1 hour to empty - crosswind landing

Why don't you amaze me and provide a straight answer.
Click to expand...

I already provided you with the information. Why don't you learn to read, and having done that, learn to comprehend?

No one could possibly amaze you. You already know everything.
 
alfadog said:
Yeah, heaven forbid someone should say something. Everything I express is my opinion and my experience. YMMV. So you do not care to know the crosswind? Well, I feel pretty safe in saying that is not how folks are taught. So what is your point regarding how folks are taught? Other than that I am wrong, of course.
Click to expand...

Not wrong, just something to consider to broaden your knowledge, experience and ability base rather than hold to a dogmatic routine of thought.

What you may note is that with people of higher experience we just take that number as a guide post for what to expect because we have found that what you get at the TDZ is not always the same as what one gets from ATIS, and that a certain reported condition at different airports can lead to different results at touch down.

There also comes in the developed skills of handling situations as we progress in our flying experience. As we become more comfortable at the edges of our aircrafts' envelopes, we are more willing to just 'go for it' realizing there is no danger in trying as we can bail out and get flying again all the way to the runway and even on it.

"But I was taught" is the worst reason in aviation to argue a point because of all the low quality teaching. It's ok to bring up, but to continue to argue it from a perspective of inexperience is not really the best mode of gaining knowledge.

If you hear "18 kts" cross wind on the ATIS and head elsewhere, your pilot skills will be extremely slow to develop.
 
Last edited:
Can we please keep the conversation civil? There is no need to poke jabs at anybody. Just state the facts as you understand them in a polite manner. We don't have to take this personally, nor should anybody feel the need to prove anybody else wrong.
 
Doug, I don't know if you instruct primary students, but if so do you give them crosswind component limitations (as per Tim's post above, this is the reason the rule is so firmly embedded in my mind - if I had bent an airplane exceeding a written limitation on a solo training flight, I would have been in serious trouble with my flying club)? I thought that this was fairly common practice, but that's based on my limited experience. If 'yes', do you teach any method for mental calculation?
 
alfadog said:
I see that as a contradiction. So if the wind is gusting 30 kt at 30 degrees and your student is not comfortable with anything over 20 kt xwind component then they fly somewhere else because you want them to figure the 30 kt as direct?? Makes no sense. Oh, you say, your student can land in 30 kt crosswind? Well, I don't think he should be but make it any number you like. Your statements don't work together.

Remember this mini-hijack started with someone saying they are not comfortable with 18 kt at 60d. That is their personal limit. Make it 20 kt or 24 kt, if you think 18 is too low. You guys that do not figure xwind have nothing useful to tell that person.
Click to expand...

We have the most useful thing to contribute actually. We contribute that you should not make the 'go/no go' choice of attempting the landing due to wind conditions reported on the radio as it is not an accurate method of determining the capabilities of one's aircraft of abilities.

I have no idea what the actual crosswind factor was on any landing I have ever made. All I know is I had enough rudder or not. Until I got the G-500 I didn't have the instrumentation, and even with it, that's not where I'm looking.

The other factor is that if someone sets a dogmatic and subjective number to make these decisions on then their 'comfort zone' will tend to shrink rather than grow. Caution is a good quality for PIC, timidity is not.
 
Last edited:
And there are times when a pilot WOULD slip on final for a long time. It allows you to gauge the crosswind all the way down, and is handy in gusty conditions.

One just needs to consider everything, which should not be news to a pilot.
 
LearDriver said:
If is a new pilot they are still working up their confidence level. Without an instructor next to them they tend to shy away from things like 15 it's of crosswind. Remember everyone is not Henning.
Click to expand...

I don't expect anyone to be me, but OTOH, confidence only comes with experience. If someone is not willing to ATTEMPT a cross wind landing and head for an alternate over 15kts of crosswind REPORTED, I have to question that persons training if they are post solo, much less post check ride.
 
Oh, you say, your student can land in 30 kt crosswind?
Click to expand...

I did not say that. You said that. Attribute what you say to you, not to me.

If 'yes', do you teach any method for mental calculation?
Click to expand...

I do not teach any such method, nor do I use one. If the wind value is 20 knots, I plan on a full crosswind of 20 knots. If the actual component is less, than any lesser value is gravy.

Always plan for the worse-case scenario.
 
I assume that means that you don't impose a solo crosswind component limitation on primary students?
 
tiger said:
I assume that means that you don't impose a solo crosswind component limitation on primary students?
Click to expand...

Not terribly unusual. When I soloed my instructor imposed a 10 knot max wind limit, regardless of direction. The thinking being that the winds can shift and we just had the one piece of pavement.
 
Henning said:
I don't expect anyone to be me, but OTOH, confidence only comes with experience. If someone is not willing to ATTEMPT a cross wind landing and head for an alternate over 15kts of crosswind REPORTED, I have to question that persons training if they are post solo, much less post check ride.
Click to expand...

Some of them just need to ramp up to the higher wind factors over time.
 
Morne said:
Not terribly unusual. When I soloed my instructor imposed a 10 knot max wind limit, regardless of direction. The thinking being that the winds can shift and we just had the one piece of pavement.
Click to expand...
But by the same token, winds can increase...

I assume this limit was raised later in pre-checkride training.
 
LearDriver said:
Some of them just need to ramp up to the higher wind factors over time.
Click to expand...


Right, do you understand how heading for an alternate on reported winds will preclude that from happening? The longer that process remains, the more entrenched it becomes and the harder learning becomes.

IOW to me, Hear 18kts wind, say 'Oh crap' shoot down final in a wandering roller coaster ride and bailing at 25' and trying again or bailing for an alternate as time and fuel allow = Good. Hear 18kts wind, say 'Oh crap' and turn away = Not Good. It's about continuing the learning process and developing. If they need a CFI to feel comfortable doing that while holding a PPC, then IMO they got cheated on their training.
 
I assume that means that you don't impose a solo crosswind component limitation on primary students?
Click to expand...

Each student is different, and a student's capabilities change with their experience and aptitude.

You're asking specifically about "component," and the answer is no, I don't.
 
Henning said:
Right, do you understand how heading for an alternate on reported winds will preclude that from happening? The longer that process remains, the more entrenched it becomes and the harder learning becomes.

IOW to me, Hear 18kts wind, say 'Oh crap' shoot down final in a wandering roller coaster ride and bailing at 25' and trying again or bailing for an alternate as time and fuel allow = Good. Hear 18kts wind, say 'Oh crap' and turn away = Not Good. It's about continuing the learning process and developing. If they need a CFI to feel comfortable doing that while holding a PPC, then IMO they got cheated on their training.
Click to expand...

I don't have personal limits but I do have aircraft limits. In my plane the XWind limit is 25 kts.

Now, if I approach an airport with one runway 18/36 and the winds are reported as 270 at 26kts I'm leaving and going elsewhere. I'm not going to 'take a look'. It's a limit. Sure, it might be a notch lower, but it might be higher too. I'm not going to bust a limitation figuring out which one it is. There is no benefit. If I make it nobodies going to give me an award or republish the XWind limitations in the book. If ANYTHING goes wrong then I'm the donkey for busting the published limitation.

Same, I think, can be said for personal limitations. If a guy sets his limit at 15 kts XW then who can fault him for holding true to it and leaving when the reported XW is greater than 15 kts? Seems to me a dangerous attitude to set a limitation and then break it when conditions exceed it. What's the point?

I do see your point about growth, but I would suggest that the raising of personal minimus should be an activity done at home with reflection on rising experience and number and type of operations conducted. Not an on the spot in the air, 'well, the winds are strong and I'll bet it'll be okay. Let's see...' type decision.
 
When the personal limit is an arbitrary limit below the physical limits of the machine they are setting themselves up to be in poor shape to handle an emergency. That's why my initial question was "What are you flying?" when told they would turn away. How many planes are you aware of with a crosswind 'limitation' of 15-18 kts? Most don't even have a crosswind limitation.

IMO by the time someone has 50 hrs in an airplane, they should no longer have 'Personal Limitations' with regards to handling the aircraft. They should know the physical limits of the craft and be comfortable operating there.
 
Last edited:
Captain said:
I don't have personal limits but I do have aircraft limits. In my plane the XWind limit is 25 kts.

Now, if I approach an airport with one runway 18/36 and the winds are reported as 270 at 26kts I'm leaving and going elsewhere. I'm not going to 'take a look'. It's a limit. Sure, it might be a notch lower, but it might be higher too. I'm not going to bust a limitation figuring out which one it is. There is no benefit. If I make it nobodies going to give me an award or republish the XWind limitations in the book. If ANYTHING goes wrong then I'm the donkey for busting the published limitation.

Same, I think, can be said for personal limitations. If a guy sets his limit at 15 kts XW then who can fault him for holding true to it and leaving when the reported XW is greater than 15 kts? Seems to me a dangerous attitude to set a limitation and then break it when conditions exceed it. What's the point?

I do see your point about growth, but I would suggest that the raising of personal minimus should be an activity done at home with reflection on rising experience and number and type of operations conducted. Not an on the spot in the air, 'well, the winds are strong and I'll bet it'll be okay. Let's see...' type decision.
Click to expand...

Captain,

What airplane are you talking about, and is the limit a limit in the airplane limitations section or in your operating specifications?

I only ask because I'm not aware of any airplane that has that sort of limits.
 
TMetzinger said:
Captain,

What airplane are you talking about, and is the limit a limit in the airplane limitations section or in your operating specifications?

I only ask because I'm not aware of any airplane that has that sort of limits.
Click to expand...


Technically, in regards to cross wind, it's max 'demonstrated', but it's treated the same at my company. More to the point is the principle of a personal limitation.

If a pilots personal limit on an ILS is 100' above DH then the day where the actual weather is right at DH is a poor day to decide to raise the personal limitation, IMHO. Like I said, what's the point of a personal limitation then?

Better to decide at home that you can lower or eliminate the personal limitation.
 
alfadog said:
Yeah, heaven forbid someone should say something. Everything I express is my opinion and my experience. YMMV. So you do not care to know the crosswind? Well, I feel pretty safe in saying that is not how folks are taught. So what is your point regarding how folks are taught? Other than that I am wrong, of course.
Click to expand...

Sorry, didn't see the disclaimer.
And, honestly, nobody ever taught me any rules of thumb for approximating xwind - apparently the instructors I've had didn't find it important enough to share with me. When I've cared to know the direct crosswind component, I've calculated it - typically, from the comfort of my desk. Otherwise, I've (rather literally) winged it. (similar to Tim's explanation)
 
JoeSelch said:
Sorry, didn't see the disclaimer.
And, honestly, nobody ever taught me any rules of thumb for approximating xwind - apparently the instructors I've had didn't find it important enough to share with me. When I've cared to know the direct crosswind component, I've calculated it - typically, from the comfort of my desk. Otherwise, I've (rather literally) winged it. (similar to Tim's explanation)
Click to expand...

Don't sweat the small stuff. There's a billion and three rules of thumb technique items out there and there is no way a single CFI is going to know every one of them. They teach the ones that work for them.

The FAA documents what MUST be taught. I'd wager 99.9% go above that. Take the rule of thirds for approximating cross wind. I'd never heard of that before. Does that mean I received crap instruction? Not at all.

But I've heard of it now. I sorta like it too. I'm at the point where I don't really care as I can feel the cross wind and apply what's needed, but still...it's a nice technique and I'll bet it'll get used at some point now that it's in my tool kit.
 
Henning said:
Right, do you understand how heading for an alternate on reported winds will preclude that from happening? The longer that process remains, the more entrenched it becomes and the harder learning becomes.

IOW to me, Hear 18kts wind, say 'Oh crap' shoot down final in a wandering roller coaster ride and bailing at 25' and trying again or bailing for an alternate as time and fuel allow = Good. Hear 18kts wind, say 'Oh crap' and turn away = Not Good. It's about continuing the learning process and developing. If they need a CFI to feel comfortable doing that while holding a PPC, then IMO they got cheated on their training.
Click to expand...

Yes Henning, I do understand that getting out of a bad situation for some pilots by going to the alternate will not give them the chance to experience the heavy crosswinds. That is what CFI's teach to students. Not to push a bad situation into a worse one. Is that what you are suggesting that they do?

The appropriate way for someone who is uncomfortable with crosswinds is to get an instructor to go up with them and practice them in those conditions. Most of them just don't get enough practice with them to stay current at it. The prt of the country I am in we only get significant crosswinds in spring and fall. So lots of pilots fall out of practice and didn't get cheated in their training.
 
LearDriver said:
Yes Henning, I do understand that getting out of a bad situation for some pilots by going to the alternate will not give them the chance to experience the heavy crosswinds. That is what CFI's teach to students. Not to push a bad situation into a worse one. Is that what you are suggesting that they do?

The appropriate way for someone who is uncomfortable with crosswinds is to get an instructor to go up with them and practice them in those conditions. Most of them just don't get enough practice with them to stay current at it. The prt of the country I am in we only get significant crosswinds in spring and fall. So lots of pilots fall out of practice and didn't get cheated in their training.
Click to expand...


If they are "out of practice and uncomfortable" with a marginal crosswind, WTF are they going to be when the s-t hits the fan? FMD, If I'm not comfortable with taking a plane to the edges of its envelope, I don't operate as PIC because I judge myself unqualified and get the training to get up to speed FIRST.

There is some seriously bad logic going on here.

I will also state that if you "fall out of practice" doing crosswind landings over a period of a few months, IMO the crosswind training received in primacy was wholly inadequate. Whether that falls on the teacher or student is still in question.
 
Last edited:
Just to throw a little more into the crosswind debate. I watch the trainers coming into KADS whenever there is a crosswind. I notice they are teaching (at least at one school) to land approach flaps only, side slip, and fast. I see this as a dis-service, because in an emergency they are going to be in trouble if there is a crosswind and they can't land in less than 2500'.

Is there some reason(s) the CFI's would teach that? BTW we're not talking 40 knots, more like 15.
 
Henning said:
If they are "out of practice and uncomfortable" with a marginal crosswind, WTF are they going to be when the s-t hits the fan? FMD, If I'm not comfortable with taking a plane to the edges of its envelope, I don't operate as PIC because I judge myself unqualified and get the training to get up to speed FIRST.

There is some seriously bad logic going on here.

I will also state that if you "fall out of practice" doing crosswind landings over a period of a few months, IMO the crosswind training received in primacy was wholly inadequate. Whether that falls on the teacher or student is still in question.
Click to expand...

When it hits the fan they divert.

Your idea of bad logic may just be reality for many private pilots. As long as they end on the ground safe. That is what matters. It's a recreational endeavor you can't expect perfection.
 
LearDriver said:
When it hits the fan they divert.

Your idea of bad logic may just be reality for many private pilots. As long as they end on the ground safe. That is what matters. It's a recreational endeavor you can't expect perfection.
Click to expand...


It's a very poor reality to fly a plane you are not confident in to the point of not attempting landing a plane within its capabilities on a runway, especially a single engine plane that can force you into that situation with no runway. If that is truly the reality for many pilots, then it explains the chasm in safety between commercial operations and GA.
 
Henning said:
It's a very poor reality to fly a plane you are not confident in to the point of not attempting landing a plane within its capabilities on a runway, especially a single engine plane that can force you into that situation with no runway. If that is truly the reality for many pilots, then it explains the chasm in safety between commercial operations and GA.
Click to expand...

That is very true. I think that for sure explains the differences in the level of safety between the two types of operations. One is heavily monitored and overseen and the other requires a BFR every two years.
 
What about the low time pilot that can only afford to fly once a month or so, either due to money or lack of time? If the crosswind is beyond my comfort level, you can bet I'm gonna divert...I'm not gonna push it!

I don't care who I don't impress!
 
If the crosswind is beyond my comfort level, you can bet I'm gonna divert...I'm not gonna push it!
Click to expand...

As you should. Safety is best based on conservative decisions.
 
redtail said:
What about the low time pilot that can only afford to fly once a month or so, either due to money or lack of time? If the crosswind is beyond my comfort level, you can bet I'm gonna divert...I'm not gonna push it!

I don't care who I don't impress!
Click to expand...

Seriously? Don't fly without a comfortable competent pilot, you have kids.
 
Henning said:
Seriously? Don't fly without a comfortable competent pilot, you have kids.
Click to expand...

So I'm not competent because I exercise what I believe to be good judgement based on my experience level?

I also don't think I'd try a return to the airport after an engine failure with less than 1000' AGL.

So what does that mean?

Maybe one day, I'll be a super pilot, but right now...I know my limits!
 
I also don't think I'd try a return to the airport after an engine failure with less than 1000' AGL.
Click to expand...

Depending on what you're flying, in most cases that's probably a good call...but in the context of this thread, if you're departing a field from which you can't return, do you really want to be trying to fly an engine out emergency landing in conditions that wouldn't permit you to come back and land with a good engine?

If the conditions are bad enough that you couldn't return to land in the first place, should you be risking the departure at all? If you have the engine failure under such conditions, whether you're able to return to land or not, you've got the issue of the weather conditions in the first place. There are many reasons you might need to return to land; an engine-out isn't the only one. The concept of departing the runway knowing that conditions are deteriorating fast enough you probably can't come back should give you some thought about whether you should be departing at all.
 
Henning said:
Seriously? Don't fly without a comfortable competent pilot, you have kids.
Click to expand...


I've been reading in the news lately about a whole lot of "comfortable competent" pilots that crashed and burned WITH their kids!

So what do my having kids have to do with my decision to divert if the crosswind is too much for me???:dunno:
 
Last edited:
DouglasBader said:
Depending on what you're flying, in most cases that's probably a good call...but in the context of this thread, if you're departing a field from which you can't return, do you really want to be trying to fly an engine out emergency landing in conditions that wouldn't permit you to come back and land with a good engine?

If the conditions are bad enough that you couldn't return to land in the first place, should you be risking the departure at all? If you have the engine failure under such conditions, whether you're able to return to land or not, you've got the issue of the weather conditions in the first place. There are many reasons you might need to return to land; an engine-out isn't the only one. The concept of departing the runway knowing that conditions are deteriorating fast enough you probably can't come back should give you some thought about whether you should be departing at all.
Click to expand...

I meant 1000' of altitude after rotation, not cloud ceiling
 
redtail said:
So I'm not competent because I exercise what I believe to be good judgement based on my experience level?

I also don't think I'd try a return to the airport after an engine failure with less than 1000' AGL.

So what does that mean?

Maybe one day, I'll be a super pilot, but right now...I know my limits!
Click to expand...

Your 'good judgement' is necessitated from bad judgement. If you don't believe yourself competent to safely handle the aircraft in normal conditions where you have the option to go around, how do you expect to be able to safely handle an emergency? All you are doing is rationalizing your safety, not assuring it.

Not being able to do something that should be able to be done is the definition of 'incompetent', so yes, that is what I call that. If you know your limit is less than that of the plane, you should spend your flying time practicing, not avoiding.
 
Last edited:
redtail said:
I've been reading in the news lately about a whole lot of "comfortable competent" pilots that crashed and burned WITH their kids!

So what do my having kids have to do with my decision to divert if the crosswind is too much for me???:dunno:
Click to expand...

It's about orphans when you can't handle your emergency, not your kids dying in the plane.
 
So in your world ALL pilots should perform right to the published limits of their plane?

Do students on solo get a break? New PPLs? How about you or me in a brand new plane we just bought? Hows this work again?
 
Captain said:
lol, welcome to the club. People don't read what I type ALL THE TIME.

So, once more. By what time in equipment or total time should a pilot operate right to published limitations? I read your post above but didn't really get much out of it other than you're angry.
Click to expand...

IMO, 50 hrs you should know the machine inside out and be able to operate at and identify the edges of the entire flight envelope; insurance companies assume it's happened by 100.
 
Theoretically I should be able to shut my engine off and restart it in flight, that don't mean I'm gonna go up and do it!

Nor am I going to create an emergency when I have a better choice, just to prove that I can handle it! If 15kts is what I feel like I can handle, then I better make sure I have enough fuel to go elsewhere! Same when it comes to any other weather situation that I have not been trained to deal with!

By your logic, if I'm not IFR trained and rated, I should just go out and practice flying in IFR conditions or else I'm incompetent. How about I AVOID IMC for now!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top