I agree, there is no such thing as a bad runway if it is made out of concrete and has no potholes in it. The actual xwind component that day was under 20 knots, quite manageable by any student pilot. JFK is not responsible for poor piloting skills.

Well, it seems that 31L ( at least part of it ) will be opened on 29th June.
So, no more excuses?

Info on antennas. Most boeing aircraft have the ILS glideslope and localiser antennas in the nose, on the forward bulkhead below the radar. I doubt whether your 9 month check of antennas would include opening the radome. Try wiring diagram manual chapter 91 charts will show all locations

A345 Antenna position
 

This is the antenna position of the actual A345 aircraft

http://i836.photobucket.com/albums/z...7at54717AM.png

...why do you care about antenna position???

On Airbuses, LLZ signal is processed so the deviation displayed on PFDs is that between the LLZ beam and the aircraft yaw axis...
The fitted Multi-Mode Receivers take care of that.


Fatfish, p51guy...on all Airbus FBW aircraft, glide and loc antennas are located in the nose area...that does not mean that the nose is aligned with the LLZ signal during an ILS app.! Otherwise, every x-wind landing would be scary...

JW411 post #31
True! :}

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviatio.../8/1724855.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/photo/USA---Air/McDonnell-Douglas-KC-10A

SF, Thanks for the explanation of how Airbus uses a nose mounted localizer antenna to land on the centerline. I wonder if Boeing uses the computer to find the center axis to align with centerline too? Seems like an antenna mounted on centerline further back would be so much simpler. I don't have any manuals any more and have a friend trying to find where the 757 loc antenna is but it isn't in our study guide. Seems like in a xwind during decrab all autolands would end up in a bank into the wind during flare to get on centerline for the main gear.

Bad RWY at JFK again
 

Could this have been an Auto-Land gone wrong with a LOC deviation after Flare?

yes:ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok:

So the apparently preferred choice is to drag the wingtip, with all that leverage, vs. scrapping the bottom of the engine cowling?

Put me down in the 'favors engine cowling' crowd.

And why would a xwind landing at demonstrated xwind component, properly executed, drag a pod or wingtip if it didn't in certification?

Eh? Could someone translate that for me please?

I think he is just trying to be funny.

ehwatezedoing:

I absolutely loved that photograph of the KC-10 doing an absolutely beautiful "wing down" landing. I suspect that the photograph was taken at Lajes (which always had a huge crosswind) in the Azores.

Now I have put one of the Queen's Short Belfasts on to that runway at Lajes in a horrendous crosswind (and I do not know how many other airfields around the world).

The Belfast crosswind limit (because of yaw dampers, triplex auto land and rudder-aileron interconnects) was officially 21 knots.

I landed at YQX one night in hellacious winter conditions in windspeeds that most of you would rather read about. As best as I can remember, the crosswind was around 41 knots but the wing down technique got us quickly down to the Flyers Club!

JW411
 

Wow is your name by any chance Chuck

No, just rule-breaker. Good example for the up-and-comers, JW4111. Not. :=

To p51 guy!(or any other pro) What if the wing tips are far aft of the mains as it is on the DC10 and many other sweep wing aircraft,and then being caught by a sheer or downdraft in the flare.Could,t this ruin an otherwise perfectly executed wing low landing when the pilot pull back on his columm to arrest the high sinkrate? I am no pro, just asking.I have seen a tip scrape on an Md80 where there was no unusual high bank angle,but where the deck angle was higher than normal to prevent a last second high sinker.Isn,t possible to simply being caught by bad luck regardless of what happend during certification?

737forever, the wing down technique works a treat if within the crosswind limits set by very experienced manufacturer's test pilots and design engineers. (It was certainly my preferred option for the Boeing 777. Airbus suggest the kick it straight in the flare option as their preferred method because their FBW computers aren't programmed to cope as well with the wing down option.)

If you try using the wing down technique at higher crosswinds (that are also within the aircraft design limits but higher than that recommended for the wing down technique), you risk an engine pod or wingtip scrape (depending on the geometry of the particular aircraft type).

In this day and age, attempting a landing in a crosswind beyond the certified (or "demonstrated") limits is a Very Bad Idea for a line pilot wishing to keep his job. However, in very rare circumstances, sometimes the alternative to busting a crosswind limit might be even less appetizing than risking a pod or wing tip strike. In those very rare and extraordinary circumstances, it's a matter of the captain using his discretion.

But such circumstances should be very rare indeed, and maybe encountered once or twice in a whole career.

MMR correction of LOC signal in Xwind
 

I'm not doubting shortfuel but would appreciate a reference to this correction calculated by the MMR to the LOC and GS signals.