Sapco

I will try your technique in the Citation when I have no PAX as don't want to stuff it in front of them :{ they only get good landings ;)

Pace

Haha, many thanks for the compliment Pace but really, it isn't my technique!
Someone taught me how to do it years ago and I've become totally sold on the idea ever since.

I think you'll agree, well executed crosswind landing are one of the few skilful and enjoyable challenges left in the commercial flying world!

MadJock

don't think this is the place to discuss relationships :E

Sapco2

Is there a Sapco1 ;) Sorry thought it was some new fangled devilish technique you had unilaterally developed :E I ought to read these threads : ----)

Pace

Ah Pace, you're the first to ask about the sapco handle!

Its a now obsolete reporting point south of EGNX.... the 2 as in to the centre fix!

It always felt good coming home to EMA and that is why I chose it!

Pace a pilots relastionship with thier aircraft is very important. If the aircraft is dominant its not a healthy one.

Looking at the picture of the landing under discussion, it's been taken with a long lens sighting up from underneath, so possibly more dramatic (why do that? ;)) than a front end shot. The wingtip wasn't particularly close in reality: you can see the optical illusion as the left gear and prop appear to be underground. None of the surfaces are actually horizontal - add that to the camera angle and it is difficult to judge the true attitude...

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/...17_634x316.jpg

That looks like one of my regular landings ;)

Naah

You cannot see the other wheel because of curvature of the earth we all know that :E ;) :---------)

Pace

Its the infamous Manchester bump that you are seeing.

Pilots have spent years trying to level it out but its not moving.

If you manage it you can touch the wheels down just on the top for a greaser. Touch down before it and the ground is coming up to meet you doubling your ROD. And if you miss the top it drops away leaving you running out of energy and dropping onto the runway.

'The Hump' caught out the Emirates A380 last year. I was in the Concorde hangar watching the landing and he must have flared with a tad too much speed as the aeroplane climbed ever so slightly in the flare. He did the correct thing and held the attitude, but by then they'd sailed over 'The Hump' and the runways was dropping away only slightly more slowly than the giant aeroplane was descending and feeling for it with all those dangly main wheels.

As the tyres brushed the surface he was almost level with me, and as I willed him to go around the power came on and go-around he did!

.

I don’t know anyone who does that, you have crab techniques if you need to on final approach, I will myself elect the “wing down” method on the flare out if actually needed.

wing down top rudder?!
 

Chuck,

Though it has been awhile since a thread was added to this forum, I just recently ran across it when researching this topic.

As a Harrier guy, I learned to do nothing but a crabbed approach, and still do it today as a natural piloting skill in commercial aircraft.

Someone tried to tell me once that for high wing a/c one should utilize the wing down top rudder, but I just can't; and I don't even think it is safer. For me it feels less safe.

We should remind the naysayers that one could also do the ultimate -- land vertically with the harrier weather vane pointed into the wind, but that is hard to do in a 777.

Thanks again Chuck!

Joe

Welcome Joe,

Chuck, whom I know as a very experienced pilot of many types, may have been highlighting the reality that different techniques are appropriate (or not) for different types.

Yes, I can imagine the "wing down" method may be undesirable for a Harrier, wiping off outriggers and all. However, in a floatplane, it's vital. If you contact the water crabbed in a floatplane, you're probably going to roll it upside down in the water. However touching a float plane on one float only, aligned with the "runway", and holding it in that attitude as needed, is no problem at all. In my flying boat (perhaps not unlike a Harrier in that way only), I'd dig in a wingtip float doing that. In my tricycle Cessna, I'm quite content to use either method to the surface, though the crabbed method will cost me more rubber.

Takeoff in a floatplane is surprisingly easier in a crosswind, when one float is lifted out as soon as practical. Half the water drag instantly, and a feeling like a push from behind.

Thus it's important to have these discussions, to have pilots consider as much as possible in making their technique choices.

It is important that pilots gain an understanding of both crosswind techniques, and thereafter any practical limitations, and preferences for the type they are flying.

Surely, 'wing down' in a Harrier would tilt the lift vector of the engine thrust and skittering off sideways at a rate of knots you'd go....

In various a/c there are often a variety of techniques. IMHO the crab technique to about 5-300' is the same for all. It is after that where things might change. The crab could be maintained until flare, then removed. You could transition to a slip manoeuvre and maintain until flare landing on the upwind wheel; or a combination of the 2. In some a/c, B738, there is a max X-wind for pure sideslip landing. This is due to bank angle flap contact. Other a/c may have restrictions due to engine pod contact: I suspect A340 might. On B738, in medium X-winds I used crab then slip about 200'. On B757/767 I set up the slip at after 300' on strong days. All seemed to work OK.
What I found disturbing with some operators is that they had an SOP teaching only 1 of the optional techniques. This I considered to be a further dumbing down of teaching a pilot how to handle the a/c IAW the manufacturer's FCTM. Pilots are already not truly taught the envelope to the a/c, and restricting their education to only 1 technique is IMHO not complete training.

That is the whole point of SOP's
So everyone does 'it' the same way whatever the procedure is.
So you can fly with anyone in the company for the first time ever and you know exactly what they are going to do in any circumstance - such as a x-wind landing. None of this "Old Joe uses method x so remember this when flying with him".

it was this crosswind video that convinced me the 777 was the fleet to be on, not a minutes regret.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ogHdIZgzR4

the wing down is fine in good viz situations, but when operating down to minima, you have to continue what the autopilot has done a magnificent job at so far, that is wings level and crabbing !

IMHO it depends on what aircraft you are flying and how fast it responds to a crosswind.

If you are in a 100 tonne Boeing crabbing into a crosswind, you get the flare wrong and float for a few seconds down the runway then it's going to keep going more or less down the runway whenever you kick the crab straight. No problem.

If it's an ultralight, and you kick the crab straight too early, a crosswind will accelerate the aircraft sideways significantly before you arrive on the ground and leave lots of rubber on the runway.

Wing down in a light aircraft allows one to float a bit without accelerating sideways ..... even if it requires one wheeled touchdown. Obviously this argument may not suit some long winged machines.

I agree with RT. Inertia (mass) of the aircraft is important​. I've kicked crab straight in a Pa28, but only​ used wing down in a Jodel DR1050.