Bad RWY at JFK again
 

While RWYs 31 are mor suitable, this flight is landing on 04, getting the full xwinds and takes out some lights...

Why don't they get the apropriate RWY for landing?

Nic

A 60 degree crosswind at 21 knots shouldn't require a runway change. Why they hit the lights is unknown but they can't blame it on the cross wind this time.

You land an A340-600 with crab still on and place the cockpit on the centreline, the main wheels are closer than some might think to the edge of the runway.

Don't we put the cockpit on the flare so the mains touch down on the centerline? Isn't that how autoland works? I remember as a junior FO, my leg, on an MD80 with a 30 knot crosswind in Vegas having the cockpit almost over the runway edge lights to land on the centerline with the mains. Also with the left 60 degree crosswind wouldn't that have taken out the right edge lights instead of the left? Sounds more like some PIO's to touchdown I've seen .

p51guy, that's the way it should be done, particularly on a very long aircraft like the A340-600 or the B777-300, but in my experience (12+ years on the 773), I've seen more than a few pilots who forget to make that allowance.

Another of my pet hates is those widebody pilots who think they're flying a Cessna 152 and kick it straight at the last moment in a crosswind. it works a treat if you get it exactly right, but can quickly become a proverbial can of worms if you don't and the aircraft begins to drift downwind before touchdown. The side of the runway can come up very, very quickly in such circumstances.

"Stabilised Approach" is the mantra we all go by in normal ops, so why not stick with that concept in a crosswind? Do what the autopilot does - cross controls a couple of hundred feet above touchdown (and if you're really clever, align the track made good line with the heading marker on your PFD) and the aircraft will ooze onto the runway tracking beautifully. If the crosswind is above 31kts, where Boeing recommends you don't cross control, accept a bit of crab at touchdown and kick it straight immediately after 'impact' - the aircraft will cope with it. If you don't believe me, look at that anmazing video clip of the 777s doing their crosswind proving flights in (was it?) Peru.

But if you're going to land with crab on - or are a 'kick it straight at the last minute' hero(!), stick yourself and the cockpit right out over the upwind side of the runway, (in a strong crosswind, as far out as the runway edge) 'cos when you kick it straight, the pivot point won't be you and the cockpit, but waaaay behind you.

Since March the main Bay runway (31L/13R) has been closed for major maintenance. This runway usually handles 30% of the traffic at JFK. About 10,000 feet of this runway is to be re-opened on June 30th. Since March unique and challenging runway combinations have been used to maintain the required capacity.

Personally I feel the airport and ATC have done a stellar job keeping things going. But it is always an interesting ride into JFK. About 50% of my flights get in there with a non-precision approach.

Wiley,
The last Airbus I flew crabbed in and kicked straight using the rad alt at very low level when on autoland. Very nice, clean and efficient.

The magic words being, beardy, "when on autoland". As someone has already pointed out - lots of non precision approaches are the order of the day at JFK, even at the best of times without the current 31 runway works.

Have to agree with Wiley's comment: kicking a big aeroplane straight in the flare isn't conducive to maintaining a stabilised approach. There are lots of videos out there of things going very, very pear shaped when people get it wrong or in gusty conditions, when the crosswind you've planned for either suddenly isn't there or is just as suddenly is quite a bit more than you planned for.

Fubaar,

I must have misunderstood Wiley

That doesn't represent a logical argument because that is not what the Airbus autopilot does. That is not to say there is no merit in flying cross controlled, but stick to sequential logic when justifying advice.

... but it might be what the B777 does, which is the aircraft Wiley refers to.

Admiral346 . . .
 

No Admiral346, rather it's bad flare/rollout technique. :{

I agree with Glueball. At first glance it looks like a bit of poor flying to me. 21 kts even at a 90 degree angle should not cause a problem to an experienced cockpit crew.

Localizer arial located on nose will mean a well flown localizer would have Cockpit on the centerline with main wheels away from the center on a 30knots crosswind. Floating on the decrab means a few edge lights will need replacing. :\

Here's the correct technique, valid for all types.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxkufQbBdbc

SMT member,

Forgive me, I thought WILEY was giving general advice/instruction to us, all based on his 773 experience.

There are 2 types of runway edge lights; elevated or inset.

Elevated are as described and consist of a frangible metal support tube that sits in an holder bolted to the pavement on op of which can be an omni directional lamp or a pair of bi directional lamps. The landing class of runway in term of viz will dictate the intensity of the lights.

Inset lights are generally bi-directional and consist of a forged alloy design that includes flush mounted lenses which are bolted onto a 'can' sunk into the pavement. A more expensive solution but clearly less prone to damage.

In Europe, these are more prevalent where CAT ll/lll ops are permitted and have to be associated with a compliant centre line.

Port of NY use Crouze-Hinds lighting equipment. Question is why in this age use last century edge lights?

Sir George Cayley

All autoland aircraft would require the localizer antennas to be placed on the belly just forward of the centerline close to the gear. All Boeings are like this because on all autoland sim checks we get one centerline call because you are rolling out off centerline. If the antenna was in the nose you would never be on centerline on a crosswind landing. We had to identify all antennas on the aircraft on 9 month checks.

I'd be interested to see any counter agruments to my comment (above)As I said above, there would seem to be quite a few who disagree with me and prefer (and persist in using) the 'kick it straight in the latter stage of the flare' technique.

In my opinion, this has all the pitfalls of turning a stable approach at the very last (and most critical) moment into what is basically an unstable approach.

With the width of the mainwheel tracks on current widebodies, it also means you can find the downwind main bogies very close to, if not off the runway in little more than the blink of an eye if you don't manage to achieve touchdown exactly when you wanted to.

I've never professed to thinking that I'm some 'ace of the base' by any means, but lately, old age and changed flying patterns have made it even more difficult to maintain stick and rudder skills. The combination of (let's be honest - stupid) company SOPS demanding maximum use of automation at all times and much of our flying these days being ultra long haul, none of us get as much hands on practice as we'd like, so anyone thinking they can plant the beast on the runway at exactly the right moment in a heavy crosswind with a 'kick it straight in the flare' manoeuvre, particulalry at the end of a twelve hour sector, in my opinion, is fooling himself.

My LOC antennae are 2/3rds of the way up forward edge of the fin (717).

Well as it's an A345 that is the subject of this incident how about a quote from A345 FCOM 3.03.22 titled Crosswind Landings?

Crosswind Landings:

The preferred technique is to use rudder to align the aircraft with the runway during the flare whilst using lateral control to maintain the aircraft on the runway center-line.
For crosswind landing routine use of into wind aileron is not recommended because sidestick deflection commands roll rate until touchdown.
In strong crosswind conditions, small amounts of lateral control may be used to maintain wing level. The lateral stick input must be reduced to zero at first main landing gear touchdown.

What is good for a 777 Wiley 'ain't good for the Bigbus... The technique works just fine I assure having done it myself in many a strong crosswind:ok:

Besides - I found that the wing down, cross control technique very effective in a C-152 all those years ago:E

Crosswind landing techniques
 

Oh come guys! We are meant to be professionals

You are flying a multimillion $ piece of tin full of people, you have a responsibility to the pax, company and yourself to be fully conversant with ALL the recommend techniques of how to do a xwind landing upto and including the limit.

If you are not you should get out of the flight deck and take up gardening.


Both Airbus and B777 are fly by wire not cable therefore there is no control input lag, as a result in my experience the 777 is the best and most responsive of any commercial aircraft in a crosswind I have ever flown.

Applying crossed controls to counter a rudder input is not unstabilising an approach, its Effect of Controls 1 for heavens sake!

Let remember we are meant to be pilots not just button pushers.

rant over and the soap box is back in the cupboard!

I couldn't agree more... Just highlighting the FCOM for the subject of this thread:ok:

Yup...and been this way since the 707 days.
Nothing new, perfectly acceptable.

For ULH pilots who get only three or four landings a month, (most of them not crosswind), is that ego or common sense talking?

Ego Vs Professional Responsibility
 

Well speaking for myself, the flight deck of a wide body aircraft (or any other vehicle for that matter) is THE ONE place where ego has absolutely no place.

My post stated that you should, as a matter of professional responsibility, be fully conversant with all the recommended techniques and use the most appropriate one depending on the circumstances in which you find yourself.

As to ULR flying and maintaining competence/proficiency. In Ek we do 1 or 2 a month so it should not be a problem. However, I agree that if you do nothing but ULR stuff maintaining proficiency is not easy hence being familiar with all the various techniques, or tell someone and get into the sim, or be a grown up and bid, if possible, for less ULR flights thus taking responsibility for your own competence.

It is not brain surgery after all.

Did any other aircraft have the same problem landing that day?.

Where is just forward of the centerline?
It's under the radome with the GS antenna. (On the 737) and most others I'd hazard a guess.

18 kt crosswind. Big deal.

Left crosswind. They took out the left runway lights. No 'downwind' drfit issue.

Crosswind landing technique isn't important if you don't land near the centerline.

Or better, why could the crew not muster the skills and proficiency required to tackle a crosswind landing:hmm:?

As a light piston single and occasional light twin driver, I always try to land with the upwind wheel first, wing low and nose pointing straight down the runway - ie no crab and no drift and hence no sideloading on the landing gear.

Videos of big jets landing with a crab/drift always surprise me as the forces that seem to be imposed on the landing gear look huge/potentially damaging.

Are big jets landed this way because a single gear cannot handle all of the weight on landing or is there a risk of one of the engine pods striking the ground or some other reason?

Interested to know.

Engine pods striking the ground is a big problem on such aircraft as the 747. This makes the wing-down technique quite tricky.

On the other hand, the DC-10 was a brilliant wing-down aeroplane. If you look at the geometry, you would never be able to scrape a pod (you would always get the wingtip first).

Not all aircraft manufacturers allow for the "crabbed landing technique" because of the side loads imposed on the landing gear.

Now that is a fascinating statement.

Can you tell us more please?

Well MD11 would be one type I´m absolutely sure of (and have experienced) that hates crabby landings!

And the Scarebus is not meant to be landed without decrabbing to a certain extent either as quoted from the OM-B before.

Somebody just messed up the landing during the EY-incident - nothing more, nothing less. The Xwind certainly sound do-able on the size of an A345.

But c´mon - AUH-JFK! - is near the red line.

There, but for the grace of God...

Agree with WILEY, I'm also a 773 driver, The Chinese Landing "One wing low" is the way to go!!

Have to agree White Knight

Had several max wind landings in AKL on the 345, looks a little hairy lining up on the edge lights. I cheat a little and begin the de-crab just prior to the flare with slower rudder inputs, needs a little more lateral attention but works well and the aircraft is in the level attitude on touchdown.

Either way immediatly prior to or in the flare hasn't made a huge difference and neither have strong gusts during the flare, just need to be ready with control inputs if needed.

This isn't rocket science, what works for one may type not necesarily work for another.

Stay safe

Dooner:ok:

Before the 31 knot limit for the crabbed technique came in, I've landed a 772 in a 40 kt crosswind at LHR using the crossed control technique - and when I was very, very new on type. (It was my initial check flight after my conversion.)

The aeroplane went on as if on a rail (thanks more to Mr Boeing's designers than anything I did, I suspect), and we certainly didn't get a pod scrape. As I mentioned in my earlier post, it's how the autopilot does it and it maintains a totally stable attitude (and perhaps just as important, a stable track) right to touchdown.

Thanks to the track line in the compass at the bottom of the PFD, you can even finesse the amount of rudder required to get the aircraft tracking exactly on runway heading, so it doesn't matter if you don't get the flare/touchdown absolutely nailed - the aircraft isn't going through (what can be a quite large) gyration as you kick it straight at the last minute and therefore, isn't heading off for the side of the runway at a rapid rate of knots if you float a little longer than is ideal.

777 drivers, next time you do a sim. ride, ask the instructor to wind in a 30kt (or more) crosswind and take a look at how the autopilot handles the final 300 or 400 feet. Then try manually flying an approach and use the same technique as the autopilot. I believe you'll become a convert.

The only reason I can see for someone using the 'kick it straight in the flare' technique in a 777 is ego, because you think you're skilled enough to do it. Like those who lambasted me in posts above, you quite possibly are - but too many FO's (and Captains on multi crew ULR flights) I've seen try it aren't so skilled and turn what could be a no brainer, non event crosswind landing into something approaching those movie clips we've all seen on YouTube.

If I remember correctly, Airbus does not recommend x-controls. As per the FCTM
"crabbed approach wings level" should be the technique used.

I have used both and Boeing a/c (never flown B777) respond well to x-control, Airbus not so much.

My two cents worth

Assy

Doing the cross control during a flare in a Boeing is quite intuitive. The Airbus I understand adds more bank holding the control off neutral so would be a relearning for a Boeing pilot. We always hold the aileron into the wind and the rudder keeps us straight. Kind of like all of the aircraft in the past 107 years.

I agree with alwayzinit.. A 21 kt crosswind should not be an issue for any professional pilot in any larger aircraft. Period!! The title of this thread is very misleading as it really had nothing to do with JFK. Crosswind landings are a fact of life in our business no matter what type of plane you fly. Quit trying to blame everyone else. Unless there was a mechanical issue, these guys just simply screwed up. End of conversation. If you can't handle the airplane get the :mad: out of the cockpit!!