I know the 777 and it's low wing heavy with big ole turbine fans under the wing.....

But shouldn't you get the upwind wing DOWN in an 70knot crosswind?

I dunno I'm just a lowly cub driver.....

http://gawker.com/passenger-plane-aborts-scary-sideways-landing-at-the-la-1477861455



The Dash 8 guy does a little better - gets it down the 2nd time around:

Looked like the "go around" light came on

Howdy,
Max demonstrated is 38 knots and that is with no slip, just a crab according to Boeing. That said it is kind of an ugly, shuddering type of touchdown but one that they say to do. I like the slight wing down straight down the runway type but I'm just an old taildragger dude. Narita Japan seems to have the most crosswinds close to limitations I have come across:)

While they may land in a severe crab during the flight trials, on the line you do everything possible to make the landing as smooth as possible which includes kicking the crab out at the appropriate time and placing the upwind wheel down first.

Whether it is a Maule or a 500,000 ton aircraft, the dynamics are quite similar.

Apparently landing a 777 in a crosswind is the same as landing an Ercoupe with no rudder pedals in a crosswind. Interesting.

Anarchisto, you are a mathematician. How would the length of wing and height of wing give the 777 as much bank angle, as your Cub, to counter drift. Theoretically, he should put the wing down as much as possible. The Dash 8 guy will. I can't think in terms of a 777. The Dash 8 guy might even get slow enough for the angled landing from the downwind corner to the upwind big airplane touchdown zone marker. Any airplane can angle from the downwind approach corner to the upwind end of runway corner. That doesn't help much on a runway five miles long. Turboprops and fan jet guys have little variable engine thrust for gusts and shears. That's why they land so fast and go beta on the prop or put the things out on fan jets that reverse the thrust. Having two engines kills more doctors and lawyers in the mountains than having one.

I've got about 5000 hours in the DC8-73, that is the stretched airplane with the big CFM fan engines. In that time I made a few great landings,lots of good landings, some bad landings, and a few arrivals. I have made a few max crosswind landings and have witnessed a few. On the DC8 six degrees of bank would get an engine pod and 9 degrees of pitch would get a tail strike. The technique we used was kick the crab out during the flare while keeping the wings level with opposite aileron, touching down before the airplane began to drift. If you kick out the crab to early the airplane will have a chance to drift. As I became more comfortable with the airplane I started to bank about 3 degrees into the wind at touch down to help. I have watched the clip a few times. It appears to me that as the pilot starts to reduce the crab, not enough opposite aileron is added to counter the roll cause by the increased lift on the upwind wing from the increase in relative airspeed of that wing moving forward, and of course of the downwind wing moving aft. This is more apparent in a swept wing aircraft due to the reduction of sweep on the up wind wing and increase on the downwind wing compared to the relative wind. You can see, just as the airplane is about to touch down. the roll to the right (downwind) beginning. In my opinion, he made the right choice, time to get out of town and give it another try.

Tim

You don't want to be cutting your fuel reserves too close on trips like that!

I remember watching on tv (I think live) a UPS plane making 4 attempts at Ontario, CA before they diverted to (I think) LAX.

Saw that UPS DC8, I worked for a different company, We roughly figured 3500 pounds (about 500 gal) of fuel for a go around and a VFR pattern and landing.

Tim

dlhanst wrote:Howdy,
Max demonstrated is 38 knots and that is with no slip, just a crab according to Boeing. Narita Japan seems to have the most crosswinds close to limitations I have come across:)

Landed a GIV at Narita one day and had the whole place to myself.
Winds exceeded the limitations of just about all the air carriers.
No big deal for the GulpStream

I don't expect as much of a bank angle w/ the 7 as any high wing much less my cub. But I still expect _some_.

I watched this video dozens of times. I hope it's just he angle it is shot from - but I don't see hardly any wing attempt to keep the upwind wing level much less down - and that seems like a bad thing.

I agree he made the right call to go around.

contactflying wrote:Anarchisto, you are a mathematician. How would the length of wing and height of wing give the 777 as much bank angle, as your Cub, to counter drift. Theoretically, he should put the wing down as much as possible. The Dash 8 guy will. I can't think in terms of a 777. The Dash 8 guy might even get slow enough for the angled landing from the downwind corner to the upwind big airplane touchdown zone marker. Any airplane can angle from the downwind approach corner to the upwind end of runway corner. That doesn't help much on a runway five miles long. Turboprops and fan jet guys have little variable engine thrust for gusts and shears. That's why they land so fast and go beta on the prop or put the things out on fan jets that reverse the thrust. Having two engines kills more doctors and lawyers in the mountains than having one.

Contactflying wrote

Turboprops and fan jet guys have little variable engine thrust for gusts and shears. That's why they land so fast and go beta on the prop or put the things out on fan jets that reverse the thrust.

This is not correct. Your VRef speed is calculated based on the landing weight and landing flap selected as these determine the stall speed. VRef is 1.3 times the stall speed in landing configuration. Approach speed is usually VRef plus wind additive which is on the B777 5-20kts depending on the wind.

When the B777 is on a stabilized approach the engines are not at idle, because the gear and trailing edge flaps produce a lot of drag. As such, the engines will spool up rather fast as you can see in the video when they initiated the go-around. There is plenty of thrust available for gusts and shears. Also to consider is that a 2 engine jet like the B777 has so much excessive thrust as all performance calculations are based on an one-engine out scenario. That's why go-around power is initially automatically limited to 2000 fpm climb rate as otherwise at full thrust way too much power could be available (on the -300ER especially).

As someone mentioned before, it is perfectly fine to land the B777 in a crab, however it is not very comfortable for the passengers.

The B777 has a supercritical wing which reacts differently then a straight wing in a crosswind, that's why B777's land differently in a crosswind then a single engine piston airplane.

If you would cross control the B777 all the way down to landing, the upwind wing produces significantly more lift then the downwind wing. To keep the wings level control wheel input into the wind is required which is achieved by moving the ailerons, but also spoilers deploy on the upwind wing. Opposite rudder is also required to keep it all aligned with the extended center line. Due to the now increased drag, pitch and power has to be adjusted which burns more fuel and makes controlling the aircraft more difficult in a go-around (due to cross controlling).

Considering the weight of the B777 or any other wide body jet upwind wing low is not required in a crosswind to control drift.

Due to the spoiler deployment using control wheel input into the wind, wide body jet pilots usually initiate the flare in a crab and then de-crab when the flare is established. The reason for this is that if you de-crab first and then flare it usually results in a firm or hard landing as the deployed upwind wing spoilers destroy lift and a normal flare attitude is not sufficient. To make it easy for the pilot to have the same flare attitude for most landings many airlines teach the flare in a crab then de-crab method, which usually increases the chances for having a good main wheel touchdown which keeps the passengers happy.

BTW, the B777 is way easier to land in a strong crosswind compared to a single engine taildragger.