Bad landings

[Jim Jones]

I went up today to practice crosswind landings. The wind was about down the
runway at my home airport so I went to Sky Manor (N40). This airport has a
2500x50 foot runway and requires vigilence in gusty winds. I did 2 landings
and 1 go around (due to the gusty wind) using runway 25 at Sky Manor with a
90 degree crosswind of about 12-15 knots gusting to about 18-20kt. The
landings here were pretty good.

Well, I went back to my home airport and the wind was still mostly down the
runway, but variable and gusty (in retrospect). Well, I built up too much
speed (the approach is over trees and there was a bit of an updraft, plus I
was a little high and probably subconsciously dove for the runway) and
floated in the flare. The gusts caused the airplane to balloon and I was
able to recover once, then it ballooned again and I should have gone around.
However, I tried to save it and as I came down I added a bit of power to
soften the landing, quickly began to balloon even higher and found myself
very nose high, very little airspeed, and was heading off the runway due to
a crosswind combined with low airspeed. I immediatly applied full power,
lowered the nose to get some airspeed, and went around. Had I waited much
longer to go around, the aircraft would soon have stalled 20 feet above the
ground. Basically, I recovered from an imminent approach to landing stall
20 feet above the ground. This is not a good situation to get yourself in,
to say the least.

This scared me pretty good. I was complacent at my home airport because I
am used to landing there, the runway is long, and the wind was basically
down the runway. I fully expected variable gusty wind at Sky Manor and
expected to go around resulting in me making a good early decision to go
around when necessary, while I tried to recover from a poor approach at my
home airport when I should have gone around earlier.

In retrospect, I made some poor decisions, but ultimately had a safe outcome
by making the right decision at the last second.

[Jose]

> I was complacent at my home airport because I
> am used to landing there, the runway is long, and the wind was basically
> down the runway. I fully expected variable gusty wind at Sky Manor...

What's your home airport? I'm at Danbury, you too?

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Darkwing]

"Jim Jones" > wrote in message
...
>I went up today to practice crosswind landings. The wind was about down
>the runway at my home airport so I went to Sky Manor (N40). This airport
>has a 2500x50 foot runway and requires vigilence in gusty winds. I did 2
>landings and 1 go around (due to the gusty wind) using runway 25 at Sky
>Manor with a 90 degree crosswind of about 12-15 knots gusting to about
>18-20kt. The landings here were pretty good.
>
> Well, I went back to my home airport and the wind was still mostly down
> the runway, but variable and gusty (in retrospect). Well, I built up too
> much speed (the approach is over trees and there was a bit of an updraft,
> plus I was a little high and probably subconsciously dove for the runway)
> and floated in the flare. The gusts caused the airplane to balloon and I
> was able to recover once, then it ballooned again and I should have gone
> around. However, I tried to save it and as I came down I added a bit of
> power to soften the landing, quickly began to balloon even higher and
> found myself very nose high, very little airspeed, and was heading off the
> runway due to a crosswind combined with low airspeed. I immediatly
> applied full power, lowered the nose to get some airspeed, and went
> around. Had I waited much longer to go around, the aircraft would soon
> have stalled 20 feet above the ground. Basically, I recovered from an
> imminent approach to landing stall 20 feet above the ground. This is not
> a good situation to get yourself in, to say the least.
>
> This scared me pretty good. I was complacent at my home airport because I
> am used to landing there, the runway is long, and the wind was basically
> down the runway. I fully expected variable gusty wind at Sky Manor and
> expected to go around resulting in me making a good early decision to go
> around when necessary, while I tried to recover from a poor approach at my
> home airport when I should have gone around earlier.
>
> In retrospect, I made some poor decisions, but ultimately had a safe
> outcome by making the right decision at the last second.
>

I had a rash of bad night landings and decided that I forgot what the hell
to do and took an instructor with me a few days later. Made a huge
difference and I got my confidence back and my night landings improved
hugely. Try taking an instructor to the airport you are having troubles at
and see if they can provide some insight, worked for me.

-----------------------------------------------------------
DW

[Mike 'Flyin'8']

>This scared me pretty good. I was complacent at my home airport because I
>am used to landing there, the runway is long, and the wind was basically
>down the runway. I fully expected variable gusty wind at Sky Manor and
>expected to go around resulting in me making a good early decision to go
>around when necessary, while I tried to recover from a poor approach at my
>home airport when I should have gone around earlier.
>
>In retrospect, I made some poor decisions, but ultimately had a safe outcome
>by making the right decision at the last second.

I always approach a landing with the intent to go around... If I
actually land I consider it a bonus. :-)


The Ultimate BBS!
Telnet://ubbs2006.synchro.net
HTTP://ubbs2006.synchro.net:81

[[email protected]]

Jim Jones > wrote:
> I went up today to practice crosswind landings. The wind was about down the
> runway at my home airport so I went to Sky Manor (N40). This airport has a
> 2500x50 foot runway and requires vigilence in gusty winds. I did 2 landings
> and 1 go around (due to the gusty wind) using runway 25 at Sky Manor with a
> 90 degree crosswind of about 12-15 knots gusting to about 18-20kt. The
> landings here were pretty good.

> Well, I went back to my home airport and the wind was still mostly down the
> runway, but variable and gusty (in retrospect). Well, I built up too much
> speed (the approach is over trees and there was a bit of an updraft, plus I
> was a little high and probably subconsciously dove for the runway) and
> floated in the flare. The gusts caused the airplane to balloon and I was
> able to recover once, then it ballooned again and I should have gone around.
> However, I tried to save it and as I came down I added a bit of power to
> soften the landing, quickly began to balloon even higher and found myself
> very nose high, very little airspeed, and was heading off the runway due to
> a crosswind combined with low airspeed. I immediatly applied full power,
> lowered the nose to get some airspeed, and went around. Had I waited much
> longer to go around, the aircraft would soon have stalled 20 feet above the
> ground. Basically, I recovered from an imminent approach to landing stall
> 20 feet above the ground. This is not a good situation to get yourself in,
> to say the least.

> This scared me pretty good. I was complacent at my home airport because I
> am used to landing there, the runway is long, and the wind was basically
> down the runway. I fully expected variable gusty wind at Sky Manor and
> expected to go around resulting in me making a good early decision to go
> around when necessary, while I tried to recover from a poor approach at my
> home airport when I should have gone around earlier.

> In retrospect, I made some poor decisions, but ultimately had a safe outcome
> by making the right decision at the last second.

You need a nastier home airport to keep you from getting complacent.

At mine the 3 wind socks are usually pointed in three different directions.

I can't count the times I was at the point of congratulating myself
on a great landing when I suddenly found myself 10 to 20 feet back
in the air or suddenly heading for a taxiway.

I was bitching about how squirrely the air is to one of the local CFI's
one day. He just laughed and said if I can land it there, everywhere
else short of a rolling aircraft carrier should be a piece of cake.

He's right.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Jay Honeck]

> Basically, I recovered from an imminent approach to landing stall
> 20 feet above the ground. This is not a good situation to get yourself in,
> to say the least.
> This scared me pretty good. I was complacent at my home airport

You don't say how much experience you've got, but I think you did just
fine. You came close to bending an airplane, and walked away
unscathed -- the best possible outcome. This extra shot of adrenaline
will serve you well down the road, trust me.

In short, you will never, EVER be complacent while landing again. I
know, because I (as, I'm sure, most pilots) have scared the crap outta
myself on landing a few times, and I now approach every landing as a
potential go-round.

Honestly, looking back at my first couple of hundred hours, I'm amazed
I didn't break something. Let's see, just off the top of my head I
remember these two:

- A landing in Rockford, IL, in a REALLY nasty crosswind, where I
froze on the controls with full left rudder applied. This was my
crosswind correction, but -- in a Piper -- the nosewheel and rudder
are linked. When I lowered the nose, guess which way the plane
headed, really fast? Oops....

- A landing at little bitty Sylvania Field (C89), in a Skyhawk, where
I had to do a go 'round and chose to raise the electric flaps
completely while low, slow, and out of ideas. Gosh, those trucks on
the freeway (at the departure end of Rwy 8) sure got big! Ooops...

I just asked Mary about her scary landings, and she replied that "We
try to block those from our memory..." I'm sure there have been
more, but you get the idea -- we all have them.

Another thing you'll find -- you ALWAYS nail the tough landings. If I
know the landing is going to be challenging (due to wind, or whatever)
it's almost always a greaser -- while the ones I expect to be a "piece
of cake" are usually the clunkers.
---
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[john smith]

Mary's most scarry landing (as documented here)... AirVenture 200?
[This Oldtimers stuff is really something. One year seems like two, two
seems like five...)

Jay Honeck wrote:
> I just asked Mary about her scary landings, and she replied that "We
> try to block those from our memory..." I'm sure there have been
> more, but you get the idea -- we all have them.

[Larry Dighera]

On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 23:08:25 -0400, "Jim Jones" >
wrote in >:

>
>This scared me pretty good. I was complacent at my home airport because I
>am used to landing there, the runway is long, and the wind was basically
>down the runway. I fully expected variable gusty wind at Sky Manor and
>expected to go around resulting in me making a good early decision to go
>around when necessary, while I tried to recover from a poor approach at my
>home airport when I should have gone around earlier.
>
>In retrospect, I made some poor decisions, but ultimately had a safe outcome
>by making the right decision at the last second.
>

Thanks for sharing your honest introspection.

You seem to blame your decisions for your difficulty, but because I
didn't see you mention the word 'slip', I would guess your training
lacked sufficient emphasis on the productive use of that maneuver.
Applied vigorously, a forward slip will shed altitude rapidly, and it
provides the pilot with authoritative control in terminating the
descent almost immediately. In a cross wind approach, it's a natural.
A truth I have discovered about gusty crosswind landings is, that
there is a brief window of vulnerability during the flair and roundout
whose duration needs to be minimized by a reduction in the approach
speed within the limits of practicality. When the aircraft's attitude
is nose-high, after the slip into the cross wind on approach must
necessarily be terminated for fear of dragging a wing on the ground,
the pilot has no good means of controlling lateral drift. If the
wheels can be planted on the runway before sufficient lateral velocity
and its inertia mount to unacceptable magnitude, all is well. But
putting the wheels on the runway requires the aircraft to be stalled
and no longer flying.

[EridanMan]

> When the aircraft's attitude
> is nose-high, after the slip into the cross wind on approach must
> necessarily be terminated for fear of dragging a wing on the ground,
> the pilot has no good means of controlling lateral drift. If the
> wheels can be planted on the runway before sufficient lateral velocity
> and its inertia mount to unacceptable magnitude, all is well.

Purely sophomoric quip, it strikes me that any crosswind landing
attempt where the crosswind is so strong that the aircraft risks a
wing-strike would already be far beyond the capacity of the rudder to
maintain the slip (and WAY beyond the aircraft's demonstrated X-wind
component).

It is of course always possible that a gusty crosswind might 'send the
plane over the edge' at the worse possible moment... but then I would
question the judgement of the pilot to even think of getting so close
to the ground in a drag-heavy deep slip configuration... The
windshear risk alone would make that a dangerous proposition.

The situation you describe strikes me as being a very clear diversion
scenario. In the absence of that option, my instructor suggested that
(at least in my stout-legged PA-28) in an emergency, during a heavy,
gusty crosswind beyond the aircraft's rudder capacity, your best bet
is simply to go with the "crab-plant' approach, and associated repair
bills.

I in no way vouch for this approach, I'm just relaying what I was told.

[Jay Honeck]

> Mary's most scarry landing (as documented here)... AirVenture 200?
> [This Oldtimers stuff is really something. One year seems like two, two
> seems like five...)

True, but that was a situation-induced scary landing, not something
caused by inattention or a sudden gust of wind, as is the spirit of
this thread.

She simply followed the guy ahead of us, and the instructions of the
controller, and ended up with a safe-but-all-too-exciting landing.

BTW: That was 2005.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Jose wrote:
>
> What's your home airport? I'm at Danbury, you too?

Home of the coolest approach in CT on 35. <G>

[Gregg Germain]

Jim Jones wrote:

> I went up today to practice crosswind landings. The wind was about down
> the
> runway at my home airport so I went to Sky Manor (N40). This airport has
> a
> 2500x50 foot runway and requires vigilence in gusty winds. I did 2
> landings and 1 go around (due to the gusty wind) using runway 25 at Sky
> Manor with a
> 90 degree crosswind of about 12-15 knots gusting to about 18-20kt. The
> landings here were pretty good.


What aircraft were you flying? What is its max crosswind component?

Congratulations on taking on crosswinds for practice; on handling the scary
situation back home. Well done.

[JGalban via AviationKB.com]

EridanMan wrote:
>The situation you describe strikes me as being a very clear diversion
>scenario. In the absence of that option, my instructor suggested that
>(at least in my stout-legged PA-28) in an emergency, during a heavy,
>gusty crosswind beyond the aircraft's rudder capacity, your best bet
>is simply to go with the "crab-plant' approach, and associated repair
>bills.
>
>I in no way vouch for this approach, I'm just relaying what I was told.

That's probably a good thing, because the bills associated with such an
approach could very well be a large part of the aircraft's total value. The
PA-28 may have stout legs, but they are not designed to handle a large
sideloads. I have seen this attempted in another stout legged Piper and the
result was a main gear leg that departed and ripped off the horizontal
stabilzer on it's way.

Even Cessnas, with their sturdier spring steel gear, can get in trouble
with sideloads on the main gear. Go to this page and scroll to the bottom
for an illustration:

http://members.cox.net/jgalban/id60.htm

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/aviation/200704/1

[[email protected]]

Hehe, please note I said 'exhausted all other options', as in, your
out of fuel and you need to get on the ground now, this runway, this
attempt;)

In that case, the associated repairs bills of ripping the gear off but
almost assuredly living are a probably a better bet than trying some
uber-crosswind landing, and either stalling out due to windshear, wing
striking, or otherwise loosing control on short final. At least
planting in a crab, you're on the ground when the **** hits the fan;)

[EridanMan]

Whoops, wrong account - the above was me.

[flynrider via AviationKB.com]

wrote:
>Hehe, please note I said 'exhausted all other options', as in, your
>out of fuel and you need to get on the ground now, this runway, this
>attempt;)
>
Well, it really depends on the airport and it's environment. If diversion
wasn't an option, you might be able to use a taxiway that's going into the
wind, or even just some flat ground around the runways. Airports often have
a lot of unpaved areas that are very flat. My point is that there are more
options that planting it in a crab.

If the crosswind is that strong, then landing directly into it should
result in a very short ground roll. Should any loss of control occur, the
speed of any impact will be lower into the headwind, thereby reducing the
chance of injuries.

There are downsides to pretty much any approach in an emergency. The
conditions and environment will likely dictate the most appropriate action.

John Galban====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/aviation/200704/1

[Tri-Pacer]

") in an emergency, during a heavy,
>>gusty crosswind beyond the aircraft's rudder capacity, your best bet
>>is simply to go with the "crab-plant' approach, and associated repair
>>bills.


Lots of people bad mouth the Ercoupe as a sissy airplane. Yet it is landed
in a crab. Makes any crosswind landing a no brainer. I owned one for a
number of years and only checked the windsock to make sure I wasn't landing
against the traffic flow. :-)

Now I have to check the wind sock again.

Cheers:

Paul
N1431A

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Tri-Pacer" > wrote

> Lots of people bad mouth the Ercoupe as a sissy airplane. Yet it is landed
> in a crab. Makes any crosswind landing a no brainer. I owned one for a
> number of years and only checked the windsock to make sure I wasn't
> landing against the traffic flow. :-)
>
> Now I have to check the wind sock again.

Does the main gear caster on those? I think I heard that it does, but I
have no confirmation of that.
--
Jim in NC

[Larry Dighera]

On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 13:46:28 -0400, "Morgans"
> wrote in >:

>Does the main gear caster on those? I think I heard that it does, but I
>have no confirmation of that.

I don't think so. It's a trailing link design IIRC.

[Blueskies]

"Morgans" > wrote in message ...
:
: "Tri-Pacer" > wrote
:
: > Lots of people bad mouth the Ercoupe as a sissy airplane. Yet it is landed
: > in a crab. Makes any crosswind landing a no brainer. I owned one for a
: > number of years and only checked the windsock to make sure I wasn't
: > landing against the traffic flow. :-)
: >
: > Now I have to check the wind sock again.
:
: Does the main gear caster on those? I think I heard that it does, but I
: have no confirmation of that.
: --
: Jim in NC
:


No

[Morgans[_2_]]

> : Does the main gear caster on those? I think I heard that it does, but I
> : have no confirmation of that.
> : --
> : Jim in NC

> No

OK, now, I gotta ask more questions! <g>

I realize (I think) how a Ercoupe works, in the "no rudder control on the
floor models" works, with interconnects between the ailerons and the
rudders.

What about this, or how, does this arrangement make crosswind landings a "no
brainer?"
--
Jim in NC

[Larry Dighera]

On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 13:04:51 -0400, "Morgans"
> wrote in >:

>how, does this arrangement make crosswind landings a "no
>brainer?"

Never having flow one, I offer:

The proper cross-wind landing technique for an Ercupe is to crab into
the wind maintaining flight-track straight down the runway centerline
all the way to the runway surface. At touchdown, the trailing-link
main gear design induces a side force near the CG that causes proper
alignment of the airplane's longitudinal axis with the runway
centerline.

It's a useful, inexpensive and relatively robust aircraft, that can be
operated as a Light Sport Aircraft, IIRC.

[Newps]

You simply land in a crab and the plane straightens itself out. Any
plane will do this but the Ercoupe is designed to do it without damaging
anything.



Morgans wrote:
>>: Does the main gear caster on those? I think I heard that it does, but I
>>: have no confirmation of that.
>>: --
>>: Jim in NC
>
>
>>No
>
>
> OK, now, I gotta ask more questions! <g>
>
> I realize (I think) how a Ercoupe works, in the "no rudder control on the
> floor models" works, with interconnects between the ailerons and the
> rudders.
>
> What about this, or how, does this arrangement make crosswind landings a "no
> brainer?"

[Matt Whiting]

Newps wrote:
> You simply land in a crab and the plane straightens itself out. Any
> plane will do this but the Ercoupe is designed to do it without damaging
> anything.

Not any plane will do this. Tail draggers won't.

Matt

[john smith[_2_]]

> Newps wrote:
> > You simply land in a crab and the plane straightens itself out. Any
> > plane will do this but the Ercoupe is designed to do it without damaging
> > anything.

Matt Whiting > wrote:
> Not any plane will do this. Tail draggers won't.

They will if they have cross-wind landing gear. :-)
Actually, they will roll while still in the crab until the pilot kicks
rudder to straighten the alignment.