Crosswind landing query
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Earth
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crosswind landing query
I've been reading about landing in crosswinds, it always mentions:
1. Keep your speed up
2. Recommends using less flaps or land flapless.
3. Land positive - avoid long flares (forget about 'greasing' it)
My question:
By keeping the speed up, how do you land positive since your airspeed is on the high side? The aircraft will tend to float due to your higher speed.
1. Keep your speed up
2. Recommends using less flaps or land flapless.
3. Land positive - avoid long flares (forget about 'greasing' it)
My question:
By keeping the speed up, how do you land positive since your airspeed is on the high side? The aircraft will tend to float due to your higher speed.
Moderator
I trust that what you've been reading about crosswind landings is the procedure in the Flight Manual for the aircraft.
Yes, "keeping the speed up" will cause a prolonged flare/float. All the more opportunity to be blown off the side of the runway. Though I agree that it might not be the Flight Manual recommended procedure - and it prevails - I fly EVERY landing with the maximum available flap extended. That means that you are flying or rolling more slowly, which means anything which goes wrong will take longer to go wrong, and have less energy if it does.
If I cannot maintain the runway heading in configuration, on approach, I'm going to have trouble landing. I will find a comfortable speed, which might be a few knots faster than normal, but never as much as ten knots faster. This is more an allowance for gusts, than the crosswind itself.
I don't so much land positive, as simply don't expect or work for a greaser. The technique is still the same, keep the nose up. You have lots of rudder effectiveness at touchdown speed, rely on it, rather than nosewheel steering. Do not land flat and fast, this is a recipe for disaster in a crosswind.
Try deliberately putting down the upwind mainwheel, and holding the downwind main and nosewheel for a while. The plane will do it, and there is nothing wrond with applying full aileron as the downwind main settles on. You're slowing down, and keeping it straight - without burning up brakes, or sliding tires...
It just take practice....
My person record for crosswind was 19 gust 25 kts direct crosswind while flight testing a modified Caravan (for crosswind control). It did require full rudder a few times. I have taken off the 150 in 38 G 43 kts, 30* off the runway heading, but I did not attempt to land back at that runway, I flew to one directly into that wind.
Yes, "keeping the speed up" will cause a prolonged flare/float. All the more opportunity to be blown off the side of the runway. Though I agree that it might not be the Flight Manual recommended procedure - and it prevails - I fly EVERY landing with the maximum available flap extended. That means that you are flying or rolling more slowly, which means anything which goes wrong will take longer to go wrong, and have less energy if it does.
If I cannot maintain the runway heading in configuration, on approach, I'm going to have trouble landing. I will find a comfortable speed, which might be a few knots faster than normal, but never as much as ten knots faster. This is more an allowance for gusts, than the crosswind itself.
I don't so much land positive, as simply don't expect or work for a greaser. The technique is still the same, keep the nose up. You have lots of rudder effectiveness at touchdown speed, rely on it, rather than nosewheel steering. Do not land flat and fast, this is a recipe for disaster in a crosswind.
Try deliberately putting down the upwind mainwheel, and holding the downwind main and nosewheel for a while. The plane will do it, and there is nothing wrond with applying full aileron as the downwind main settles on. You're slowing down, and keeping it straight - without burning up brakes, or sliding tires...
It just take practice....
My person record for crosswind was 19 gust 25 kts direct crosswind while flight testing a modified Caravan (for crosswind control). It did require full rudder a few times. I have taken off the 150 in 38 G 43 kts, 30* off the runway heading, but I did not attempt to land back at that runway, I flew to one directly into that wind.
There should be no one size fits all method. It depends on the aircraft and the conditions.
High wing Cessna's particularly the ones with the 40 degree flap setting do better with less flap. I generally use 10 degs for these aircraft when landing with a significant crosswind.
Low wing aircraft that have less effective simple slotted flaps, like Pipers and Grumman's, do fine with full flaps in a crosswind and thus I use full flap for every landing in these aircraft
The approach speed is condition dependent. I use a normal approach speed in strong but steady winds, but add 5 knots for gusty unsteady wind days.
High wing Cessna's particularly the ones with the 40 degree flap setting do better with less flap. I generally use 10 degs for these aircraft when landing with a significant crosswind.
Low wing aircraft that have less effective simple slotted flaps, like Pipers and Grumman's, do fine with full flaps in a crosswind and thus I use full flap for every landing in these aircraft
The approach speed is condition dependent. I use a normal approach speed in strong but steady winds, but add 5 knots for gusty unsteady wind days.
Last edited by Big Pistons Forever; 3rd Jun 2013 at 04:38.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For low wing aircraft I land with full flap every time on Cessna with 40 degree barn doors I might not.
Fly the approach speed as normal unless it's really gusty in which case rule of thumb is add about half the difference between steady speed and gust speed.
I recommend crabbed approach converted to wing down with about 150 ft to go, that will quickly tell you whether you can maintain the centre line and if you can't go around and divert. Falre normally with wing down and hold wing down until the aircraft stops flying which it will more or less as soon as you run out of aileron. Maintain into wind aileron throughout the roll out.
Fly the approach speed as normal unless it's really gusty in which case rule of thumb is add about half the difference between steady speed and gust speed.
I recommend crabbed approach converted to wing down with about 150 ft to go, that will quickly tell you whether you can maintain the centre line and if you can't go around and divert. Falre normally with wing down and hold wing down until the aircraft stops flying which it will more or less as soon as you run out of aileron. Maintain into wind aileron throughout the roll out.
Maintain into wind aileron throughout the roll out.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that the frequently mentioned "add a few knots to cover yourself" is either not understood well enough by the average student, or not explained properly by some instructors.
Twice I've been sat in the right hand seat with fellow pilots on days out and bounced down the runway quite severely on touch down. One of them damaged the nose gear strut (luckily the prop didn't strike) and one of them lead to a 20ft balloon at which point the PIC finally realised it was time to go-around. Both pilots less than 300 hours and within a year or two of completing their PPL, and otherwise very safe/competent pilots. During post-flight coffee in the club house, when talking about the two potentially dangerous scenarios, both pilots commented along the lines of "it was a bit bumpy on approach so I was carrying a bit of extra speed just to be safe".
Safe? Of course there is a valid reason to add extra speed when circumstances require, but in my opinion I don't think the subject is properly approached during the average PPL course. I also am not particularly surprised at the number of prop strikes/collapsed nose gears that we hear in the AAIB reports each month.
Twice I've been sat in the right hand seat with fellow pilots on days out and bounced down the runway quite severely on touch down. One of them damaged the nose gear strut (luckily the prop didn't strike) and one of them lead to a 20ft balloon at which point the PIC finally realised it was time to go-around. Both pilots less than 300 hours and within a year or two of completing their PPL, and otherwise very safe/competent pilots. During post-flight coffee in the club house, when talking about the two potentially dangerous scenarios, both pilots commented along the lines of "it was a bit bumpy on approach so I was carrying a bit of extra speed just to be safe".
Safe? Of course there is a valid reason to add extra speed when circumstances require, but in my opinion I don't think the subject is properly approached during the average PPL course. I also am not particularly surprised at the number of prop strikes/collapsed nose gears that we hear in the AAIB reports each month.
Depends what you fly. DR 400 I will crab, kick off the drift, let it land on the mainwheels (both at the same time) using full flap and normal approach speed. Without the crosswind I would be holding off more positively for a slower touchdown speed. In neither case do I land flat.
With the cub I will do a wheel landing off a slipping final with half flap, ( which is 30 degrees), again normal speed, then the landing is into wind wheel, other main wheel. Tailwheel lands last.
Difference between a low wing nosedragger with smallish flaps and a high wing conventional gear with barndoor flaps....
Then one has to taxi, which is often harder!
With the cub I will do a wheel landing off a slipping final with half flap, ( which is 30 degrees), again normal speed, then the landing is into wind wheel, other main wheel. Tailwheel lands last.
Difference between a low wing nosedragger with smallish flaps and a high wing conventional gear with barndoor flaps....
Then one has to taxi, which is often harder!
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Perth, WA
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots of good advice here, none of which I have any issue with. After mastering the basic techniques people have mentioned, you can allow yourself the luxury of tweaking a bit for your own aircraft and conditions. The main thing is not to develop unsafe habits based on folklore. For example, you might find you're comfortable using 20 deg instead of 30 (or 40) deg flap in your C172, and adding a very few knots, in a very gusty crosswind situation. Just make sure this doesn't become an excuse for far too much approach speed, or touchdown without a proper flare.
While I prefer to land with as much flap as possible, and as slow as possible, I have slightly revised my view since starting to fly very light aircraft. Even in a C150 you can do very well with conventional techniques up to quite high cross-wind limits, as Pilot_DAR notes. However, if you are flying an aircraft of (say) <2/3 the weight of the C150 and commensurately lower book speeds, you do start to become a bit more legitimately concerned with gust variations. In effect, the gust values can start to become a big fraction of your flying speed. By using a bit less flap and some slightly faster speeds you push yourself out of the ridiculously low speed regimes these little puddle-jumpers can operate in.
While I prefer to land with as much flap as possible, and as slow as possible, I have slightly revised my view since starting to fly very light aircraft. Even in a C150 you can do very well with conventional techniques up to quite high cross-wind limits, as Pilot_DAR notes. However, if you are flying an aircraft of (say) <2/3 the weight of the C150 and commensurately lower book speeds, you do start to become a bit more legitimately concerned with gust variations. In effect, the gust values can start to become a big fraction of your flying speed. By using a bit less flap and some slightly faster speeds you push yourself out of the ridiculously low speed regimes these little puddle-jumpers can operate in.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wales
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi, I used to be confused about the action of the rudder pedal, thinking it was like riding a bike with your feet on the handlebars.... But it's not, It's the opposite. You push the pedal and the wheel goes towards that pedal... strange...
At one stage before I pressed a pedal, I was thinking out the mechanics of the situation... Press right pedal, pulls the right cable, pulls right bell-crank, brings more rudder to that side, which forces the tail to the left. You don't want to be going through all that thought process in the flare.
So I devised a strategy that helps me decide which pedal to press for a cross wind landing... On final I press the downwind rudder pedal, to see how much it really does align me with the runway, then I just lightly hover my foot over that pedal, to partially reduce the crab. For the actual touch-down, I give that pedal the full amount of push required. This generally ends up as a one wheel landing with the downwind wheel landing next then the nose-wheel some time later. Some aircraft require a considerably strong push on the pedal to get the amount of movement required.
If you are still confused, the Wind-Sock or Yaw-String always points to the ruder pedal you will need to press.
At one stage before I pressed a pedal, I was thinking out the mechanics of the situation... Press right pedal, pulls the right cable, pulls right bell-crank, brings more rudder to that side, which forces the tail to the left. You don't want to be going through all that thought process in the flare.
So I devised a strategy that helps me decide which pedal to press for a cross wind landing... On final I press the downwind rudder pedal, to see how much it really does align me with the runway, then I just lightly hover my foot over that pedal, to partially reduce the crab. For the actual touch-down, I give that pedal the full amount of push required. This generally ends up as a one wheel landing with the downwind wheel landing next then the nose-wheel some time later. Some aircraft require a considerably strong push on the pedal to get the amount of movement required.
If you are still confused, the Wind-Sock or Yaw-String always points to the ruder pedal you will need to press.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, "keeping the speed up" will cause a prolonged flare/float. All the more opportunity to be blown off the side of the runway.
The only thing which will cause a prolonged float /flare with higher speeds is the pilot!
Why would you want a serious flare in bad conditions just fly it onto the ground.
You can land an aircraft with full flap, part flap. no flap,at speeds near the stall or much higher speeds.
As stated before my friend landed a Citation up at Edinburgh with a radar speed of 200 kts when VREF was 105 when he had control problems.
Mad Jock was there when it happened.
Landing and stall are not connected in the way some think.
Holding off/flare is A landing technique allowing the speed to diminish to the point that the aircraft starts to sink towards the runway but it is not THE only landing technique.
Any landing involves reducing the rate of descent to a point where contact with the runway allows the aircraft to remain on the runway rather than with a still flying wing to become airbourn again but that is technique.
Different conditions warrant different techniques
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 4th Jun 2013 at 11:43.
Moderator
Why would you want a serious flare in bad conditions just fly it onto the ground
Though possible, it requires lots of skill. If pilots here are musing crosswind techniques, that skill is probably not with them yet. If you threepoint a tricycle, you're very likely to induce a pitching oscillation, or wheelbarrow it, and loose directional control. Or, you'll hit it hard enough to break a nosewheel.
I have no experience with jets, so I cannot comment on how they are landed, though I suspect that techniques would have some similarity, though many have spoilers to help you keep it on the ground.
I agree that in a crosswind landing, you probably want to minimize the "depth" of the flare, but you still need to do one, and get the pitch right at touchdown. If your average GA pilot cannot maintain directional control during a flare, they do not have the skill to land that aircraft in those conditions, and should land elsewhere. They should have determined this during the approach, They've left it too long if they're in the flare when they find this out.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot Dar
What I am doing here is being pedantic to correct a misconception that stall and landing are connected as that tunnel visions the idea of landing into something which is not totally correct.
It also reduces the idea of other landing techniques in the future for aircraft pilots may fly.
Yes obviously light aircraft are different and in most situations you need to land as slow as possible for the shortest stopping distance.
Aircraft which are short coupled ie nose to mains will not tolerate a high speed landing as will long coupled aircraft for the reasons you state.
A long coupled aircraft only requires a tiny pitch change to take the nosewheel well clear.
But as stated I am making a point to rectify a misconception no more
Pace
What I am doing here is being pedantic to correct a misconception that stall and landing are connected as that tunnel visions the idea of landing into something which is not totally correct.
It also reduces the idea of other landing techniques in the future for aircraft pilots may fly.
Yes obviously light aircraft are different and in most situations you need to land as slow as possible for the shortest stopping distance.
Aircraft which are short coupled ie nose to mains will not tolerate a high speed landing as will long coupled aircraft for the reasons you state.
A long coupled aircraft only requires a tiny pitch change to take the nosewheel well clear.
But as stated I am making a point to rectify a misconception no more
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 4th Jun 2013 at 12:05.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During, or preferably just before the flare, apply sufficient downwind rudder to align the aircraft nose with the centreline simultaneously applying into wind aileron (that's opposite aileron to rudder) to prevent the wing from being lifted and to give precise directional control; continue holding off normally making sure the throttle is fully closed for a smooth and precise touchdown on the centreline... Simples!
I was going to write up my technique, but I'm lazy - it's exactly like Pilot DAR's ( post no. 2).
A key point, worth reiterating, is land on the upwind main wheel in a cross-wind.
I used to "two-point" Bellanca Scouts up to the 15kt demonstrated cross-wind speed.
A key point, worth reiterating, is land on the upwind main wheel in a cross-wind.
I used to "two-point" Bellanca Scouts up to the 15kt demonstrated cross-wind speed.
Last edited by India Four Two; 4th Jun 2013 at 13:12.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you get the approach and flare right on most light aircraft in a cross wind using wing down technique (which is the the most flexible) then you'll land one wheel at time. First the upwind wheel then the down wind wheel and finally the nose wheel at which point you'll probably be holding full into wind aileron and the stick or yoke hard back.
Now if you are a 6000 hr test pilot full flap landings in virtually any conditions are not going to be a problem. However if you are a 100 hr PPL it is IMO reasonable that you should configure the aircraft in a manner that makes it easier to complete the manoever.
I have found that all of my low time students flying Cessna's did better in crosswinds if they restricted the flap to 10 degrees. The more nose up attitude in the flare reduced the chance of an inadvertant nose wheel first touch down while they worked at keeping the aircraft straight in the flare and the slightly higher touchdown speed helped with increased control effectiveness.
But and it is a big but, before you can get good at crosswind landings you have to be good at regular landings.
Finally I would like to clarify what I wrote regarding adding extra speed. I want to be clear that most crosswind landings should be flown at the correct speed for a no wind landing. It is only on very windy or gusty days that extra airspeed should be added on final approach.
There is a discouraging drip, drip, drip of GA landing accident reports and almost every one has a root cause of excessive airspeed on final.
Last edited by Big Pistons Forever; 4th Jun 2013 at 17:22.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BPF
Just as an example I landed a Citation at Gatwick at night in 70kt winds 20 degrees off the runway.
The biggest problem was shear all the way down the approach and AS fluctuations of plus and minus 15-20 kts.
With that headwind was I worried about landing too fast and running off the end of Gatwick?
With the chunk of airspeed I added to touchdown the aircraft was way over its stall speed.
Landing and stall are not connected in the way implied by some and no I am not suggesting little Timmy with 100 hrs does fast approaches.
Yes poor flying skills will mean pilots will land too fast or too long for the conditions and have all manner of accidents but that is technique and lack of flying skills and nothing to do with whether an aircraft can only land near the stall or way over
Pace
Just as an example I landed a Citation at Gatwick at night in 70kt winds 20 degrees off the runway.
The biggest problem was shear all the way down the approach and AS fluctuations of plus and minus 15-20 kts.
With that headwind was I worried about landing too fast and running off the end of Gatwick?
With the chunk of airspeed I added to touchdown the aircraft was way over its stall speed.
Landing and stall are not connected in the way implied by some and no I am not suggesting little Timmy with 100 hrs does fast approaches.
Yes poor flying skills will mean pilots will land too fast or too long for the conditions and have all manner of accidents but that is technique and lack of flying skills and nothing to do with whether an aircraft can only land near the stall or way over
Pace
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 716
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please, please, look it up in the AFM/POH. No two airplanes have the exact same reccomendations regarding crosswind.
Yes, you will find that some techniques are more universal than others, such as:
-Using a lower flap setting: May or may not be approved, and you may or may not have performance data avaliable. Remember that you will have to fly faster, so you may be performance limited. (Also, the look and feel will be different, so you have a good chance of screwing it up if you've never practiced it before.)
-Carrying extra speed: Gives you extra rudder authority, however, again you may run into performace issues. There is also the difference between carrying extra speed on approach, vs carrying it all the way to touchdown. Due to the landing gear geometry of certain airplanes, you risk either floating (to achieve correct touchdown attitude), or landing with a lower body angle. Results may vary from giving yourself extra work to breaking the aircraft.
-Wing-low vs decrab vs landing with a crab: There may be type differences as to what you can and should not do. Ie, some C172s have a limitation to avoid slipping with certain flap settings to avoid tailplane oscilations. On the other hand, the B737 has bank limits for the wing-low landing, to avoid a nacelle-strike/flap track fairing strike/wingtip strike, and thus it is approved, and under some conditions even preferred to land it with some crab remaining.
-Interconnect systems: such as on the BE36, may make it a bit more tricky to kick off the crab smoothly. Something to consider.
So, and the end of the day... RTFM! The guy who built it usually knows best
Yes, you will find that some techniques are more universal than others, such as:
-Using a lower flap setting: May or may not be approved, and you may or may not have performance data avaliable. Remember that you will have to fly faster, so you may be performance limited. (Also, the look and feel will be different, so you have a good chance of screwing it up if you've never practiced it before.)
-Carrying extra speed: Gives you extra rudder authority, however, again you may run into performace issues. There is also the difference between carrying extra speed on approach, vs carrying it all the way to touchdown. Due to the landing gear geometry of certain airplanes, you risk either floating (to achieve correct touchdown attitude), or landing with a lower body angle. Results may vary from giving yourself extra work to breaking the aircraft.
-Wing-low vs decrab vs landing with a crab: There may be type differences as to what you can and should not do. Ie, some C172s have a limitation to avoid slipping with certain flap settings to avoid tailplane oscilations. On the other hand, the B737 has bank limits for the wing-low landing, to avoid a nacelle-strike/flap track fairing strike/wingtip strike, and thus it is approved, and under some conditions even preferred to land it with some crab remaining.
-Interconnect systems: such as on the BE36, may make it a bit more tricky to kick off the crab smoothly. Something to consider.
So, and the end of the day... RTFM! The guy who built it usually knows best
Dear OP, above this post you'll find a great deal of good advice on how to tackle crosswind landings. Now see how NOT to do it.
This footage was a landing competition day held 2 years ago. I was there (I flew that day but my landing is not shown). The pilots you see range from very low time students to PPLs with 100+ hours. What you don't really see is the terrain and treeline upwind causing quite a bit of turbulence on very short finals (and on climb out). That does not excuse the poor landing technique shown. I want this to be a learning exercise for any student pilots reading this thread, not a willy waving match about how superior your skills are, or how poor crosswind landing techniques are being taught in my neck of the woods. This film was edited to show the worst cases, so keep that in mind when forming your opinion.
This footage was a landing competition day held 2 years ago. I was there (I flew that day but my landing is not shown). The pilots you see range from very low time students to PPLs with 100+ hours. What you don't really see is the terrain and treeline upwind causing quite a bit of turbulence on very short finals (and on climb out). That does not excuse the poor landing technique shown. I want this to be a learning exercise for any student pilots reading this thread, not a willy waving match about how superior your skills are, or how poor crosswind landing techniques are being taught in my neck of the woods. This film was edited to show the worst cases, so keep that in mind when forming your opinion.