12kts is well below a 152's demonstrated limit and if people are ignoring it anyway, then the rule is patently wrong!

60kt final? Oh FFS! Someone trying to reinvent the wheel?

1.3 Vs rings a bell? I forget the C152 Vs?

Approach speeds should be based on weight, not some arbitrary figure that the CFI thinks is acceptable!

1.3 Vs is fine, but as Vs is variable then a bit of thought should be stuffed in at least.

I might be having a word with Keith when I nip into Perth next!

Kieth had nothing to do with my PPL just the tailwheel.

I'll go along with that, bearing in mind that the 152 was usually 2up & tanks full. one hr flight time average. Probably 1.3 Vs as a straight number for training purposes would be ok.
We were taught & I knew from way back to gliders that wt matters, but it saves on workload if you are not doing sums downwind on early solo.
So a bit of thought was stuffed in there in as much as a couple of knots for the wife & kids so to speak.
I'll look forward to meeting you at Perth when this wind drops a bit.

I did wonder! I was a bit surprised to think he'd come up with anything quite so daft!

Well I'm glad we got that on the same freq.
In fact I would say I could have done with his kind of help 150hrs ago instead of spending 20+ hrs on navexes & never getting "lost".

Say Again Slowly

Actually 12 knts is the demonstrated maximum cross wind limit according to the C 152 POH I have. But I think this is really a red herring. First the 12 knts is not limiting and second it can be generated by a 12 kt 90 deg crosswind or a 35 kt 15 deg crosswind. Any one flying a C152 in 35 kts of wind needs their head examined. Also what the wind is when you actually flare will probably not be what was reported. Ultimately it is up to the instructor to teach students how to fly the aircraft in crosswind conditions annd more importantly to recognize when things are not working out and either go around from the landing or reject the takeoff. Having flown a C185 on amphib floats the aircraft can be a bitch to taxi in a crosswind. The guy who rolled up the airplane at the beginning of this thread would have known virtually from the get go that this was not going to work yet he persisted. Ultimately this accident was not caused by poor flying skills it was a massive pilot decision making failure. The solution is not a blanket one wind value fits every condition prohibitions by flying clubs it is better pilot decision making skills training.

My point (though reading back I see it's poorly made) is that there is no absolute limit for a 152.

The demonstrated crosswind limits are also different between the C150 and C152, the operative word being again demonstrated. There is no absolute limitation, shown by the fact that crosswinds aren't mentioned in the limitation section.

You are making my point for me too. Each pilot has their own limitations that they are comfortable with. Sticking something into a flying order book that is so unneccesarily limiting as a 12kt crosswind limit in an aircraft that is far more capable (especially given the fact that there is an FI onboard) is a joke.

Break the FOB then you are in for all sorts of problems if an accident or incident occurs.

Why put in a silly rule like this that will simply cause problems?

I've landed 152's in significantly more than 12 kts direct x-wind, without a hint of an issue. I've had students do the same with nothing more than a briefing and the odd word of encouragement, they aren't exactly beasts to handle!

How can you teach someone to use their own judgement when you are limited by the Flying Order Book to this extent? If it says thou shalt not land in >12kts across, then, thou shalt not.

A silly rule for many reasons.

Say Again Slowly

I think we are in violent agreement on this issue. The crosswind landing limit is not some arbitrary number it is when you no longer have enough rudder authority to keep the aircraft tracking down the centerline with the aircraft aligned with the runway heading (although there are ways around this if you know what you are doing:E). Part of the problem is Amercian aircraft have a certification requirement that they are controllable with a crosswind equal to 20 % of the stall speed. This is why the "demonstrated" crosswind limit is so absurdly low. Cessna just demonstrates the minimum required and calls it good.

I would point out gents that most Instructors I flew with were prepared to fly in far more than 12kn. Early in my training on 152 one day wind was some 20kn+ at about 45deg to CL. Instructor was quite happy, flew me for 45mins then stopped the clock on me & did a couple of t&g to keep himself current on crosswinds. It was just that 12kn was what was writ.
Also some of us students were & are well aware of what causes stalls (AofA caused by wt, bankangle, low power+AofA, etc & not really related to speed) I'm trying not to say stall "speed" cos there really isn't one is there? Staggering over trees at TO on a hot summer day with my son in law on board & full tank was anticipated & dealt with, but demonstrated another story.
As an aside, you guys obviously being instructors. I once asked a gliding instructor "How do you calculate lift?" Answer "Half Ro V squared" & he walked away with the look that says "aren't I clever"
OK, pressure 15psi = 7.5 x 60sq (3600)= 27000. 27000 what? pounds, Kg, inches, cubits? My car weighs less than 27000lb so it should fly???

It does help to work through the dimensions, as I was taught to do in O level physics - not only do the answers to such questions pop out automagically but you also get a sanity check. Do they not teach this stuff in schools any more then?