wow!

I like how he started out upwind and gently worked it to centerline. If you start from downwind it is a lot more aggressive.

Gracias Dopple. Great piloting.

That was not his first rodeo!

Good job.

Yep. If I were a betting man, I would say that guy was a former Naval Aviator or Marine. As a passenger, I always had a lot more confidence in the pilots who flew missions dodging missiles, AAA, fighting MiGs, and landing on carriers.

quote:

Originally posted by PSmith:
Yep. If I were a betting man, I would say that guy was a former Naval Aviator or Marine. As a passenger, I always had a lot more confidence in the pilots who flew missions dodging missiles, AAA, fighting MiGs, and landing on carriers.

Absolutely not!!! He was most like a former USAF pilot, and on top of that a heavy driver. Naval aviators land with no crosswind when landing on ships. A USAF Herk or C-17 driver has to land on small assault zones, and you can't turn an assault runway into the wind. Also, fighter guys have a very responsive aircraft. Heavy drivers have to land large aircraft with inertia and slow response, meaning they have to plan much farther abead when dealing with crosswinds. Having tours in the T-38, T-1, and C-130, I can say the T-38 was easiest to land in a crosswind. The C-130 was the hardest.

And another one.

quote:

Originally posted by DOPPELGANGSTER:
[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XFIKLk_wDZA" width="560"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

Except that ain't United airlines. It's a contract express carrier. He also did not "drift" to center line. That is an optical illusion created by the gimbled camera on the helicopter as the helicopter moved to his six o clock position.

In fact it isn't even that huge of a crosswind component.

Max demonstrated cross wind during the Boeing 777 certification process. Notice that the test pilots do not decrab the airplane. Rather they are landing in the full crab to test the side shear ability of the gear.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_z2LtHrn9Jw

Looks like to me the United Express jet is banking more to the left than needed to just account for the decreasing wind. I still say he starts on the upwind side and gently (and correctly) moves to centerline.

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:
Looks like to me the United Express jet is banking more to the left than needed to just account for the decreasing wind. I still say he starts on the upwind side and gently (and correctly) moves to centerline.

At full demonstrated crosswind component there is never a need to drift from the upwind side to center line. The aircraft is capable of, in fact required to be able to maintain center line from the beginning of the approach until touchdown at a full value max demonstrated crosswind.

In a low visibility situation the aircraft is required to track the localizer center line and be fully controllable even in a full value crosswind. There are three approved crosswind landing techniques in a transport category aircraft.
1. Crab with a transition to a slip, landing wing low fully decrabed into the wind and landing on center line.
2. Land on center line in a partial slip and a partial crab.
3. Land in a full crab on center line.

Drifting from upwind to center line is not listed for the obvious reason that you are not guaranteed obstacle clearance in low vis if you are not on Loc center line.

I have said this before, but damn, having you pilots on AR explain things is really great.

quote:

Originally posted by surestrike:

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:
Looks like to me the United Express jet is banking more to the left than needed to just account for the decreasing wind. I still say he starts on the upwind side and gently (and correctly) moves to centerline.

At full demonstrated crosswind component there is never a need to drift from the upwind side to center line. The aircraft is capable of, in fact required to be able to maintain center line from the beginning of the approach until touchdown at a full value max demonstrated crosswind.

In a low visibility situation the aircraft is required to track the localizer center line and be fully controllable even in a full value crosswind. There are three approved crosswind landing techniques in a transport category aircraft.
1. Crab with a transition to a slip, landing wing low fully decrabed into the wind and landing on center line.
2. Land on center line in a partial slip and a partial crab.
3. Land in a full crab on center line.

Drifting from upwind to center line is not listed for the obvious reason that you are not guaranteed obstacle clearance in low vis if you are not on Loc center line.

After traing a hell of a lot of USAF students--including instructor candidates--and flying three significantly types of aircraft in mild to aggressive environments, I have to disagree. The best practice is to favor the upwind side. There is no obstacle clearance issue unless you are significantly off centerline and I have not suggested that. I am puzzled as to how you would assume that? Also, as you know, it is rare when there is a max crosswind in a low visibility situation--unless you are in the Aleutians.

Favoring the upwind side means a very minor and easy correction, where as the smallest downwind deviation requires a significant and sometimes aggressive maneuver to correct. In a small aircraft like the T-38 (land in a crab) or T-1 (wing low), missing centerline is no big deal. With a C-130 (wing low) on an assault zone--where the runway is less that half the width of the wingspan and the outboard props are over off the prepared surface, landing on centerline is critical. Add to that a blown landing that requires another approach may well expose you to hostile fire, it's best to take the most reliable approach, which means favoring the upwind side.

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:

quote:

Originally posted by surestrike:

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:
Looks like to me the United Express jet is banking more to the left than needed to just account for the decreasing wind. I still say he starts on the upwind side and gently (and correctly) moves to centerline.

At full demonstrated crosswind component there is never a need to drift from the upwind side to center line. The aircraft is capable of, in fact required to be able to maintain center line from the beginning of the approach until touchdown at a full value max demonstrated crosswind.

In a low visibility situation the aircraft is required to track the localizer center line and be fully controllable even in a full value crosswind. There are three approved crosswind landing techniques in a transport category aircraft.
1. Crab with a transition to a slip, landing wing low fully decrabed into the wind and landing on center line.
2. Land on center line in a partial slip and a partial crab.
3. Land in a full crab on center line.

Drifting from upwind to center line is not listed for the obvious reason that you are not guaranteed obstacle clearance in low vis if you are not on Loc center line.

After traing a hell of a lot of USAF students--including instructor candidates--and flying three significantly types of aircraft in mild to aggressive environments, I have to disagree. The best practice is to favor the upwind side. There is no obstacle clearance issue unless you are significantly off centerline and I have not suggested that. I am puzzled as to how you would assume that? Also, as you know, it is rare when there is a max crosswind in a low visibility situation--unless you are in the Aleutians.

Favoring the upwind side means a very minor and easy correction, where as the smallest downwind deviation requires a significant and sometimes aggressive maneuver to correct. In a small aircraft like the T-38 (land in a crab) or T-1 (wing low), missing centerline is no big deal. With a C-130 (wing low) on an assault zone--where the runway is less that half the width of the wingspan and the outboard props are over off the prepared surface, landing on centerline is critical. Add to that a blown landing that requires another approach may well expose you to hostile fire, it's best to take the most reliable approach, which means favoring the upwind side.

Being a B-777 instructor and check airmen and having flown the DC-8, B-737, A-320, B-757,767 and B-777 extensively in line operations all over the world in every imaginable type of weather and wind conditions. I disagree with your technique in general from the prospective of a heavy, large aircraft operators standpoint. In fact what you describe from my reference is not only sloppy it's absolutely not allowed. In a smaller air frame such as a C-130 center line control far is less critical on a standard runway.

On aircraft with a fuselage length approaching 200' and greater. When the main gear is sitting 100' behind your butt such as the case in a 777. You want to line your butt up with the upwind side of the runway in a strong crosswind 25 kts and higher. In this case your main gear is over the center line, your butt is up wind. When you decrab and bring your butt onto the center line the main gear stays in place and you touch down on the center line. The main mass of the aircraft is always over on center line there is no drift or change of aircraft position over the runway involved if it's done correctly.

If you are properly controlling an airplane there is never a reason to let that airplane drift. Unless we are talking a swept wing fighter. That's a whole different story as the airplane can't be effectively side slipped. It's also the reason that fighter guys are a PITA to train to make a smooth crosswind landing. In the case of a fighter guy the technique you've described is valid and it takes time and effort to beat it out of them when they transition to a low wing under slung engine wide body. Dragging engine pods through the runway lights does not look good on a resume.

The simple way to think about this is that the when we transition from a pure crab to a slip the low wing into the wind cancels out your drift across the runway. The opposite rudder lines the aircraft up with the center line. If you can not keep the aircraft from drifting with your maximum allowable bank angle on landing then you'll have to keep a bit of crab in on touch down as well.

Above 31 kts direct cross wind on landing in 777 you are required to use a combination of wing low and crab to maintain center line control. On an aircraft with a wing span that is wider than the runway you are landing on, if you touch down directly perfectly on center line you are ALREADY hanging parts of the airplane over the the runway edges on both sides. Drifting from upwind to downwind is begging for trouble. So as you mentioned with your C-130 example in a large wide body aircraft, perfect center line control is always critical.

Now as far as your comment regarding low vis and winds. I agree with you in principal however, if you've ever spent a winter flying out of Denver you'll find yourself flying into low vis and strong crosswinds during winter snow storms at least several times a year. I've also done a max demonstrated cross wind in Taipei in low vis due to driving rain right after a typhoon had passed. Granted it isn't common. However we should always train and fly like it's a worst case scenario, that way on the day it happens you are not doing anything out of the ordinary.

Another video. Multiple cross wind landings. Some not so great but you'll notice that not one single pilot uses your drift down wind technique. It's simply not done in transport category aircraft.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMvLuUJFHYk

If my "favor the upwind side" and your "put your butt on the upwind side" is really more than a semantic difference, the I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree. It's not a "drift down technique." When you favor the upwind side the correction to centerline--if any at all--is minor and does not result in lateral drift--it actually avoids it. Nine time out of ten when someone lines up on the upwind side they wind up in the middle of the runway. When they start out in centerline they often wind up on the downwind side.

If you land with ANY drift in a C-130 you can tear the gear off. Also, dirt assault zones don't even have a centerline. C-17s don't usually land on the dirt, but they do perform assault landings and they weigh 585k at max gross. (Max gross for a C-130 is 155k.) Every one of the C-17 pilots was taught to favor the upwind side when they were in pilot training, as were pilots going to the 840k C-5. I expect they fly the C-17 and C-5 that way, but I am not 100% sure. I am pretty sure they don't land the C-17 wing low with that excessive wing anhedral.

The T-38 is landed in a crab, but my first tour was in C-130s and my second in T-38s. There was always a crosswind in Lubbock, and on one of my early transition flights I couldn't help myself and I kicked the nose straight and dropped the wing. It was a perfect landing, but expecting students to do that isn't smart as the rudder is extremely effective at low speeds, more so than the ailerons, and it is too easy to turn the plane upside down with the rudder when slow.

The T-1 (military version of a Beech 400) has a steep swept wing and that plane is landed wing low, so we can't say all steep swept wing aircraft are landed in a crab. As to fighter guys being hard to train Inhave to agree. We would always get one or two in the T-1, and they struggled to do the things we took for granted, like changing an instrument approach at the last minute or adapting to a less responsive aircraft.

BTW, this has been an enjoyable discussion. Reminds me of sitting in the squadron arguing with another pilot about some flying or tactical technique. I miss those days.....

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:
C-17s don't usually land on the dirt, but they do perform assault landings and they weigh 585k at max gross. (Max gross for a C-130 is 155k.) Every one of the C-17 pilots was taught to favor the upwind side when they were in pilot training, as were pilots going to the 840k C-5. I expect they fly the C-17 and C-5 that way, but I am not 100% sure. I am pretty sure they don't land the C-17 wing low with that excessive wing anhedral.

I'd have to agree on the C-17 comment above. I had a student in the 757/767 several years ago who was fresh out of C-17's. I'm not sure what technique he used in the C-17 but it did not translate at all to a 757. It took me a good 10 hours to get to where he could land the 757 in a crosswind.

Maybe the real answer is what it's always been. Different aircraft require different techniques and even different thought processes if we want to optimally fly each one......

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:
Maybe the real answer is what it's always been. Different aircraft require different techniques and even different thought processes if we want to optimally fly each one......

No doubt about it!