3 planes in the pattern doing touch-and-go's with a 4 knot tailwind

Old Geek

Old Geek

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Oct 30, 2011
Messages
1,888
Location
Northern California
Display Name
Display name:
Old Geek
I came home after being beat up for 6 hours in thermals and turbulence to find the pattern full and everyone landing with a 4 knot tailwind. I was too tired to argue so I found a gap and landed with them. I didn't like it then and I don't like it now. What's the right way to call BS and get everyone (or at least me) turned around and landing into the wind.:confused:
 
What did AWOS say and what were the actual? I have frequently come into land in KSNK(rwy 17/35) and the AWOS will have something along the lines of 140@5. However, the wind sock and trapezoid clearly show the wind being more along the lines of a 5kts wind swinging from 030 to 160.
 
Traket92X said:
What did AWOS say and what were the actual? I have frequently come into land in KSNK(rwy 17/35) and the AWOS will have something along the lines of 140@5. However, the wind sock and trapezoid clearly show the wind being more along the lines of a 5kts wind swinging from 030 to 160.
Click to expand...

The AWOS was correct. It called the tailwind and the sock and my little plane totally agreed.
 
I guess I wasn't aware there is a regulation which prevents landing with a tailwind?
 
just announce you are coming in with the headwind - when the inevitable lemming tells you "we are using runway blank"

tell him, wind is X, not landing with a tail wind - but then 4 knots? is that really a wind for just some air moving around?

I mean, if you have 4000' in front and you are landing single piston . . . just seems like making a fuss for no real reason. They had me land @ OAK on 27L with 160@09 . . . had no choice there if I was going to land at OAK - was interesting getting pushed from that direction on landing but nothing earth shaking . . .
 
Last edited:
Common practice here. DFW airspace works better with southerly flow, so KADS tower will use RW 15 up to ~10 knot TW component.
 
I will often land with a bit of a tailwind, just for practice. I limit it to 7kn. I find that it makes me better at normal landings to practice these.
 
Me personally...

4 kts, I wouldn't worry about it regardless of runway length.

8 kts, I wouldn't worry about it if the runway was 3,000' or more.

Over 10 kts and I would probably say something regardless of runway length.
 
4 kts? Pfsh...

Pick your better airmanship. Land with the 'lemmings' or scramble everyone to turn around and go your way. Seriously, 4 kts? That's called 'calm'.
 
Captain said:
4 kts? Pfsh...

Pick your better airmanship. Land with the 'lemmings' or scramble everyone to turn around and go your way. Seriously, 4 kts? That's called 'calm'.
Click to expand...

Heh... I thought the official "calm" was 3 knots or less. Now you have me digging to find it. Not that it matters. 3... 4... just land. :)
 
Unless you were facing a short field, you wouldn't even need to "shortsight" your aim point with that kind of wind. What were you looking at length wise and what were you flying?? Your instincts were correct, I prefer landing into the wind if possible as well, but as others have mentioned a tailwind of 4 kts is a non factor. IMHO.
 
You realize that if you do manage to get everyone else to join you in using the other runway, the light winds will shift the other way, putting you once again landing with a tail wind.

If winds are less than 5 knots, I use whatever runway is most convienent. YMMV.
 
ATC uses less than 5 kts for selecting a calm wind runway. 3 kts or less and ATC will give the wind as calm. For me with an approach speed of 80 kts I go with 5 as the max (depends on runway length). Also this is in the middle of summer. With build ups around the winds can change rapidly. I'd say the winds changed on these guys and they felt 4 kts wasn't worth changing a runway over.
 
Last edited:
Our SOP allows a 10kt tailwind component. I will always use it if I can and it gets me in sooner. Pretty common.
 
I had the same issue landing at a airport last week. AWOS reporting a 4 kt wind favoring runway 36 and there was 4 planes in line departing on 18. I announced i was landing on 36 and they radioed up and told me to land on 18. I kept my mouth shut and proceeded to land on 36.
 
For what it's worth, the Airport Facilities Directory entry for LXT says the preferred runway is Runway 18 for anything less than 5 knots. I don't get too worked up about 5 knots of tailwind.

Having said that, it is ALWAYS the PIC's decision as to what runway to use in such conditions. But I would be hesitant to be the only one going against the flow, unless it was totally unsafe.
 
It's all aircraft dependent as to how much tailwind for landing.
Gliders not much fun at all, especially those with weak brakes.
The Pawnee taildragger can be a bear to handle at 5 knots tailwind, the wing decides to just stop flying when you least expect it. Most taildragger pilots do not like tailwinds for landing.
A C182 on any "normal" runway, not an issue except for the longer float and runway used up.

Landing with tailwinds is harder on brakes and tires too, but not so much at 4knts.
 
Which move was dumber, landing against the flow or not announcing it?

flyer said:
I had the same issue landing at a airport last week. AWOS reporting a 4 kt wind favoring runway 36 and there was 4 planes in line departing on 18. I announced i was landing on 36 and they radioed up and told me to land on 18. I kept my mouth shut and proceeded to land on 36.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Which move was dumber, landing against the flow or not announcing it?
Click to expand...


i was announcing my intentions and the planes impatiently waited while I landed on 36. Ive never let other pilots make my PIC decisions for me. Ive had similar issues with pilots landing on a x wind runway when there was a runway with no x wind that I was using.
 
flyer said:
I had the same issue landing at a airport last week. AWOS reporting a 4 kt wind favoring runway 36 and there was 4 planes in line departing on 18. I announced i was landing on 36 and they radioed up and told me to land on 18. I kept my mouth shut and proceeded to land on 36.
Click to expand...

'4 kts wind favouring runway 36' could mean the winds were 080 at 4 kts. I'd be a bit put out too if I had to wait while you enforced your PIC prerogative. Don't get me wrong, I fully support your PIC authority to make decisions...but common, we can factor others into our decision making process.

I often fly way out of my way to accommodate other folks sharing the airspace and that includes sucking up tail winds if able.
 
BillTIZ said:
It's all aircraft dependent as to how much tailwind for landing.
Gliders not much fun at all, especially those with weak brakes.
The Pawnee taildragger can be a bear to handle at 5 knots tailwind, the wing decides to just stop flying when you least expect it. Most taildragger pilots do not like tailwinds for landing.
A C182 on any "normal" runway, not an issue except for the longer float and runway used up.

Landing with tailwinds is harder on brakes and tires too, but not so much at 4knts.
Click to expand...

Once long ago I was about to pull onto the runway for takeoff when along came a glider, landed downwind (long), and rolled right past me and off the end. Kinda startled me, but I figured he did so to clear the runway without getting out and pushing.

Dave
 
denverpilot said:
Heh... I thought the official "calm" was 3 knots or less. Now you have me digging to find it. Not that it matters. 3... 4... just land. :)
Click to expand...
To some extent that really depends on the airplane. In a tricycle gear plane with a stall speed in the 50-60 KIAS range a 4 Kt TW would have less effect than a half degree runway downslope but that same wind in a Luscombe could make for some tricky rudder pedal dancing and definitely presents an increased potential for a ground loop.

Keep in mind though, that the effect of wind on runway needed is not linear, e.g. 10 Kt has much more than twice the effect of a 5 Kt TW. In many GA airplanes, 10Kt is the biggest TW that the POH data accounts for and often represents more than a 50% increase in runway required. Worse yet, that 50% increase only applies if you use the same techniques as the test pilot including maximum braking, and a weight adjusted speed over the fence.
 
Saturday morning the winds were straight out of the east, so R08 was being used - a lot. Then it got real quiet for a few minutes and the Citabria doing pattern work moved to R17 for x-wind practice. A couple minutes later it got real busy again, and everyone was using R17. It was actually pretty funny to watch. Then the Citabria moved to R08 for a full-stop landing and all the traffic switched back to R08. All it takes is one person to get the dance going.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
I guess I wasn't aware there is a regulation which prevents landing with a tailwind?
Click to expand...

Maybe not, but just don't ya love it when the pattern is full of stupid people. that do not know how to read a wind sock, nor change the active. ?


be a pilot, do not be a sheeple.
 
Like others have said, 4 knots of wind is not worth messing up the traffic flow over.
 
gismo said:
. . .and a weight adjusted speed over the fence.
Click to expand...

What's your guesstimate of the percentage of pilots who have any notion of this concept?
 
Where is it written about which pilot is the stupid one?

Tom-D said:
Maybe not, but just don't ya love it when the pattern is full of stupid people. that do not know how to read a wind sock, nor change the active. ?


be a pilot, do not be a sheeple.
Click to expand...
 
GCA319 said:
Like others have said, 4 knots of wind is not worth messing up the traffic flow over.
Click to expand...

It's not, but at my airport it amazes me that the flight school people will back-taxi for over a mile and take off into 0000KT (that the windsock corroborates) only because that runway has been in use all day. They will do this even if there is nobody else in the pattern, and they could actually apply a little common sense as to which runway to use. So that one person will back-taxi over a mile, take off on the more inconvenient runway, leave the pattern, and then when someone else calls that they are on final for the other runway (nobody else in the pattern), they will urgently and somewhat indignantly state that runway XX is the "active". :mad2: Uncontrolled field. I guess some of these pilots need the chief flight instructor to come on the radio and tell them it's OK to use their brain. ;)
 
It's pretty obvious that for something as simple as runway selection there are a million variables, wind being only one of them.


  • Wind
  • Slope
  • FBO location
  • Preferred Runway
  • Obstacles
  • Terrain
  • Route of Flight

To name what just came off the top of my head. Add to that some people may intentionally want a off runway to practice short field or cross wind.

Even if you just want the 'best' runway, each pilot weights the scale differently depending on their equipment, skill level, local knowledge and whims.


It's up to each pilot to decide what they are going to do and how they are going to do it. We all try to work the above list into the local flow and 99% of the time we end up with a system that works great. There's no need to bang your head aginst the wall ---> :mad2: <--- because someone else picked a different runway. Sometimes we think we know why another pilot selected a runway but there is no way for any of us to know what the rational of someone else is.
 
Captain said:
There's no need to bang your head aginst the wall ---> :mad2: <--- because someone else picked a different runway. Sometimes we think we know why another pilot selected a runway but there is no way for any of us to know what the rational of someone else is.
Click to expand...

But you see, all the factors you listed involve critical thinking and judgment. I will never complain about someone exhibiting that. I guarantee the situation I described not only involved none of those factors, but involved no judgment or thought period. That is what frustrates me - the lack of common sense, judgment, and independent thought that seems to be consistent with the mentality that results from rote flight training/school culture bubble...at least the one that's here. There is absolutely no reason to back-taxi at this airport in the conditions that existed at the time. There was no rationale...other than, "well runway XX has been "active" for most of the day, so I guess I have to follow along"...and expect and admonish others to do the same. That is the "lemming" and "sheeple" mentality that others were referring to. I guess I just see too much of that where I'm based and it bothers me.
 
Last edited:
timwinters said:
Me personally...

4 kts, I wouldn't worry about it regardless of runway length.

8 kts, I wouldn't worry about it if the runway was 3,000' or more.

Over 10 kts and I would probably say something regardless of runway length.
Click to expand...

spot on
 
timwinters said:
Me personally...

4 kts, I wouldn't worry about it regardless of runway length.

8 kts, I wouldn't worry about it if the runway was 3,000' or more.

Over 10 kts and I would probably say something regardless of runway length.
Click to expand...

Just be aware that that works fine in your heavy trike, but landing with with 8KTS on your tail in light tailwheel airplanes can be asking for trouble. It's not a runway length issue - it's a controllability issue.
 
RoscoeT said:
But you see, all the factors you listed involve critical thinking and judgment. I will never complain about someone exhibiting that.
Click to expand...

IMHO, flying should be a process of constant evaluation. If you are not attuned to the environment, you'll become part of it. If a training program teaches to the PTS alone they are shortchanging their students and the passengers those students will someday carry. Airmanship is more than following the herd.
 
Reminds me of a story describing yet another reason to modify runway selection.

I can't remember the airport but it was on the West Coast of Michigan. Maybe MBL?

Anyway, we landed to the East on the East West runway. We were the only plane there and winds were calm. As we were out of the West and the FBO was on the East side straight in was perfect. Plus we'd get a nice view of the lake front in the setting sun.

As we were rolling out I saw the weirdest thing ever...a wall of sea gulls. They really were like a wall at the end of the runway. They were feeding I think but the result was a wall of birds that literally scared me when I thought of what would have happened if we'd gone around. We'd have flown right into that mess.

As we were parking I heard a Citation (or some biz jet) make his initial call and he was going to be straight in the other way as he was coming from the East. I told my FO to 'hang on' as he was just about to power down and I made a Pirep to the inbound jet.

They changed their mind and landed the other way (same way as us) and when he got in the blocks we all just sort of stood on the ramp for a moment and marveled at the wall of birds. He was thankful for the Pirep.
 
RoscoeT said:
Just be aware that that works fine in your heavy trike, but landing with with 8KTS on your tail in light tailwheel airplanes can be asking for trouble. It's not a runway length issue - it's a controllability issue.
Click to expand...


Seems to me landing any plane in a 4kt tailwind is the same as landing the same plane in still air at higher elevation. Do tail dragger pilots not fly in Denver?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top