that the received knowledge was to never transition to a slip upon landing,"

Yep, the aircraft geometry was such that if you allowed any significant deviation from wings level to develop in the flare you were in danger of smacking a pod. There were some graphs around, certainly in manuals for the 100-200, that illustrated pod ground clearance vs. pitch and roll that were quite quite eye watering...it could be tight even wings level.

"rather, let the undercarriage sort it out."

It would...and there was certainly an argument that on wet runways it was better to get the aircraft with all it's associated momentum attached to the concrete whilst the fight path vector was still aligned with the centre line, rather than spending too much time finessing the yaw alignment.

As a final point I know a lot of the comments about landings seen on streaming sites are wide of the mark but before being too critical it's always worth bearing in mind a lot of the performers seen on TV maintain recency with maybe two or three landings a month at best, might be at the end of a v long duty day and it might be oh dark horrible on their body clock.....

[RichardJones]

421dog

"My understanding from a few 747 jocks of my intimate acquaintance, is that the received knowledge was to never transition to a slip upon landing,"

Yep, the aircraft geometry was such that if you allowed any significant deviation from wings level to develop in the flare you were in danger of smacking a pod. There were some graphs around, certainly in manuals for the 100-200, that illustrated pod ground clearance vs. pitch and roll that were quite quite eye watering...it could be tight even wings level.

"rather, let the undercarriage sort it out."

It would...and there was certainly an argument that on wet runways it was better to get the aircraft with all it's associated momentum attached to the concrete whilst the fight path vector was still aligned with the centre line, rather than spending too much time finessing the yaw alignment.

As a final point I know a lot of the comments about landings seen on streaming sites are wide of the mark but before being too critical it's always worth bearing in mind a lot of the performers seen on TV maintain recency with maybe two or three landings a month at best, might be at the end of a v long duty day and it might be oh dark horrible on their body clock.....

Good point. Yes currency or recencey can influence the outcome among other things.

[Discorde]

Yep, the aircraft geometry was such that if you allowed any significant deviation from wings level to develop in the flare you were in danger of smacking a pod. There were some graphs around, certainly in manuals for the 100-200, that illustrated pod ground clearance vs. pitch and roll that were quite quite eye watering...it could be tight even wings level.

Perhaps twins are more tolerant of dipping a wing than the quads.

[wiggy]

Perhaps twins are more tolerant of dipping a wing than the quads.

Well, err, yes, as previously stated it's almost all about the geometry (including the sweep of the wing) coupled with what's hanging/sticking down under the wings and where...I'd guess there are some twins with not a lot of pod clearance that don't have a lot of tolerance.

You could certainly afford to be slightly more "carefree", if I may use the term, with the AOB approaching and into the flare on something like a T7 than you could on a 747.

[Discorde]

It's perhaps surprising that swept wings with podded engines have been with us for more than six decades and yet no definitive procedure has been developed for landing in strong crosswinds. With increasing incidence of violent weather and low availability of crosswind runways the difficulties might worsen in the future.

[RichardJones]

It's perhaps surprising that swept wings with podded engines have been with us for more than six decades and yet no definitive procedure has been developed for landing in strong crosswinds. With increasing incidence of violent weather and low availability of crosswind runways the difficulties might worsen in the future.

Indeed. Couldn't agree more

The ideal lateral position of the wings at touch down, should be into wind wing down, or slightly down. Even level, if that's how it turns out.

The pod strikes, in first generation 4, underslung engined heavy jets, often occurred when crosswinds are involved. Usually when the into wind wing is allowed to lift beyond level. If the procedure you use is correct, the A/c will be slipping into wind. No drift at touch down. Therefore the into wind wing will be lower.
We must be aware of the consequences of a heavy landing, with the wing down. The a/c will tend to rock or roll and leave the aircraft in a lateral position which is not ideal.
Stick to the basics that you were taught (if) during abinino training.

Whatever is done, make sure the rudder pedals are not juggled or pedalled like pedal car. Increase the rudder (lee wind) inputs gradually.

One may ask, when do you start crossing the controls? I crossed them gradually. Depending on the width and surface conditions. It is not ideal waiting to kick off the drift at the last moment then finding yourself not lined up and off the centre line..On occasion I have started crossing the controls as high as 500' AGL, or more. Need to be lined up and maintain it throughout the landing roll.
I was taught by a Master on a B707.

"When you can touch down, at max demonstrated crosswind for the aircraft type, on the centre line, the aircraft heading and track the same as the runway direction and maintain. Do that, you can land crosswind. This is what we aim to do right? Well if it can't be done, then it could be argued the handling pilot does not have full control of the aircraft. Or do we? Juggle the rudder, you are inviting trouble"

[NoelEvans]

...
The basics are the same. Doesn't matter the size of the aircraft. The big jets I have flown, were low wing monoplanes. The basices are the same as a PA 28. It's not rocket science. Don't try and reinvent the wheel.
...With an Aerospace Engineer and an Astrophysicist in the family, we always find those comments about "rocket science" to be very amusing!!

[RichardJones]

With an Aerospace Engineer and an Astrophysicist in the family, we always find those comments about "rocket science" to be very amusing!!

🤣

Well you know what I mean

[ATOguy]

I find this quote from the report interesting:

"CL-604 Operating Manual The manufacturer’s Operating Manual (OM) stated in ‘NORMAL PROCEDURES, Approach and Landing’ that VREF+X is calculated by adding a wind correction of ‘half steady state crosswind plus all gust (regardless of direction). Maximum correction is + 20 KIAS’ to the VREF. For the reported wind of from 300° at 13 kt gusting 25 kt, and a VREF of 123 kt, this equates to a VREF +X of 142 kt".

On most airliners, it has traditionally been half(or a third) the steady state headwind plus all of the gust.

Anybody seen this before on other aircraft?
I was surprised when I read that in the report. I expected them to pick up on the fact that it is a typo that was corrected in the AFM years ago, but the OM has not been updated to match. Legally that shouldn't matter as the preamble states that in case of discrepancy the AFM takes priority. But in reality there is a lot of scope for confusion.
But in this case it actually worked in their favour since it went some way to mitigating the incorrect initial calculation of Vref. Again I am surprised the report did not delve deeper into why they got the figure they did, but it is consistent with them not spotting that a database update has cleared the defaults. This sometimes happens, and one of the items cleared is the DOM figure, which reverts to the factory setting. so all the FMS speeds would be based on a mass around 4000lbs too low, or around 15%.

[redsnail]

I am not familiar with the handling of the CL604, but am reasonably familiar with it's younger sibling, the CL350.
The human factor elements definitely contributed to it.
The Chally 350 will drop a wing if you put in too much rudder. I daresay it's a similar set up on the CL604. It can catch out folks. I think he probably over rotated a smidge thus letting it float down the runway. It is a very slippery wing and needs some attention to the flare - or rather - check.

[FlyingRoland]

When looking at the Challenger 604 airframe it always strikes me how close those wingtips are to the ground. Tipstrikes are easy to make by design…

[RichardJones]

https://www.facebook.com/reel/206467855842831?s=yWDuG2&fs=e

[RichardJones]

This ain't very pretty to watch.

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/aeDgs5pzVmpBMSpF/

[treadigraph]

Can't watch it as I either need to log into Facebook or it's been removed...

Can we have a clue as to what/where/when please?

[RichardJones]

Let me have go. Born too far into the last century to be much good.
leave it wiv me

https://youtube.com/shorts/8o-wZQ78T_Y?si=k6W3NImlRa15jhHI

In essence, a B787 landing at LHR, crosswind, no effective corrective action attempted, before touchdown, putting the aircraft at more risk than necessary.
Not being critical of the handling pilot, as has obviously never been taught, or ALLOWED to do it properly. As demonstrated in the clip.

The second clip, there was a good attempt at corrective action.

Slip the aircraft into wind. It wont bit you! It may bite, if you don't

[treadigraph]

Definitely Heathrow, landing on 09L.

https://youtube.com/shorts/8o-wZQ78T_Y?si=k6W3NImlRa15jhHI

Nor I. But you don't need to - just close the login popup, and you can view the video.

I see I have form on not seeing FB links in December - but using my laptop this afternoon rather than my phone, I can see the link after closing the "log in" box. Strange...

[First_Principal]

I see I have form on not seeing FB links in December - but using my laptop this afternoon rather than my phone, I can see the link after closing the "log in" box. Strange...

Keep that form up treadigraph, there's probably a few of us on here that don't have anything to do with FB and would like to see the action! ;)

From what I saw I'd have thought the touch-down pretty much complete, and the go-round rather too late in the piece to really matter, FWIW.

FP.

[Joker89]

The 604 has a really weak rudder. I have over 1000 hours on type and from memory the crosswind limit was 24 knots. I once landed at or close to this limit and needed basically full rudder and a lot of aileron to straighten the jet before touchdown . It also is very prone to float which needs to be corrected quickly.

I think it says it all they the skipper disconnected AP at 150ft. He wasn’t confident or current enough to get the job done in those conditions but pressed on.

[Consol]

Let me have go. Born too far into the last century to be much good.
leave it wiv me

https://youtube.com/shorts/8o-wZQ78T_Y?si=k6W3NImlRa15jhHI

In essence, a B787 landing at LHR, crosswind, no effective corrective action attempted, before touchdown, putting the aircraft at more risk than necessary.
Not being critical of the handling pilot, as has obviously never been taught, or ALLOWED to do it properly. As demonstrated in the clip.

The second clip, there was a good attempt at corrective action.

Slip the aircraft into wind. It wont bit you! It may bite, if you don't
Rich, as I've said before, it's a long lens so it exaggerates the drift angle. It's probably a great deal less than it looks. Fair point on people not knowing how to decrab (I've flown with a few) but the issue here is the pitch PIO they get into. That's a worthwhile training theme for any TREs out there.

[RichardJones]

Rich, as I've said before, it's a long lens so it exaggerates the drift angle. It's probably a great deal less than it looks. Fair point on people not knowing how to decrab (I've flown with a few) but the issue here is the pitch PIO they get into. That's a worthwhile training theme for any TREs out there.

Constructive post and Point taken. Decrab, that's the word that has been alluding me. Thankyou

[DaveReidUK]

Cinstructive post and Point taken. Decrab, that's the word that has been alluding me. Thankyou

Or the non-PC "kick off drift". :O

[3Greens]

For anyone unfamiliar, LHR 09L is an absolute nightmare below 200feet with a strong northerly or south/east wind. It’s a Captains only landing in many companies.

[Fursty Ferret]

For anyone unfamiliar, LHR 09L is an absolute nightmare below 200feet with a strong northerly or south/east wind. It’s a Captains only landing in many companies.

Wish it was in mine.

Or the non-PC "kick off drift".

"Kick off" is honestly the worst advice you could give someone for landing a transport-category aircraft. Don't forget that with FBW you're actually asking the flight computers for a sideslip, not a direct surface deflection. Squeeze it in gently and the handling is sublime. Kick it and you'll regret it. It's not a PA28.

[RichardJones]

Wish it was in mine.



"Kick off" is honestly the worst advice you could give someone for landing a transport-category aircraft. Don't forget that with FBW you're actually asking the flight computers for a sideslip, not a direct surface deflection. Squeeze it in gently and the handling is sublime. Kick it and you'll regret it. It's not a PA28.

Interesting indeed.
I am not qualified, therefore know nothing about FBW.

My first job in aviation was abinitio instructing. Started just after turning 20. Now the xwind landing technic i taught then is the same technique I used throughout my career, up to and including, heavy Jet Transport a/c until I retired.
Yes smoothly and graduale, does it.
The basics are the same. Why? It is a fixed wing aircraft,
After about 12 months instructing I was an ag pilot for 10 years, operating 5 different types of tailwheel a/c.,in both hemispheres .
When you were expected, to operate from an airstrip, that was scraped off a ridge in hill country you learnt how to fly crosswind, very quick. Same technique. Laterally, some of those ridge strips were and still are, shaped like a banana on its side. But I digress.
What I am trying to get across, is you cannot just drop the aircraft on the ground without initatating some form of corrective action before that. Hope that makes sense.
The most unforgiving a/c to fly in a xwind is a floatplane.. land with drift in that, it will tip over.

[1southernman]

Interesting indeed.
I am not qualified, therefore know nothing about FBW.

My first job in aviation was abinitio instructing. Started just after turning 20. Now the xwind landing technic i taught then is the same technique I used throughout my career, up to and including, heavy Jet Transport a/c until I retired.
Yes smoothly and graduale, does it.
The basics are the same. Why? It is a fixed wing aircraft,
After about 12 months instructing I was an ag pilot for 10 years, operating 5 different types of tailwheel a/c.,in both hemispheres .
When you were expected, to operate from an airstrip, that was scraped off a ridge in hill country you learnt how to fly crosswind, very quick. Same technique. Laterally, some of those ridge strips were and still are, shaped like a banana on its side. But I digress.
What I am trying to get across, is you cannot just drop the aircraft on the ground without initatating some form of corrective action before that. Hope that makes sense.
The most unforgiving a/c to fly in a xwind is a floatplane.. land with drift in that, it will tip over.


Well said RJ...Basic skills are the same in anything I've flown...even FIFI :)

[RichardJones]

Well said RJ...Basic skills are the same in anything I've flown...even FIFI :)

FIFI?? I'm intrigued. Is that the B29 by any chance?

[Fursty Ferret]

I'd hazard a guess at the Airbus.

[B-757]

..Some quotes from the maker´s B787 manual..``Three methods of crosswind landings..De-crab, touchdown in a crab, or the sideslip technique....The airplane can land using crab only, up to the crosswind guideline speeds....Touchdown in a crab only condition is not recommended on a dry runway in strong crosswinds..``

Fly safe,
B-757

[Speed_Trim_Fail]

..Some quotes from the maker´s B787 manual..``Three methods of crosswind landings..De-crab, touchdown in a crab, or the sideslip technique....The airplane can land using crab only, up to the crosswind guideline speeds....Touchdown in a crab only condition is not recommended on a dry runway in strong crosswinds..``

Fly safe,
B-757

It has been a while, but I seem to recall the same in the 737 (classic) FCTM. It’s unfashionable at the moment to say such things but their manuals are a lot easier to digest than the equivalent airbus material.

It may of course be that I am simply too stupid for the airbus material!

[Bergerie1]

At one time in my career, because the 707 simulator was not adequate, we used to have check new captains out on cross-wind landings on the aircraft at Prestwick or wherever we could find a sufficient cross-wind component. Each captain did at least three landings in succession. There is not much room for error on that type, the 747 was much easier.

First piece of advice - never, ever kick off the drift, instead, during the flare, gently push off the drift to remove the crab while keeping the wings level. Next piece of advice - resist the temptation to be over-active on the ailerons and rudder because that will only lead to unwanted PIOs. Third piece of advice - continue to fly the aircraft after touchdown and during the landing roll since the tendency to lift a wing only gradually reduces with airspeed.

Of course, this is easy to say but requires practice in order to coordinate it with the flare. Ideally, the transition should start at about 50ft and it is better to land with a little crab still remaining than to start too early and then drift towards the downwind edge of the runway.

[RichardJones]

Good constructive input in the above posts👍

[punkalouver]

It has been a while, but I seem to recall the same in the 737 (classic) FCTM. It’s unfashionable at the moment to say such things but their manuals are a lot easier to digest than the equivalent airbus material.

It may of course be that I am simply too stupid for the airbus material!

Having flown over ten types, I have a procedure prior to the start of groundschool of studying ahead of time to be more familiar with systems. I tried this with the Airbus manuals and soon gave up as I found them to be too difficult to get a good initial understanding.

Instead, Inwatched a long series of United Airlines videos(with the understanding that there are differences). After each video, I would then compare with the Airbus section for that system, which made things much better.

One would think that such a large company, that is partly British owned, would get a Brit to write their manuals in English(or now update them). After all, they have plenty of money and it could be a safety issue. All it takes is one accident these days to harm a reputation significantly.

[1southernman]

FIFI?? I'm intrigued. Is that the B29 by any chance?

The Airbus 320 and I wish on the original namesake :)

[RichardJones]

The Airbus 320 and I wish on the original namesake :)


LoL. Thanks for the clarification.

I thought you might have been a relic from a by gone age. There are some relics on this site. 🤣

[RetiredBA/BY]

At one time in my career, because the 707 simulator was not adequate, we used to have check new captains out on cross-wind landings on the aircraft at Prestwick or wherever we could find a sufficient cross-wind component. Each captain did at least three landings in succession. There is not much room for error on that type, the 747 was much easier.

First piece of advice - never, ever kick off the drift, instead, during the flare, gently push off the drift to remove the crab while keeping the wings level. Next piece of advice - resist the temptation to be over-active on the ailerons and rudder because that will only lead to unwanted PIOs. Third piece of advice - continue to fly the aircraft after touchdown and during the landing roll since the tendency to lift a wing only gradually reduces with airspeed.

Of course, this is easy to say but requires practice in order to coordinate it with the flare. Ideally, the transition should start at about 50ft and it is better to land with a little crab still remaining than to start too early and then drift towards the downwind edge of the runway.
We must have flown for the same company but on a different type.!
What you have written is absolutely what I was taught flying a V bomber straight out of training and used throughout my career. That said, just a few degrees of into wind bank. 2 or 3 at most, in the flare seemed to work well on the Boeing twins (3, 5 and 6) without compromising pod clearance.
DP Davis in HTBJ emphasises the need to remove drift by pushing the rudder NOT kicking it !
Coffee finished !

[Bergerie1]

RetiredBA/BY,

HTBJ by DPD was my bible. I flew with him a couple of times and sat at the master's feet

[RichardJones]

RetiredBA/BY,

HTBJ by DPD was my bible. I flew with him a couple of times and sat at the master's feet

I was never honoured to have flown with him. I was never in that leaque.
He certainly knew his stuff and even more importantly able put it across and teach it on.
A God given talent .

[Bergerie1]

If you haven't already listened to these RAeS podcasts of DPD talking about his career and doing certification tests on various aircraft types you really need to do so. They are excellent:- https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/602953-d-p-davies-interviews-certificating-aircraft.html

[RichardJones]

If you haven't already listened to these RAeS podcasts of DPD talking about his career and doing certification tests on various aircraft types you really need to do so. They are excellent:- https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/602953-d-p-davies-interviews-certificating-aircraft.html

Thankyou for that. Much appreciated.

[Discorde]

Here's the relevant pages from the B757/767 FCTM dated 2001. Perhaps Boeing have changed their recommended techniques since then.


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/620x2000/xwind_combo_v2_3cac955d3f69a55ad48e174eeb15d580333388f6.jpg

[Bergerie1]

Yes - they probably have, but it depends on the aircraft type due to the need for pod clearance. The 707 was probably more critical than the 757/767 therefore the de-crab during the flare was the recommended technique. Horse for courses!!

[Uplinker]

Having flown over ten types, I have a procedure prior to the start of groundschool of studying ahead of time to be more familiar with systems. I tried this with the Airbus manuals and soon gave up as I found them to be too difficult to get a good initial understanding.

Instead, Inwatched a long series of United Airlines videos(with the understanding that there are differences). After each video, I would then compare with the Airbus section for that system, which made things much better.

One would think that such a large company, that is partly British owned, would get a Brit to write their manuals in English(or now update them). After all, they have plenty of money and it could be a safety issue. All it takes is one accident these days to harm a reputation significantly.


I am not trying to be clever, but I never had a problem crosswind landing Airbus FBW. Possibly because I learned crosswind landings flying small and medium turbo props, (where it is more crucial to get the handling exactly right), and we used the crossed-controls wing down method from short finals. The only things on the subject I took from the Airbus manuals and SOPs was to use the crab/de-crab technique and wings level rather than wing down.

When I transferred to the Airbus, we just needed to modify to the crab/de-crab method: Fly crabbed all the way down to the flare, offset slightly upwind of the centreline. As you flare, simultaneously gently squeeze the rudder* to yaw and align with the runway, and keep the wings level, (although I probably put in a tiny 1° or 2° of upwind wing down as I straighten to counter the advancing wing lift). If you get the timing right, the mains touch just as you complete the straightening manoeuvre.

On turbulent days it is worth knowing about partial spoiler deployment, which is a very handy feature.



*I have never understood the "kick it straight" thing. Kick it ???? Gently and smoothly squeeze the rudder, is all you need. Treat all controls gently.

[RichardJones]

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/zCM73pHRTYepDNNX/

Text book IMHO. Refreshing but rare to see.

[Good Business Sense]

Well I have put a B707 down with 360/ 28 gusting 33 kts. Straight across. Zero crab. I long time ago. If it can be done Zero crab in a 707 surely it can be done on a 737. 707 less forgiving,
admittedly the 707 was at max landing weight which makes it easier. Cargo.
That was one of my best efforts. X wind.

Once the wind gets up and on wide bodies I think a zero drift touchdown can provide a great deal of trouble on so many levels - Boeing and Airbus test pilots don't really touch the rudder on a crosswind and land drift on during their extreme crosswind testing regime (get a video and frame by frame watch the rudder movement i.e. it is zero). I know that Airbus has the slip in their manuals but I don't think that they believe it is a good idea (honestly) - the bigger the aeroplane (especially with four engines) the better to land crab on - which makes the highest crosswinds easy to fly. Saves on engines, wing tips and the odd tail strike.

[safetypee]

Do not use self generated procedures based on unsubstantiated video.

Use the manufacturers recommended procedures; note the term 'maximum demonstrated' and the associated conditions.

Consider other aspects as discussed in the manufactures publications:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zq6lxugvocvhmio/A-B Crosswind presentation.pdf?dl=0

https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/app/themes/mh_newsdesk/documents/archives/airbus-crosswind-development-and-certification.pdf