Pilot and Co-Pilot are incompacitated....

[icepac]

As long as you have rudder authority, you have the ability to land. Crosswinds be damned!

As long as you have enough authority using the combination of the controls available, you have the ability to land.

[Traveler]

Quote from: Tupac
As long as you have rudder authority, you have the ability to land. Crosswinds be damned!

As long as you have enough authority using the combination of the controls available, you have the ability to land.

neither of these statements are correct.

The limit for a  crosswind landing is the airplane's demonstrated crosswind capability, which is published in the pilots operating handbook (POH).

To operate outside of the POH is not an option according to the FAA.   

[Golfer]

That's wrong.

Demonstrated crosswind is just that, demonstrated. It is NOT a limitation per any FAR. It can be made a limitation by the manufacturer but a 15 knot demonstrated crosswind component in a transport jet is pretty useless.

What can be limiting is a company GOM/FOM which may (not shall or must, just may) make it a limitation for that company only.

I don't know how Easterns books were written but using the published demonstrated crosswind component as a limitation is not a requirement.

[Tordon22]

Golfer said it the way I've always read/heard about it.


FWIW, I did much better today. Had a little better flare, touching down a couple of knots slower, keeping that back pressure in, no problems. Even solo in wind conditions that tower was just calling "all directions" with gusts.

[Golfer]

Eastern never flew 707s either but I didn't say anything about that detail of the story.

[Traveler]

miss fired

[Golfer]

Oops post

[Golfer]

Double post

[Golfer]

Triple oops

[Traveler]

That's wrong.

Demonstrated crosswind is just that, demonstrated. It is NOT a limitation per any FAR. It can be made a limitation by the manufacturer but a 15 knot demonstrated crosswind component in a transport jet is pretty useless.

What can be limiting is a company GOM/FOM which may (not shall or must, just may) make it a limitation for that company only.

I don't know how Easterns books were written but using the published demonstrated crosswind component as a limitation is not a requirement.

The limit for a  crosswind landing is the airplane's demonstrated crosswind capability, which is published in the pilots operating handbook (POH).

I’ll stand by that statement.  I was responding to what ICEPAC and TUPAC had stated.
about having enough rudder authority , has nothing to do with authority it’s the result of a vector calculation  performed and then flown by a factory test pilot for the inclusion in the POH.   Is it a limit? It’s not a recommendation , it’s a demonstrated limit as a result of a calculation. 


I witnessed an aircraft operating under Part 91 run off a runway during a cross wind training session, prang a wing and do damage to another aircraft.  The final outcome did not go well for the instructor involved.  The FAA found pilot error and  keep pointing out to him that the cross wind component for that flight exceeded the Cross Wind component demonstrated in the POH for the aircraft used for training.  The flight school let him go.

In that case, I’d say it was a limit.

[Golfer]

It has nothing to do with a vector calculation.

The demonstrated crosswind component is what the test pilots encountered during the certification process and handled without any unusual flying skill.

Should we talk about how Eastern never operated 707s next?

Even if you were talking about 720s they operated in the late 60s, which you would have said, the most fidelity any of the sims back then would have been a camera hovering around a picture of a miniature airport. No light rain, etc as you described.

[Traveler]

Eastern never flew 707s either but I didn't say anything about that detail of the story.

your correct, Eastern contracted out their training at times.  They did training for several different lines, TWA, Eastern, Allegany and a few others.

 

[Tordon22]

Do you know a Jim Beekman, trav?

[Traveler]

Do you know a Jim Beekman, trav?

Not that I recall, I left as a result of the 73 Oil Embargo.  After being out for 18 months, I decided I had to get a real job.  I had finished school and picked up a degree in Computer Science.  I did fly with a Jim Beam, Ron Chadwick, and a Harry Sparrow. You know any of them.  They all went back after the recall and Harry finally retired just before the end.   Everyone else that went back got screwed big time.  Beam is dead, Cancer, Chadwick works in landscapping. 

[SFRT - Frenchy]

The second bit may be it. I usually let the nose come down on its own, and be sure when you put your feet on the brakes the pressure is even. All the Cessnas I've flown besides the 210 had hyper sensitive brakes.

Tordon, Tupac I think it's good airmanship to 'land' the nose wheel, but that's just my experience, but I witnessed many pilots that don't. I say that because I flew with Metro guys that do a fantastic main wheel landing then just drop the nose hard on the ground then jump on the beta ... you feel all the weight transfered on the nose wheel ... and man  that can't be good for that nose strut.

I usually touch main, hit the beta, land the nose wheel and maintain as much back pressure as possible till the elevator effectiveness dies around 50 kts. You really don't feel the nose sink like it's trying to go thru the ground. But that's me in this plane, and also the 402s and other bug smashers. Maybe jets you don't care, can't afford to do it.

As far as crosswind, we have no Ops Specs limits as far as Xwind, we do have 10 kts tailwind. And thank God, those Idaho airports get hammered. Xwind landing on a dry runway is not too hard because we have a very responsive differential power/beta to keep the plane in check. When the runway is iced up it's even easier, you can land with the crap as long as your 'momentum' is lined up with the runway, then you manage with differential beta.