Crosswind component

[PTK]

Coming back home late afternoon today the AWOS started throwing curve balls! It went from reporting 28010KT to 35022G37KT right when I was about 10 miles out! Landing runway is 26. I briefed the passengers (the wife and the sister-in-law) that we will give it a shot but we may have to divert to a more favorable runway due to winds. It was no surprise to us as we could see the change coming out of the west.

I'm happy to report that the Mooney handled it extremely well! I'm very happy with the airplane's performance. She came in to a nice no flap cross wind landing. Yet another reason to love the Mooney! The passengers handled it well too!

I've heard that the demonstrated crosswind numbers in the POH are really what was "demonstrated" the day of the test flight. It wouldn't be legal to amend the demonstrated crosswind component in our POH, would it?!  (kidding...)

 

[rbridges]

good job.  My sphincter would have been so tight when I started final.

[jetdriven]

I find it funny Allsmiles wont operate his engine 1 degree LOP when Lycoming recommends peak, but happily explores the envelope 3 times beyond the maximum demonstrated crosswind component, flaps up, in unstable weather.  I guess "Some things are best left to professionals" is appropriate here.    

[Gone]

I too have been a "test pilot" for strong crosswinds and I can tell you that our Mooneys, especially the short body ones from what I hear, are superbly suited to the role.  20G25 at 90 degrees to the runway.  Don Kaye and others recommend no flaps and I agree. 

[Lood]

Extreme cross wind landings are much less of an issue in my Mooney than it was in both my C172 and Robin Hr100-210 and I always use full flaps in the Mooney.

[jackn]

Out here, we seem to always have a gusty x-wind. Last week, another 90 degree x-wind14g20. My passenger asked if we would have a problem. I told him 'not on takeoff but we'll be careful with the landing'. On takeoff, delayed my rotation a little bit for more speed, at about 10 feet above the runway a gust must have gotten behind my wing, cause we dropped about 5 ' in a blink. Having the runway coming up at you like that really got my attention! Landing was a non issue. I always use full flaps.

[Jeff_S]

Had two interesting x-wind experiences on Saturday. The first was flying into Cullman AL (3A1) where the AWOS reported "wind calm" and the skydiving plane was usine runway 2 so we just fit into the flow. Damned if that wasn't one of the squirreliest landings I'd had in awhile, and as we touched down the tail kept pushing out to the right and just ground steering was an issue. When we got out we saw the wind had shifted to a quartering tail-wind of about 5 knots. That doesn't sound like a lot, but I can tell you when it's from behind it makes an impact.

Coming back into PDK that same day landing on 34, winds were 15G25 from 310° which, again, doesn't seem like a lot. But anybody who's ever landed on 34 at PDK knows there is a gully in front that causes all kinds of swirls, so with any breeze at all it's a constant dance movement with rudder, aileron and throttle to bounce through the air on your way in. As we were getting down to about 100' my passenger asked "is this when I should be panicking?" but in fact all that dancing improved my concentration and I made one of the softest touchdowns I've had in awhile. Go figure.

[David Mazer]

Quote: jetdriven

 explores the envelope 3 times beyond the maximum demonstrated crosswind component, flaps up, in unstable weather.

[johnggreen]

Yes, sometimes pilots are faced with in flight scenarios that they have no option but to "address".  There are a multitude of reasons for a crosswind component, and if you ignore it long enough, you will probably become an "incident".

With a landing gear that has almost no shock absorbing movement compared to the the spring gear of a Cessna or the hydraulic action of a Beech, I can only shudder at the thought of the side loads imposed on the Mooney gear and wing connection points in a severe cross wing landing.  Mooney must consider that a weak point as they actually have a landing weight on the heavier Ovations, Bravos, and I assume, Acclaims where they specifically caution in the POH about side loads generated from "heavy" landings.  I have no doubt that many leaking wing issues can be traced directly to hard landings and strong crosswind landings.

All this being said, the most disturbing point is the cavalier attitude that I see from low time, barely experienced pilots who think themselves to be such a rare cross between Bob Hoover and Sky King that just because they don't "understand" why the manufacturer and FAA put limitations on the flight parameters of their airplanes that they should just disregard those limitations.

A similar thread and attitude cropped up here several months ago over VNE's and gross weight limitations.

I would also point out that most members of this blog are flying airplanes 30, 40, and 50 years old that have been owned by multiple persons of questionable flying skills and usually subjected to the minimum of maintenance that can be had.

I am not trying to embarrass or insult anyone.  I am pointing out that complacency kills and this site is absolutely full of complacency.

That's all.  Sorry if I offend.

Jgreen

[xftrplt]

Well said.

[rbridges]

Quote: Jeff_S

Had two interesting x-wind experiences on Saturday. The first was flying into Cullman AL (3A1) where the AWOS reported "wind calm" and the skydiving plane was usine runway 2 so we just fit into the flow. Damned if that wasn't one of the squirreliest landings I'd had in awhile, and as we touched down the tail kept pushing out to the right and just ground steering was an issue. When we got out we saw the wind had shifted to a quartering tail-wind of about 5 knots. That doesn't sound like a lot, but I can tell you when it's from behind it makes an impact.

 

[PTK]

Quote: johnggreen

Yes, sometimes pilots are faced with in flight scenarios that they have no option but to "address".  There are a multitude of reasons for a crosswind component, and if you ignore it long enough, you will probably become an "incident".

[xftrplt]

 

Quote: allsmiles

[PTK]

Quote: xftrplt

And I, to my credit, don't habitually beat the dog more than the wife.

[bnicolette]

Quote: allsmiles

It is always good policy to be fair to the wife. Happy wife happy life, as they say! So beat them both equally!

[DaV8or]

Quote: jackn

My passenger asked if we would have a problem. I told him 'not on takeoff but we'll be careful with the landing'.

[OR75]

Gust winds implies some kind of random occurence ... if I landed when 37 knots xwind gusts are called, I would simply consider myself lucky to have made it between 2 gusts. That would be very lucky if i was in a C150, maybe less if it was a heavy aircraft.   

[jackn]

Quote: DaV8or

Wow. That must have made him feel better about the flight. Translation- "It's pretty easy going up, but getting down can be tricky... so you have that to look forward to."

[Bennett]

For what it is worth: San Carlos Flight Center (KSQL) has a multi-motion dedicated crosswind simulator for training. A bit strange looking, as it can move forward, sideways, and allows various yaw angles. Seems to be fairly popular as I see pilots taking instruction with it frequently. (It is housed in the hangar next to mine). Never tried it myself as I get plenty of crosswind practice just flying in and out of San Carlos Airport. It does sound like a resonable training device, and saves wear and tear on real aircraft.

[DaV8or]

Quote: jackn

Think you missed the point of my confession. I won't assume anything to be routine. Jeez, what a tough crowd.

[johnggreen]

OR75,

Excellent point and one I wanted to address but I had already loaded my post with points that some might take as insults.

Again, I do not wish to berate or insult.  So if you must wonder about my motivation it is, and will always, be this.

Many, many novice pilots read these blogs.  They don't know what to take with a grain of salt and what is the "gospel'.  It therefore scares me that "innocents" may completely misconstrue a particular thread and fly accordingly.

Forgive me, but I am truly a "by the book" pilot and have been for a long time.  Flying is a very dangerous vocation and avocation with a fatality rate pretty much equal to riding a motorcycle.  We take the risk.  That being said, doing it "by the book" will give even the most incompetent of us a margin of safety when we most need it.  Once when I was 24, I threw the book out and went on an ill-advised flight.  I almost killed 6 people.  You can read about it in Flying magazine this month under, "I LEARNED ABOUT FLYING FROM THAT".  You can see it online without a subscription at flyingmag.com

CASE IN POINT.  Yesterday I flew from my home base in North Central Mississippi to a small airport just outside Knoxville to pick up one of my sons.  One the way back, a cluster of high intensity thunderstorms was right in my way.  There was a hole about 15 miles wide with a much less severe storm to my left.  Did I take it?  No. The "book" says give a thunderstorm a 20 mile birth.  I could see clear air on the other side.  What did I do?  I took a left turn around all of it.  Flew south toward Tuscaloosa.  Added 25 minutes to my flight.  So what?  I'm not trying to prove my manhood with my Bravo.  Yes, I have WSI and stormscope and center advising me, but, I did it by the book and will continue to do so.

If you want to see my track, go to flightaware.  N21448.

As for the macho side of me, at 63 I can do a one legged squat with either leg, 50 pushups, 100 situps, and work most 20 year olds in the ground.

So, don't take my observations personally.  I really don't want to read about you in a NTSB accident report.  OK?

Jgreen

[Awful_Charlie]

Just because it says 13kts in the manual doesn't mean it is the limit - in fact in the Bravo POH it explicity states that it is not a limit.

If you look into the certifiction requirements, you can see where it came from:

AC 23-8B (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/469CD77D24955F4E86256DA60060C156?OpenDocument)

107. SECTION 23.233 DIRECTIONAL STABILITY AND CONTROL.

a. Explanation.

(1) Crosswind. This regulation establishes the minimum value of crosswind that must be demonstrated. Since the minimum required value may be far less than the actual capability of the airplane, higher values may be tested at the option of the applicant. The highest 90- degree crosswind component tested satisfactorily should be put in the AFM as performance information. If a demonstrated crosswind is found limiting, it has to be introduced in Section 2 of the AFM.

b. Procedures.
(1) Crosswind.

(a) The airplane should be operated throughout its approved loading envelope at gradually increasing values of crosswind component until a crosswind equivalent to 0.2 VSO is reached. All approved takeoff and landing configurations should be evaluated. Higher crosswind values may be evaluated at the discretion of the test pilot for AFM inclusion.

So by all means take whatever you want as a limit, but if you go and break anything, don't blame the FAA, Mooney or me!

[Hank]

I just double-checked my Owner's Manual. The only mention I can find of crosswinds is where it says "(When high, gusty winds prevail, or when landing crosswind, approach at a higher airspeed.)" This is just after it recommends slowing to 80 MPH on final, and reducing power to idle crossing the runway end marker. And yes, it is in parentheses in the book!

Must be nice to have a new-fangled "book" with so much specific advice on how to fly your aircraft!    Mine is replete with excellent flying recommendations like:

• 
  
• Degree of flap deflection needed will vary according to landing conditions, but for most landings you should lower flaps about half way just prior to turning on to base leg. Extend flaps as required on final approach to adjust for variations in wind, glide angle, and other variables. [This is a hot point of discussion on this site! Should I follow my book, or others' mandates to make every landing with full flaps, regardless of conditions?]
  
• Proper fuel management during flight will help maintain lateral trim and will also serve as a fuel quantity check. After takeoff with both tanks full, use fuel from one tank for one hour; then, switch to the other tank and note the time. Use all the fuel from the second tank. The remaining fuel endurance in the first tank can be calculated from the time it took to deplete the second tank, less one hour. You must remember, however, that this endurance calculating procedure can be relied upon only if power and mixture remain the same and an allowance is made for the extra fuel used during climb. For estimation purposes, consider fuel consumption during a full-power climb to be 40 percent higher than that of best-power cruise, and 50 percent higher than that of bect-economy cruise. [No, I have not and do not plan to purposely fly a tank empty! I lost just over 2 hours fuel when I had my tanks resealed, because that's what I landed with. It seems that this was another lively discussion on this board, too.]
  
• CAUTION:  Do not allow the engine to lose power or quit before switching fuel tanks. If a tank runs dry and the engine quits, retard the throttle before restarting. Restarting with an advanced throttle may cause engine overspeeding that can lead to mechanical malfunction. [!!]
  

So sometimes my Book has good advice, sometimes not-so-good advice and often incomplete procedures and recommendations like this one:

• 
  
• In case of fire, turn cabin heater off. [shouldn't there be something in there about shutting off the fuel, extinguishing the flames, best glide, landing??? This is it--turn off the cabin heat.]
  
• Turn carburetor heat FULL ON if icing conditions are inadvertently encountered. [Turn on pitot heat? The defroster is a multi-step procedure, too, involving turning on both cabin heat and vent, closing a second vent and two additional heat outlets in the front footwells. Maybe exit icing conditions? climb or descend?]
  

But what do I know? I'm not a real Mooney pilot, I fly a C-model . . . .   . . . .  where the pilot has to know a few things conveniently left out of the book, a relic the predates lawsuits for instructions that fail to warn consumers to not use a hair dryer while sleeping, that coffee is hot or to not eat your mattress.

[Lood]

If you're proficient and use a good tegnique, there shouldn't be much of a side load, or any other load for that matter, on the landing gear compared to a landing under normal conditions. Some pilots manage to break things in still conditions, so I think it's really a case of skill, to a large extent. You just need to recognise when the situation is above your own ability.

When I return home after a there and back flight that took in the region of 5 hours, I don't really have much of a choice in terms of an alternative. I live on a farm with only one runway and that's it.

[johnggreen]

First of all, when I say "the book", I'm not referring to a particular POH, or regulation, I'm referring to those accepted parameters of pilot operations that are taught and observed by most pilots as being safe flying practices.  Our POH's whether for a 1965 C model or a 2008 Acclaim leave a great deal to be desired.  Move into heavier faster iron, fly for a scheduled carrier, fly a 320 Air Bus and the "book" will indeed be quite specific as will the company regualtions as to its operation.  Violate that "book" and you will no longer have the priviledge of operating at all.

I have flown a myriad of airplanes for 52 years under many different conditions.  I have, on numerous times, been faced with landing the Bravo in gusty 40 knot quartering winds and once in Omaha had to land with winds gusting to 50 knots and the ATIS reporting, warning, of 50 knot wind shears on the airport.  My final approach, with no flaps, was 100 knots and I made one of the smoothest landings I have ever made in the airplane.  Skill? I'm not that egotistical.  Everything went right.  Most of which was not really within my control.  I did have the advantage of a runway that was aligned within 15 degrees of the reported wind.  Had that runway not been available, I would have diverted to an airport with an aligned runway.

I suppose that where I differ from so many on this site is that after flying since I was eleven years old, and accumulating over 6000 hours in over 50 types of airplanes, it is my limitations that I recognize, not my skills.

Jgreen