Whether natural and cyclic or human driven or both, increased heating of the earth results in increased likelihood of severe crosswind encounter. Recreational pilots can continue to mitigate wind encounter by avoiding heat of day operations, but the FAA should consider training to cope with this climatic change.

Continued decrease in the number of airports available will increase the number of operations at multi-runway airports, but increased headwind will increase the number of necessary single runway operations for refueling. Those who's jobs and/or schedules require heat of day operations will encounter more severe crosswind from time to time. I don't know of an app for that, just flexible training.

Using any form of power pitch approach that makes deceleration on short final safe, especially with a strong headwind component, will go a long way in opening up possibilities in strong crosswinds. Those comfortable with deceleration on short final find that angling from the downwind corner of the runway to the upwind big airplane touchdown zone marking is safe and effective at solving rudder limitation. Airspeed control makes angle across pretty much default in crosswind. Altering this new angular mental centerline and centerline extended out to an upwind base becomes logical as well. The downwind of runway downwind leg and teardrop base leg to angular final leg turn into a crosswind should become the severe crosswind, if not every crosswind, solution. Yes, the nose must be allowed to go down naturally in this less than 180 degree wind managed teardrop turn to angular final.

So now we have a necessary downwind of the runway downwind leg to facilitate an upwind teardrop base to final operation that is going to unglue inflexible, by the book, operators. That is why the FAA needs to update the book, in the interest of safety.

Another big benefit of going to default power pitch approaches is that this would mitigate the need for the much more difficult and incident provoking round out and hold off landing technique. Active power pitch short final iterations, rather than always continuing the 1.3 Vso stabilized approach, actually reduce the excessive runway eaten up by students in power off spot landing practice. While some round out and hold off is necessary when we remove the throttle control of descent rate, having had iterations of power/pitch deceleration gives the student a sense of what is necessary to get into the landing zone available in a forced landing situation. Students learn that excess airspeed is not a desirable forced landing technique.

Given current excess airspeed increase that results in greater groundspeed in crosswind than in no wind, we are going to see increased crosswind incidents and accidents without some training adjustment. Also increased global heat will decrease book ceilings on our aircraft, but that's another story.

When I changed from my 170 to my supercub it dawned on me that I had the option to land across the runway to varying degrees. Where I am based there is an almost 11000 foot runway that is 150 feet wide. One time I had a straight in approach to midfield and I landed a direct crosswind of 30 without crossing the centerline. After I realized this was a possibility I worried less about crosswinds. ATC did not object. I think they wanted to see the wreck that didn't happen. It is actually fun and what I call a helicopter landing. Varying degrees of diagonal work well but it is hard to ignore the centerline and judge the distance available when landing diagonal across smaller runways. I guess running into the grass is better than a ground loop. Now I mostly worry about taxing back as the big problem

Taxi back is the big problem and sometimes requires help. One good use of radio is to get some help. A vehicle to taxi with you upwind will mitigate the crosswind a bit.

With most four place and two place airplanes it is not the airplane but the pilot's technique that makes flexibility possible. No, ATC does not care so long as we make good use of common sense. Faster stall in ground effect airplanes like the Comanche, Mooney, Bonanza, or Centurian can land in the one thousand feet between the downwind corner and the big airplane touchdown zone square and even turn down the runway there using those amazing tricycle gears.

With a decent headwind component in the crosswind, or enough angle into it, we can compete well with the helicopter. The airplane is fine with sufficient, not excessive, relative wind. We need to be ready with throttle to keep the desired glide angle stable. In severe balloon we may go close throttle and then adjust. In severe sink we may go full throttle and then adjust. The main thing is to use it as aggressively as any other control.

Distance left is not much of a factor if we touch down on the exact downwind corner slowly and softly. Elevator will slow us enough to get the sink that will require the throttle becoming very active which will allow us to prevent significant increase in the apparent rate of closure with the downwind corner. Way back at Vso it appeared to be a brisk walk. On short final to touchdown we want it to continue to appear to be a brisk walk. This requires deceleration same as with our automobile at an intersection. Difference is we don't have to make the rate of closure appear to be less than a brisk walk. However, in a strong crosswind approach done well, it will appear to be less than a brisk walk. We just have to be careful not to get going backwards. Yes, just like a helicopter.

Rate of closure calibration and stabilization using elevator is with the exact desired touchdown point, not something on down the runway. Distant points are always appearing to close with us at a brisk walk in our airplane or automobile. It is not that we all don't have a zillion iterations of using the apparent rate of closure to decelerate. Who uses the speedometer to decelerate into an intersection? All of us who don't blow through intersections are really good at stabilizing the apparent brisk walk rate of closure approach. No real need for brakes except that modern autos will not completely stop without brakes. Airplanes will. In a strong crosswind, we will not need brakes.

contactflying wrote:It is not that we all don't have a zillion iterations of using the apparent rate of closure to decelerate. Who uses the speedometer to decelerate into an intersection? All of us who don't blow through intersections are really good at stabilizing the apparent brisk walk rate of closure approach.

contactflying wrote:Whether natural and cyclic or human driven or both, increased heating of the earth results in increased likelihood of severe crosswind encounter. Recreational pilots can continue to mitigate wind encounter by avoiding heat of day operations, but the FAA should consider training to cope with this climatic change.

Continued decrease in the number of airports available will increase the number of operations at multi-runway airports, but increased headwind will increase the number of necessary single runway operations for refueling. Those who's jobs and/or schedules require heat of day operations will encounter more severe crosswind from time to time. I don't know of an app for that, just flexible training.

Using any form of power pitch approach that makes deceleration on short final safe, especially with a strong headwind component, will go a long way in opening up possibilities in strong crosswinds. Those comfortable with deceleration on short final find that angling from the downwind corner of the runway to the upwind big airplane touchdown zone marking is safe and effective at solving rudder limitation. Airspeed control makes angle across pretty much default in crosswind. Altering this new angular mental centerline and centerline extended out to an upwind base becomes logical as well. The downwind of runway downwind leg and teardrop base leg to angular final leg turn into a crosswind should become the severe crosswind, if not every crosswind, solution. Yes, the nose must be allowed to go down naturally in this less than 180 degree wind managed teardrop turn to angular final.

So now we have a necessary downwind of the runway downwind leg to facilitate an upwind teardrop base to final operation that is going to unglue inflexible, by the book, operators. That is why the FAA needs to update the book, in the interest of safety.

Another big benefit of going to default power pitch approaches is that this would mitigate the need for the much more difficult and incident provoking round out and hold off landing technique. Active power pitch short final iterations, rather than always continuing the 1.3 Vso stabilized approach, actually reduce the excessive runway eaten up by students in power off spot landing practice. While some round out and hold off is necessary when we remove the throttle control of descent rate, having had iterations of power/pitch deceleration gives the student a sense of what is necessary to get into the landing zone available in a forced landing situation. Students learn that excess airspeed is not a desirable forced landing technique.

Given current excess airspeed increase that results in greater groundspeed in crosswind than in no wind, we are going to see increased crosswind incidents and accidents without some training adjustment. Also increased global heat will decrease book ceilings on our aircraft, but that's another story.

Huh? What did he say? Does anyone else have trouble trying to follow this?

Kurt

Thanks for the criticism, Kurt. Have you noticed that for whatever reason most of us are having warmer average weather than when we were younger. If there is a bit more heat, there will be more wind and that seems to be happening as well. If we have more wind, we will sometimes have more headwind going west occasionally. If we have to stop for fuel, short of major cities in the western states, we will probably land at a single runway airport. If the crosswind there is greater than the book says our rudder can handle, we may have to decide to either run out of rudder, land in the desert into the wind, or land at an angle into the crosswind on the wide and long runway.

If we decide to land at an angle to the wide and long runway, it is very helpful to be able to decelerate on short final to the angle across the runway and touch down on the very beginning of the downwind side of the runway. Using both deceleration coming into ground effect and the headwind component of the strong crosswind, we can easily get stopped in the angular distance (1,000') between the downwind corner of the runway and the upwind big airplane touchdown zone marking. Using the headwind component of the crosswind on a base leg into the wind makes lining up with the angle across the runway easy. That means we need to fly a downwind leg downwind of the airport or a straight in to the angle from way out or even allowing drift to move us from the centerline extended to the extension of the angular line out to an angular short final.

It is impossible to describe this angle across technique to safely handle severe crosswind using only the exact same words used to describe a geometric square pattern. It will not always work well to try this new technique using only left turns. Wind management common sense screams against a downwind base to final turn in severe crosswind.

Thanks again for your comment.

Jim

G44 wrote:Huh? What did he say? Does anyone else have trouble trying to follow this?

Kurt

He has a 'unique' style of writing. I am guessing he is emulating some author in particular he admires. (Very difficult to follow what winds up being some sort of affectation.) I was going to bite my tongue on this post to try to avoid politics, but in a nutshell, he says the earth is warming and it may be due to people (why didn't he just leave that out as it opens the door to politics and frankly turned me off to what followed. And, I take it he will be getting rid of his polluting car and airplane), and heating is causing winds, and runways are disappearing too (rising sea levels? greedy capitalist real estate developers?) making fewer runway headings available, and people are not trained in crosswind landings anymore like they were in the good old days?

contactflying wrote:Thanks for the criticism, Kurt. Have you noticed that for whatever reason most of us are having warmer average weather than when we were younger. If there is a bit more heat, there will be more wind and that seems to be happening as well. If we have more wind, we will sometimes have more headwind going west occasionally. If we have to stop for fuel, short of major cities in the western states, we will probably land at a single runway airport. If the crosswind there is greater than the book says our rudder can handle, we may have to decide to either run out of rudder, land in the desert into the wind, or land at an angle into the crosswind on the wide and long runway.

If we decide to land at an angle to the wide and long runway, it is very helpful to be able to decelerate on short final to the angle across the runway and touch down on the very beginning of the downwind side of the runway. Using both deceleration coming into ground effect and the headwind component of the strong crosswind, we can easily get stopped in the angular distance (1,000') between the downwind corner of the runway and the upwind big airplane touchdown zone marking. Using the headwind component of the crosswind on a base leg into the wind makes lining up with the angle across the runway easy. That means we need to fly a downwind leg downwind of the airport or a straight in to the angle from way out or even allowing drift to move us from the centerline extended to the extension of the angular line out to an angular short final.

It is impossible to describe this angle across technique to safely handle severe crosswind using only the exact same words used to describe a geometric square pattern. It will not always work well to try this new technique using only left turns. Wind management common sense screams against a downwind base to final turn in severe crosswind.

Thanks again for your comment.

Jim

So in all these words you are saying land at an angle across the wide runway to decrease the cross wind component using some sort of pattern and approach that I still cant figure out? Ok got it. Your style of writing is very hard to follow even for those of us who have been flying for many years.

I'm not a fan of Jim's particular style of communicating aviation theory, and at times he certainly seems like Rainman weighing in on posts with unsolicited analysis, but one thing he never fails at is being polite and friendly. He deserves to be treated in kind. Even I should take my own advice on this.

As for politics, the rule is in place. Get political, your thread gets flushed and with enough violations, eventually violators do too. No politician or man made law created physics that makes hotter air less fun to fly in, and I don't see him going any deeper on the topic than that. Let's perhaps work on weathering what triggers us. It makes life easier in this "climate" of hyperpolarization of everything.

Jim,

Would another way to characterize what you are explaining be as follows?

Fly a rectangular patter with the down wind leg being a pure tailwind. Base is a 90 degrees to the relative wind, and final is pure headwind. All that's left to do land slow as possible into the wind making sure whatever landing surface available is long enough to stop? In other words a pattern based on the winds not the runway as long as ATC gives permission.

I've done this a number of times. A quick explanation to ATC about crosswind limits and a taildragger have come in handy. I've landed on cross taxiways before if needed.

I don't care who how the wind is created, if its windy then I have to deal with it regardless.

MW

Yes, MW, that would certainly work. The angle can be significant from downwind corner to upwind white square or slight from downwind corner to the upwind edge way down the long runway or anything in between. Certainly can be modified depending on the strength of the crosswind and the stall airspeed in low ground effect of the airplane. I just can't understand running out of rudder and flopping it down anyway. Also we lost a Brenco pilot who, as a retired airline pilot, could not bring himself to alter the standard pattern and runway centerline in any way. It killed him and an oil company employee in a severe crosswind on the front range.

You may know some of the pilots and the young lady instructor at Iowa Falls where I did a seminar and clinic on Contact Flying because they wanted to work on angle across the runway in severe crosswind. To make the angle across work we first have to learn to land slow and where we intend to touch down. I know, we all landed slow where we intended to touch down in the old days.

Jim, if I came across as impolite or disrespectful I apologize that was not my intent. I just have a tough time following what you are trying to say, I thought I would mention it so maybe you could clarify your message. Like you, I too have many years of experience and if I have a tough time following I imagine some of the newer pilots may too. I know you have a good heart and are trying to pass on your wisdom from many years of experience. I’m sorry if I did not inform you of this in a more respectful manner.

Kurt

Thanks Kurt. I'm as bad in the flesh. My boss at Underwood Aerial Patrol said I talk like I have marbles in my mouth. I have flown the way I try to explain here so long that I just can't fathom it not being logical common sense. That is not fair and I try hard to put myself in the shoes of the pilot I am trying to convince.

Aviators have a language, a code, that rings true. Orientation has a lot to do with that. Some of us are not the best team players and see, hear, and speak evil. When we do that it should be for a good purpose like increasing safety. If rather for personal elevation that should be called out by others. I go afield on war stories, admitting I was too scared to really remember well, but safety issues should be clear. I wish I were a clearer teacher.

Thanks Contact . I’ve never had a problem understanding that the time and effort you expend trying to express yourself here is purely in the interest of attempting to help people like me to fly safely.
Please continue with my education . I read and reread every word .

Jim,

I had the very good fortune to get my tailwheel checkout in 1991 from a Forest Service pilot. I bought my first plane, a 1962 PA-18 in Yankton South Dakota. I needed to get the plane to near Ogden UT. This was before GPS etc. Old school flight planning, windage etc. Listen to the AWOS and look at the windsock.

As it turns out I got a little off course a couple of times and needed to land. Well we were doing this flight in February and we all know the wind can really blow hard during that part of the year in the that part of the country. We were going to North Platte Nebraska for a fuel stop and the wind was blowing hard. I don't remember what direction or the exact details but I remember this, Stan came on the radio (voice of god to us students) to tower and asked for either grass or a taxiway to land on, again a long time ago. ATC granted permission as requested and the landing was a non event because we made a pattern based on winds not runway.

The taxi to the pumps was the real challenge. That was 30 years ago. I've not forgotten that lesson from a seasoned Forest Service pilot and instructor.

MW

MW,

So many people in government and aviation are so willing to help but are not able to offer unless we ask. Why we don't ask is a mystery. And much of the time I had no radio to ask, so the PIC thing. When you bend it is different. Then the FAA must look good, you must be cited as the cause, and safety is a small issue.

In the interest of safety we sometimes need to think in terms of what makes sense and not worry what authorities or other pilots might think.

Jim

“Let's perhaps work on weathering what triggers us. It makes life easier in this "climate" of hyperpolarization of everything.” should be a daily mantra for all of us. Very well said Zane.
After many years of being a member of BCP, I find myself coming back to BCP more often these days. A huge part of that is to read, or re-read or to dissect and read again, what contact wrote. Jim, your writing style IS hard to parse. You don’t fit in a 30 second sound byte and your style takes time and thought. I am totally willing to set the time aside to do exactly that, give what you write the time and thought to try and understand. Your experience, your take on your experience and your willingness to share it, even in your very wordy way, is invaluable to me. I truly respect your contribution to this site and to my flying and I thank you for what you do. Please keep sharing!
Chris

Thanks Chris and everyone,

I have been over the ground plenty, but hope to say what I say in a more understandable way some day. Also it is not the usual AOPA menu so doesn't always compute. Sorry about the title of this thread, but I have already posted one on Severe Crosswind and there is a chapter on that in Safe Maneuvering Flight Techniques. I really didn't mean to trigger politics. Like Zane said, it is just pretty hot sometimes.

Jim

Hear on the east slope of the Rockies in the winter when you have a warm winter day the flying is going to be sporty because it is almost always windy. On a cold 10 or less day, maybe some low clouds, there is usually little wind. I often have to explain this to people that want me to take them for a ride in the winter. I say your choice sick sac or long johns.