Tailwheel/crosswind advice please!
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
From: london
some excellent advice on here, fascinating.
i would like to relate a story an instructor told me many years ago.
paul was checking a new club member with tailwheel experience out in an auster. on the first approach he got the flare horribly wrong and made such a heavy landing that both legs punched though the floor. there was a moment of silence then the pilot said to paul,"some fxxxxing instructor you are", promptly opened the door, walked across the airfield and was never seen again!
i would like to relate a story an instructor told me many years ago.
paul was checking a new club member with tailwheel experience out in an auster. on the first approach he got the flare horribly wrong and made such a heavy landing that both legs punched though the floor. there was a moment of silence then the pilot said to paul,"some fxxxxing instructor you are", promptly opened the door, walked across the airfield and was never seen again!
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,681
Likes: 10
From: Just South of the last ice sheet
The Ultimate Grounloop
I copied this from the MilPilot's thread about the F4 Phantom:
OK, sorry for a mere ex-Air Trafficker jumping in on your "good old days" stories but I thought I might share my abiding memory of the F4J at the hands of, I think, a certain Louie McQuade. It was at Wattisham during yet another TACEVAL and it led to one of the best quotes in "Feedback" I ever saw. Apologise for the length of this but I feel it needs a bit of scene-setting and I think it is worth it in the end
Wattisham is wet and cold and the F4 is on its way home from a diversion to Brize where it had gone after dropping his chute on our runway earlier in the day. He is coming home, minus chute with p**s poor brakes and not much poke from the engine.
Basically at Wattisham in the wet, the F4J landed and was under control by the mid-point or it was getting too late to try and get airborne again. We get word that he will take the approach end cable (cos he has no chute) and we are all set. With great timing as usual the sirens go off, the masks go on and Louie is on approach.
He comes over the threshold, plonks it down and sails over the approach cable with no apparent loss of momentum. Hmmmm, thinks us in the Tower before the Tower guy utters the line "I think you missed the cable". Biting his tongue, the cockpit response is "you're right, I will re-cycle the hook and take the PUAG" (portable arrestor gear at the mid-point of the runway). "Roger that" is the Tower controllers response as he leans over the desk to get a better view through his mask; joined by the rest of us displaying not a little amount of interest in the developing situation. The aircraft slows, marginally, and sails serenely over the PUAG stubbornly refusing to connect with it as it trundles on its way.
We have just passed the point of no return, there is not enough power or runway to get airborne and probably not enough brakes or runway to stop; interest is heightening in the Tower and I order "masks off" as we hit the 'Crash Phone'. Before we can stop him, the Tower controller informs the crew that "they missed the PUAG" and, through clenched teeth now, we are informed, with remarkable confidence that they will "re-cycle the hook once more and attempt to take the overrun cable". So the F4J trundles down the runway, slowing all the time but, you always felt, not quite quick enough and it is now being hotly pursued by 3 gleaming Red Fire Engines.
Despite re-cycling, the overrun cable is not troubled by the hook and the situation, already interesting in the cockpit, becomes a tad more serious as the lumbering F4J approaches the end of the runway, the Barrier and the overshoot with more than its fair share of momentum. [Apparently cockpit discussions now turn to the likely acquisition of a couple of Martin Baker ties but hands are kept firmly away from the handles for the moment]. Ever game, Mr McQuade steps a little heavier on the brakes, squeezing every last drop out of them whilst slowing the aircraft down at a remarkable rate.
Just when it looks as though this may fizzle out into just another exercise story the tale takes a dramatic turn, literally, as the aircraft decides enough is enough, breaks free from all attempts to stop it and gracefully pirouettes through 540 degrees to leave it still travelling down the runway but now facing the wrong direction. The atmosphere is now fever pitch in the tower, and I daresay it was a little gamey in the cockpit also. I will leave it to Feedback to close this; having given the details and got to the stage where the aircraft is careering backwards down the runway the article simply states: "Finding himself going backwards down the runway, the pilot coolly applied power and brought the aircraft to a gentle braking halt in the runway overshoot".
That night in the bar when being questioned as to why he stayed with aircraft and spurned the chance of a fancy tie, the response went along the lines of "one hand on the stick, the other on the throttle what am I going to pull the handle with, my d**k!!!". I can't remember who the back-seater was but I do recall he was a lot quieter than usual that night.
OK, sorry for a mere ex-Air Trafficker jumping in on your "good old days" stories but I thought I might share my abiding memory of the F4J at the hands of, I think, a certain Louie McQuade. It was at Wattisham during yet another TACEVAL and it led to one of the best quotes in "Feedback" I ever saw. Apologise for the length of this but I feel it needs a bit of scene-setting and I think it is worth it in the end
Wattisham is wet and cold and the F4 is on its way home from a diversion to Brize where it had gone after dropping his chute on our runway earlier in the day. He is coming home, minus chute with p**s poor brakes and not much poke from the engine.
Basically at Wattisham in the wet, the F4J landed and was under control by the mid-point or it was getting too late to try and get airborne again. We get word that he will take the approach end cable (cos he has no chute) and we are all set. With great timing as usual the sirens go off, the masks go on and Louie is on approach.
He comes over the threshold, plonks it down and sails over the approach cable with no apparent loss of momentum. Hmmmm, thinks us in the Tower before the Tower guy utters the line "I think you missed the cable". Biting his tongue, the cockpit response is "you're right, I will re-cycle the hook and take the PUAG" (portable arrestor gear at the mid-point of the runway). "Roger that" is the Tower controllers response as he leans over the desk to get a better view through his mask; joined by the rest of us displaying not a little amount of interest in the developing situation. The aircraft slows, marginally, and sails serenely over the PUAG stubbornly refusing to connect with it as it trundles on its way.
We have just passed the point of no return, there is not enough power or runway to get airborne and probably not enough brakes or runway to stop; interest is heightening in the Tower and I order "masks off" as we hit the 'Crash Phone'. Before we can stop him, the Tower controller informs the crew that "they missed the PUAG" and, through clenched teeth now, we are informed, with remarkable confidence that they will "re-cycle the hook once more and attempt to take the overrun cable". So the F4J trundles down the runway, slowing all the time but, you always felt, not quite quick enough and it is now being hotly pursued by 3 gleaming Red Fire Engines.
Despite re-cycling, the overrun cable is not troubled by the hook and the situation, already interesting in the cockpit, becomes a tad more serious as the lumbering F4J approaches the end of the runway, the Barrier and the overshoot with more than its fair share of momentum. [Apparently cockpit discussions now turn to the likely acquisition of a couple of Martin Baker ties but hands are kept firmly away from the handles for the moment]. Ever game, Mr McQuade steps a little heavier on the brakes, squeezing every last drop out of them whilst slowing the aircraft down at a remarkable rate.
Just when it looks as though this may fizzle out into just another exercise story the tale takes a dramatic turn, literally, as the aircraft decides enough is enough, breaks free from all attempts to stop it and gracefully pirouettes through 540 degrees to leave it still travelling down the runway but now facing the wrong direction. The atmosphere is now fever pitch in the tower, and I daresay it was a little gamey in the cockpit also. I will leave it to Feedback to close this; having given the details and got to the stage where the aircraft is careering backwards down the runway the article simply states: "Finding himself going backwards down the runway, the pilot coolly applied power and brought the aircraft to a gentle braking halt in the runway overshoot".
That night in the bar when being questioned as to why he stayed with aircraft and spurned the chance of a fancy tie, the response went along the lines of "one hand on the stick, the other on the throttle what am I going to pull the handle with, my d**k!!!". I can't remember who the back-seater was but I do recall he was a lot quieter than usual that night.
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
From: Deepest Warwickshire
Brief ex-Jodel DR221 owner here with a few hour on type (before it toasted itself - you know the one!)
I found I had exactly the same problem as 122.45.
All the advice above assumes a servicable aircraft!
Please, check your brakes. When was the last time they were done and what was done?
Also brake symmetry. Test can be done pref. on tarmac, at no more than a safe fast walking pace, by pulling the handbrake. Does she pull evenly or pull to one side?
I never got the hang of crossy landings in the Jodel due to it's destruction so I apologise for the lack of further advice. I will say however that this year's foray into Maules, despite it's reputation for groundloops, exposes better handling than the Jodel.
BR
I found I had exactly the same problem as 122.45.
All the advice above assumes a servicable aircraft!
Please, check your brakes. When was the last time they were done and what was done?
Also brake symmetry. Test can be done pref. on tarmac, at no more than a safe fast walking pace, by pulling the handbrake. Does she pull evenly or pull to one side?
I never got the hang of crossy landings in the Jodel due to it's destruction so I apologise for the lack of further advice. I will say however that this year's foray into Maules, despite it's reputation for groundloops, exposes better handling than the Jodel.
BR
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
From: Chichester, UK
I arrived back at Goodwood's runway 24 today to find a wind of 210/18kts - a lot for me, if not for others - and with a tacho that had failed a few minutes earlier and a dodgy ASI I was quite pleased to pull off a more than acceptable landing. I was even more pleased to find time to remember a couple of tips from this thread 
Next one will probably be a shocker of course
Next one will probably be a shocker of course
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
From: Norfolk
Evo,
"runway 24 today to find a wind of 210/18kts "
I agree that it sounds a lot... and in the Pitts I don't have space for one of those crosswind component charts so I do a rough brain calc...
the wind direction is less than the r/way number therefore
WIND FROM LEFT/PORT
difference is 30 which is a third of 90
SO BALLPARK I EXPECT 12 to slow my groundspeed and 6 to blow me to the right
doesn't sound so bad now, does it?
I acknowledge that mathematically it is not 100% but then neither is the wind and by the time that the observed wind has been passed, you've recieved it, done the above calculation it is probably about time to lower the left wing, negate the drift and grease it on anyway!
Stik
"runway 24 today to find a wind of 210/18kts "
I agree that it sounds a lot... and in the Pitts I don't have space for one of those crosswind component charts so I do a rough brain calc...
the wind direction is less than the r/way number therefore
WIND FROM LEFT/PORT
difference is 30 which is a third of 90
SO BALLPARK I EXPECT 12 to slow my groundspeed and 6 to blow me to the right
doesn't sound so bad now, does it?
I acknowledge that mathematically it is not 100% but then neither is the wind and by the time that the observed wind has been passed, you've recieved it, done the above calculation it is probably about time to lower the left wing, negate the drift and grease it on anyway!
Stik
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
From: Chichester, UK
Stik, your approximation isn't a great one. You're trying to work out 18 sin 30, which equals 9kts (not 6kts) - still, possibly not a lot for some, but if the wind was 150/9kts i'd have been seriously worried about the landing, even though the crosswind component is the same.
The way I work it out is to think of the crosswind as one of three things; either up to 30 degrees, 30-45 degrees or more than 45 degrees. Then think of your watch. 30 minutes is half, 45 minutes three quarters. For more than 45 degrees I assume it's all crosswind. So
210/18 -> 9 kts crosswind
195/18 -> 13 kts crosswind
180/18 -> 18 kts crosswind
It's not quite right, but good enough for government work and no need for much in the way of maths in the cockpit.
The way I work it out is to think of the crosswind as one of three things; either up to 30 degrees, 30-45 degrees or more than 45 degrees. Then think of your watch. 30 minutes is half, 45 minutes three quarters. For more than 45 degrees I assume it's all crosswind. So
210/18 -> 9 kts crosswind
195/18 -> 13 kts crosswind
180/18 -> 18 kts crosswind
It's not quite right, but good enough for government work and no need for much in the way of maths in the cockpit.
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,414
Likes: 2
From: Europe
I am a simple mind (OK you all expected that!) and go by the following for flying tailwheelers.
[edited values out for being stupid!]
FD
The point I was trying to convey is that I have set myself some limits beyond which I will not go out and fly the tailwheelers. The reasoning is that winds can and do change and you don't really want find yourself not being able to go to place x,y or z or to get back where you want to be at the end of the day. With experience these values have gone up but there are days that I am happy to go out in a trike but leave anything with the little wheel at the back safely in the hangar, taxying the things is usually the first thing that I worry about, rather than landing or taking off in a bit of a wind.
[edited values out for being stupid!]
FD
The point I was trying to convey is that I have set myself some limits beyond which I will not go out and fly the tailwheelers. The reasoning is that winds can and do change and you don't really want find yourself not being able to go to place x,y or z or to get back where you want to be at the end of the day. With experience these values have gone up but there are days that I am happy to go out in a trike but leave anything with the little wheel at the back safely in the hangar, taxying the things is usually the first thing that I worry about, rather than landing or taking off in a bit of a wind.
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
From: Norfolk
Evo,
Thanks for the maths lesson - you sound just like Wilkie (my maths master) back in the seventies trying to teach me differential calculus for advanced math! Dx by Dy, Stik! Differentiate don't integrate, boy. Keep making these mistakes and all you'll be good for is biplane flying!
The point that I tried to convey was that IF 18kts straight across is not outside the demonstrated cross wind capability of your aircraft then all you really need to know is that the wind is from the left.
The difference between 6kts (my rough approx) and the 9kts that results from a proper calculation is only 3kts. (Yes I know that equates to a massive 50% difference) - but 3 kts is just a zephyr.
Whilst typing this, my annenometer has showed a fluctuation of of 6 kts whilst the wind direction has remained pretty constant.
As long as you cancel any cross wind drift as the wheels touch down then you should be fine.
The whole point of the post was to engender a mindset for increasing your confidence in your abilities!
Sure, we ALL impose self policed restrictions on our own limits but as FD says, these tend to increase with time/experience.
A couple of mates are neophyes on the Pitts S1S and I suggested that a good starting point was no more than 10/10. Ie, no more than 10 kts greater than ten degrees of the nose. One, after a few weeks, is now quite competent with 10/90 and the other is getting there incrementally. The downside being that if you don't keep increasing your limits you will run out of places to visit or days to go flying on!
Stik
Thanks for the maths lesson - you sound just like Wilkie (my maths master) back in the seventies trying to teach me differential calculus for advanced math! Dx by Dy, Stik! Differentiate don't integrate, boy. Keep making these mistakes and all you'll be good for is biplane flying!
The point that I tried to convey was that IF 18kts straight across is not outside the demonstrated cross wind capability of your aircraft then all you really need to know is that the wind is from the left.
The difference between 6kts (my rough approx) and the 9kts that results from a proper calculation is only 3kts. (Yes I know that equates to a massive 50% difference) - but 3 kts is just a zephyr.
Whilst typing this, my annenometer has showed a fluctuation of of 6 kts whilst the wind direction has remained pretty constant.
As long as you cancel any cross wind drift as the wheels touch down then you should be fine.
The whole point of the post was to engender a mindset for increasing your confidence in your abilities!
Sure, we ALL impose self policed restrictions on our own limits but as FD says, these tend to increase with time/experience.
A couple of mates are neophyes on the Pitts S1S and I suggested that a good starting point was no more than 10/10. Ie, no more than 10 kts greater than ten degrees of the nose. One, after a few weeks, is now quite competent with 10/90 and the other is getting there incrementally. The downside being that if you don't keep increasing your limits you will run out of places to visit or days to go flying on!
Stik
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,198
Likes: 0
From: South Norfolk, England
Well I'm a self confessed mathematical dunce
Apart from at the planning stage on the ground where it's easy to think things out, my approach is to look at the windsock and fly the aeroplane.
If the windsock shows the crosswind to be excessive and there is another runway better suited, I'll ask for it. Otherwise I'll fly the approach and go around if I can't cope. If I'm going somewhere towards the outer limits of duration I'll make sure there is an alternative nearby if required.
So far I've never had a problem with this method even though it's not very scientific
SS
Apart from at the planning stage on the ground where it's easy to think things out, my approach is to look at the windsock and fly the aeroplane.
If the windsock shows the crosswind to be excessive and there is another runway better suited, I'll ask for it. Otherwise I'll fly the approach and go around if I can't cope. If I'm going somewhere towards the outer limits of duration I'll make sure there is an alternative nearby if required.
So far I've never had a problem with this method even though it's not very scientific
SS
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: Sussex
CONTRARY TO POPULAR BELEIF, IF ONE USES THE CORRECT AILERON AND AMOUNT IN A CROSSWIND TO CREATE ADVESE YAW ON THE DOWNWIND WING THE AEROPLANE WILL TRACK STRAIGHT ON THE GROUND. ONCE THAT THINKS BUBBLE APPEARS AND THE LIGHT BULB COMES ON ALL IS WELL. THINK ABOUT IT.
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,414
Likes: 2
From: Europe
If you are the bloke flying the Pitts advertised in your www link then you are probably very well skilled in dealing with Xwinds in tailwheelers.
However to rely on the adverse yaw created by the downdeflection of your downwind aileron for tracking straight in a Xwind is a concept new to me.
Do you imply not to use the rudder at all then?
FD
However to rely on the adverse yaw created by the downdeflection of your downwind aileron for tracking straight in a Xwind is a concept new to me.
Do you imply not to use the rudder at all then?
FD
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: Sussex
RUDDER IS STILL REQUIRED, BUT THERE WILL BE A LOT LESS "PEDALLING" TO BE DONE AS IT CAN ALMOST BE ONLY SMALL CORRECTIONS. THERE IS A NEED TO FIND A NEW NEUTRAL POSITION WHICH VARIES FOR TAKEOFF WITH POWER OR WITH ANY GIVEN WIND CONDITIONS FOR TAKEOFF AND LANDING, BUT THIS NEW NEUTRAL BECOMES SAY 2" OF RIGHT RUDDER DEFLECTION AND ANY CORRECTIONS ARE MADE ABOUT THIS. IF LEFT RUDDER IS REQUIRED IT MAY ONLY BE NECESSARY TO RELEASE SOME RIGHT PRESSURE THEN REAPPLY IT. GOOD LUCK.
.... Like I said, just fly the aeroplane 