I Read an article from AOPA regarding landing with reported wind shear. Obviously, not the greatest time to be flying but should be prepared how to handle it. The author shared the advice the military uses, that is to increase ground speed so that it the same as the air speed normally used on approach. Example you normally approach at 80 knots and the ground speed maybe 50 knots. You should approach at 80 knots ground speed while airspeed maybe 110knots.

Any thoughts?

At this stage of the game I'll most likely be on the ground wishing I was flying... But it's good to have the knowledge in the bag of tricks.

Well then there is the FAA syllabus point to add 1/2 the gust spread to your approach speed.
Never a fan myself.

Just carry something extra to arrest the descent when you get the shot of tailwind. How much? For me usually depends on what I'm flying, the load I've got on, and how long the runway is. You can easily carry 30 extra in a loaded Cessna landing a 3,000 foot runway, so why not?
When you start landing more complex, shorter places and can't carry as much you eventually have to ask yourself why you are trying to land that particular spot in those conditions. Saving babies or just trying to go fishing?
I don't personally get bogged down in formulas and specifics, if I think I can do it and make it feel good I do, if not I wait 'til another day.
Captain obvious says - More shear, carry more speed.

Also decent angle, I know I always feel better coming in steep if some LLWS might be on the menu.

At "our" aircraft weights and low wing loading I don't think we are quite as affected by wind shear as the bigger guys. Most pilots I watch working hard in the wind carry way too much speed for the conditions. We aren't arresting a huge sink rate with 500,000 pounds of airplane. A quick blip on the gas usually does it for our 2,000 pound spam cans.

My theory has alway been, the quicker I can transform from flying machine to driving machine, the less chance I have of breaking something when the wind's blowing hard. Excess speed means more time in that transition period, and more risk.

Gump

GumpAir wrote: A quick blip on the gas usually does it for our 2,000 pound spam cans.

Gump

Isn't that the one advantage a piston engine have over a turbine? Isn't there a small lag time for a turbine and jet engine to increase RPM? Slower than a piston, I believe

58,
PT-6 needs a while to spool from idle especially if like the Twin Otter idle is like 55% gas generator speed. Most Pt-6 applications I have flown have a "flight idle" setting of about 70% g.g. Doesn't take as long but still a bit longer than most expect.
Garrett turbines not so long. They are running at 100% g.g. and just adjusting the blade pitch so when you heave it in panicking they getcha goin' a bit quicker.
Gumps got a point and I respect that perspective with the experience he has in the wind.
One other thing I think about if we're going to talk gusty as well, especially when light actually, is that if you are flying faster you have less angle of attack thus exposing the less of the bottoms of the wings to gusts and potential low speed control issues. But you have to remember that most of my career has been landing empty and light.
In the Twin Otter for example I never (other than playin' once or so a month) landed it with more than 20 degrees of flap empty and rarely full stalled it. Usually rolled it on with a bit of speed. Especially in the desert in the afternoon when dust devils become prevalent. If you hit one you had a bit more control was always my feel.
Most of my non-play flying landings are (and have been for a long time) crossing the fence at 100-140 down to six inches and just keep changing the pitch attitude til it wants to touch then if tailwheel, a little forward pressure to stick it on the mains a bit until the elevator gets soft and let it fall/pin it BEFORE reverse, or nosewheel hold it until the elevator gets soft and let it down BEFORE reverse.
In a sense I guess my whole landing is a transition period from level at six inches at 120ish to pitched up at six inches at about 70ish. Gump is right, given the right set of circumstances it prolongs my exposure near the ground but I've never had any problems....yet. Now you're freakin' me out Gump!! I hate it when we have to start thinking about what we do.
I suppose it's a bit more structured in the 180 but I don't like to be too steep either (no matter the airplane) because if the bottom falls out at the end you've already established a downward trajectory to flare out of and any additional from windshear may be too much to power out of. I guess I just tend to fly fairly flat which does put me dependent on my engine continuing to run.......I may have to keep thinking about this.

Although not totally relevant, nor applicable to our type of flying, I thought I'd add this. I fly the A320 and it has an interesting thing in its software called "Ground Speed Minny". Essentially, it figures out what the ground speed should be on approach and will adjust the targeted (bugged indicated airspeed) airspeed to maintain that same ground speed during the approach. It is basically energy management. When the wind is really cranking with big gusts, you can watch the magenta bug jump up and down the speed tape and the autothrust making the adjustments to keep up. Kind of cool. However, it does create a problem when following an aircraft without Ground Speed Minny. We tend to gain on them, reducing separation since they are flying their approach speed that isn't compensating for the headwind(with the resulting slower ground speed).

As for our type of flying, I agree with Gump's comment above about not needing to add tons for our smaller aircraft.

I guess I have to read the AOPA article to get the specifics, but what you said is not universally applied across the military. This is the first time in 17+ years of military flying that I heard this technique.

We make no special adjustments for reported wind shear. We might add 10 knots to our IAS on approach, but we are supposed to be on-speed crossing the numbers. In fact, if I'm approaching an airport that just received a wind shear PIREP then I'd go into holding until the condition passes (thunderstorm) or divert if it will persist (mountain wave). That decision obviously depends on the mission.

As for our Pacers, Super Cubs, Stinsons, etc, I think we would be out of Schlitz if we encountered wind shear regardless of the IAS. The best we could do is go to max power, bring the nose up about to a attitude that is normally used for Vy (but don't chase the airspeed trying to achieve Vy), and pray.

I think it would be foolish if we were to continue an approach in our light planes into an airfield that just reported wind shear.

I had a pretty bad shear on final to Johnson Creek a few years ago... Winds were gusting due to t storms in the big creek area. I know I shouldn't have been flying but several of us were returning from fishing up north and there the storms were... I figured we were ok at JC .. big mistake... I turned into the canyon from Yellow Pine and immediately got hammered.... It was one roller coaster ride..About a quarter mile from touchdown, I thought I had it made when the vert speed went to 1000 ft per min down... I added full power, and went to a slow climb attitude... leveled off about 10 feet above the trees and stayed there till over the field.... after that it was touchdown and roll out and a beer....pucker factor.....10 plus...

Grassstrippilot wrote:Although not totally relevant, nor applicable to our type of flying, I thought I'd add this. I fly the A320 and it has an interesting thing in its software called "Ground Speed Minny". Essentially, it figures out what the ground speed should be on approach and will adjust the targeted (bugged indicated airspeed) airspeed to maintain that same ground speed during the approach. It is basically energy management. When the wind is really cranking with big gusts, you can watch the magenta bug jump up and down the speed tape and the autothrust making the adjustments to keep up. Kind of cool. However, it does create a problem when following an aircraft without Ground Speed Minny. We tend to gain on them, reducing separation since they are flying their approach speed that isn't compensating for the headwind(with the resulting slower ground speed).

As for our type of flying, I agree with Gump's comment above about not needing to add tons for our smaller aircraft.

Automation keeps comin on...

...now for the way it was done in the day....

At our airline pilots who had reached the mandatory retirement age of 60 could bid back to Flight Engineer and continue their career. On one such trip flying the B-727 into Hartford Conn.... I had a former captain serving as my FE who had flown the B-727 for over 20 years as a captain. I could feel his eyes burning into the back of my head as we began the approach for landing.

The winds were about 30 degrees off the runway at 25 kts gusting to 40....we were bouncing wildly on approach with constant power adjustments. The tower was reporting a wind shear alert. It had been my technique for decades to carry lots of extra airspeed under such conditions. Although our company proceedure was a max of 15 kts addition to bug speed.....on this day I was carrying 35 extra kts. Approach was at an indicated 170 kts. Not by the book, but a technique that would get the job done. All the way down approach I figured the former captain, now FE,was silently cursing me for the extra speed.

About 20 ft. above the runway we caught a huge downdraft and the airplane sank like a rock. Instantly I firewalled the throttles: the extra airspeed vanished in a second...a quick flare and the power application arrested the sink which was followed by a near perfect landing.... full power still on the engines as the main gear touched down. I taxied to the gate, shut down the engines, completed the check list and began to slide my seat back. Then the FE began to clear his throat. Here it comes I thought.

"Captain you were carring a lot of extra speed on that approach weren't you?" "Yes, I sure was," "Some guys would be highly critical you know?" "Yes they would." I answered. "NEEDED EVERY DAMNED BIT OF IT DIDN'T YOU?" "I was mighty glad to see it" he continued.

With that he smiled and shook my hand. From a 62 year old grizzled veteran to a somewhat less grizzled 48 year old veteran. No greater compliment could have been recieved.


Fly Safe.

Bob


p.s. Gump as usual has it right. Light, propeller driven aircraft don't need such dramatic, if any speed increase. Instant response and light wing loading does the trick. Add power and the prop bites right away. Even the increased airflow over the wing, caused by the prop. creates a mild "blown wing" effect...adding lift. A jet powered aircraft must actually accelerate the aircraft first ....to increase airflow over the wing and create additional lift. Thus the delay with jets. Nothing better than an Allison powered TurboProp: such as the CV-580, Lockheed Electra or C-130 Hercules for handing wind shear. They have the best weapons for fighting that devil.

Just to clarify, I don't think anyone here was talking about when windshear has been reported. That is another animal.

AOPA also had another article in November's issue on automation and that pilots tend to loose their basic airmanship skills when relying on it too much. Had a case two days ago when we had an issue with the Fadec (engine's brain) and it did an uncommanded increase in thrust. It took the Captain, who was flying, quite a while to figure out that the fix was to bring the throttles to idle. Meanwhile, it overspeed the aircraft. Luckily the plane is smart enough to retract the flaps when that happens. Anyway, I was surprised to hear after the fact that he had never flown the aircraft with the autothrust off, except one time in the simulator. I don't do it enough myself, but try to get it all off occasionally. In fact, I'll be doing that here in a bit when we land in BDL.

Z3, great story!

Grasstrip...

....you are right. My little hanger flying tale was about a situation in which there was a windshear "alert" as opposed to windshear reported. The original posting of this threaed was LANDING WITH WINDSHEAR....but I doubt that was the clear intent. The first few years of my career the term"wind shear" didn't exist. We all just called it "gusty" winds. It was only in the mid 70's, after numerous crashes, primarily in Denver and acknowledging the disadvantage of jet aircraft during windshear, that the phenomenon was understood: methods of detection became available and procedures for coping with wind shear were developed. I remember much classroom discussion and many hours in the simulator trying to understand and practice wind shear avoidance and techniques. Of course it had always existed but as stated earlier....straight wing, prop driven aircraft handled shear much better than swept wing jets.

I am proud of you and your intention to remain an "aviator" despite flying one of the most technically advanced aircraft in the world. Life experience has demonstrated to me that those of us who fly light aircraft and are especially adventurous with them....carry those skills and attitudes into our professional cockpits. Don't ever stop "flying" the aircraft as often as you can. The system is rapidly developing to engineer you out of the cockpit. Hang in there my friend. I hand flew the 767 to the last leg of my career. Autothrottles, autopilot, flight director....all off below 10,000 ft., except for CAT-III approaches. I left the boredom of cruise to the automation. It is not surprising to learn that your captain was lost when the gee wiz stuff failed. I saw it happen more and more toward the end of my career. My tale of days gone by was intended as just "hanger flying" and not as critizism or arrogance.

Most modern pilots turn on the automation when they get in trouble. Old hats turn it off...when trouble rears it's ugly head. Of course the old hats are dinosaurs....but it is comforting to know that younger aviators such as yourself ....continue to keep their skills sharp.

Sorry to have turned this into an airline/military type of discussion. All our hearts are really with...... the backcountry pilots.

Take care.

bob

z3skybolt wrote:
Sorry to have turned this into an airline/military type of discussion.

Take care.

bob

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm diggin your stories/comments!! Interesting stuff!

I agree, all interesting and inoformative stuff. My first encounter was with the PA-15 Vagabond I had years ago. Made a nice landing at full throttle! Thought about a while, and became much more alert to what the winds might be doing. The " adding half the gust" speed is a good rule of thumb, but if you're at a backcountry strip you don't know what the gust is. learnnig the feel of your aircraft, like Gump says, is important,

Thanks for the comments Bob. Like I said, I need to do it more often. The crazy thing is that some guys get a little freaked out if you turn off the automation, as in not being comfortable with it being off. So, you take advantage of practicing when you fly with someone that doesn't mind. Got some good flying in the last few days.
To the guy's credit that hadn't ever flown without the autothrust, he flew the next two approaches with the automation off.


I definitely agree that my GA flying has a direct positive affect on my work flying...especially the adventurous type of flying. I feel it keeps the stick and rudder, feeling the aircraft skills alive. Especially when flying a plane that doesn't give a lot of "feedback" via the controls. It is more like flying a video game, but I do love the plane...despite the French building it, it is a nice ride.

I've never liked blanket statements like, "when things get ugly turn the automation on" or, "when things get ugly turn it off".

Automation is a tool. A good pilot uses all his tools in the appropriate manner at the appropriate time.

As to shear, just yesterday I was taking off from KAPA and we lost 20 kits just after rotation. My FO called for gear up and was a tad annoyed I left them right where they were during the shear. I explained latter I thought it'd be nice to have 'em down in case our flight was going to be real short.


P.S. This is my first post, I've been reading the forum for just a couple of days and am very impressed with all of your posts. This place has a great vibe I've not seen elsewhere!

Fly safe,

GP

GlassPilot wrote:I've never liked blanket statements like, "when things get ugly turn the automation on" or, "when things get ugly turn it off".

Automation is a tool. A good pilot uses all his tools in the appropriate manner at the appropriate time.

As to shear, just yesterday I was taking off from KAPA and we lost 20 kits just after rotation. My FO called for gear up and was a tad annoyed I left them right where they were during the shear. I explained latter I thought it'd be nice to have 'em down in case our flight was going to be real short.


P.S. This is my first post, I've been reading the forum for just a couple of days and am very impressed with all of your posts. This place has a great vibe I've not seen elsewhere!

Fly safe,

GP

Welcome, GP. Glad to have the pros like you here along with those like me who are amateur private pilots.

Your point about using whatever you have in your tool kit, but not relying too much on any one tool is a very important point. Flying is one of those activities that is best done by the numbers, and the book, but it's also important to guard against too much complcency and reliance on standard numbers in situations where you're near the edge of the envelope. Landings and takeoffs are two of those occasions where the edge is near.

It seems that the best advice I've heard and try to follow is to be wary about wind shear whenever there's a lot of wind about, no matter it's reported direction. Even in light aircraft like my Cherokee 180, it's interesting how many times during windy, gusty conditions the stall light will suddenly come on when I thought I was right on the numbers for approach - even after allowing a "gust factor" in approach airspeeds. Being prepared to instantly lower the nose and add power should be one of those reflexes that pilots need. This notion of elevated sensitivity is not unlike what most wild animals exhibit whenever they sense risk, or vulnerability, in the wild. Failing to sense the potential for risk, and not being prepared to react instantly, is what puts wild animals - and pilots - in the most danger.

Duane

GlassPilot wrote:I've never liked blanket statements like, "when things get ugly turn the automation on" or, "when things get ugly turn it off".

Automation is a tool. A good pilot uses all his tools in the appropriate manner at the appropriate time.

As to shear, just yesterday I was taking off from KAPA and we lost 20 kits just after rotation. My FO called for gear up and was a tad annoyed I left them right where they were during the shear. I explained latter I thought it'd be nice to have 'em down in case our flight was going to be real short.


P.S. This is my first post, I've been reading the forum for just a couple of days and am very impressed with all of your posts. This place has a great vibe I've not seen elsewhere!

Fly safe,

GP

Hello Glass,

First..... congratulations captain.... on leaving the gear down until revovery was assured. Such command decisions is what being a captain is all about. Did you fly the full wind shear recovery profile?

As for the comment about not liking blanket statements such as: "..........................." you are absolutely correct once again. In my posting I was not suggesting a blanket statment: rather I was acknowledging a fact which is well documented by simulator and line instructors who have been active during the last 20/30 years. A mere fact of accurate observation concerning evolving/generational technique.... not an effort to support any philosophy.

Welcome here. This is a great place to learn and share. I've learned so much from these guys. Once in a while we get reaquainted with old friends. Perhaps we once flew for the same airline ?

Fly safe.

Bob

We did fly the profile (mostly). We stayed configured until well clear at least. It was a clear day, albeit gusty so micro burst was out. We just got into a "backward gust". Like I said, I left us configured while he held pitch until we accelerated out of it. By the end of the runway we were well on our way upward on speed and climbing normal. My plane has a stall computer but does not have the eyebrows.

I don't think we're from the same airline. I'm former ACA / Independence Air.