Ack!! video A320 xwind in Germany

WTF kind of crosswind does it take to cause this?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185

"gatt" wrote in news:13sol8u8jlhokb5
@corp.supernews.com:

WTF kind of crosswind does it take to cause this?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185




Wasn't so much the crosswind as the technique used to deal with it.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"gatt" wrote in news:13sol8u8jlhokb5
@corp.supernews.com:

WTF kind of crosswind does it take to cause this?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185




Wasn't so much the crosswind as the technique used to deal with it.

Perhaps so - but it's been alleged there was a wind gust of 155 mph:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080303/..._rough_landing

Recently, Jim Logajan posted:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"gatt" wrote in news:13sol8u8jlhokb5
@corp.supernews.com:

WTF kind of crosswind does it take to cause this?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185




Wasn't so much the crosswind as the technique used to deal with it.

Perhaps so - but it's been alleged there was a wind gust of 155 mph:

Could it have been caused by that wing almost hitting the ground? ;-)

The entire approach looked bogus to me, but I'm nowhere near a heavy
driver. The result was exactly what I'd expect with that technique...

--
Neil

Jim Logajan wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"gatt" wrote in news:13sol8u8jlhokb5
@corp.supernews.com:

WTF kind of crosswind does it take to cause this?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185




Wasn't so much the crosswind as the technique used to deal with it.

Perhaps so - but it's been alleged there was a wind gust of 155 mph:

Nah. has to be a misprint. probably 55 mph.

He may have encountered a gust at that point, but it wouldn't have done
that to the airplane.

I've flown smaller in heavier winds than that.
In fact, I was flying in that storm not a million miles from where he was.
Our runway was more aligned with the wind than his was, though. We were
getting 50 plus in gusts about twenty degrees off with a baseline of about
38.


Bertie

On Mar 3, 1:50*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"gatt" wrote in news:13sol8u8jlhokb5
@corp.supernews.com:

WTF kind of crosswind does it take to cause this?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185

Wasn't so much the crosswind as the technique used to deal with it.

Bertie

Hah, I was about to post this vid and ask Bertie about it.

He crabbed in, then straightening out his upwind wing (not lowered)
got caught by the x wind.

I've seen numerous vids of jetliners crabbing in.

So if he'd sideslipped in with the upwind wing down and HELD it after
touch down maybe that is what would have worked? I'm assuming the the
GA approach holds for jetliners, like I said, I can't tell if I've
ever seen a jetliner sideslip vid.

If that's not the way, what is (other than the obvious find a better
runway option).

"Neil Gould" wrote in news:y9Zyj.19181$J41.7752
@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net:

Recently, Jim Logajan posted:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"gatt" wrote in news:13sol8u8jlhokb5
@corp.supernews.com:

WTF kind of crosswind does it take to cause this?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185




Wasn't so much the crosswind as the technique used to deal with it.

Perhaps so - but it's been alleged there was a wind gust of 155 mph:

Could it have been caused by that wing almost hitting the ground? ;-)

The entire approach looked bogus to me, but I'm nowhere near a heavy
driver. The result was exactly what I'd expect with that technique...

The approach was fine all the way to the flare.

Bertie

wrote in news:9c6e930e-6cf4-4f7d-b2f1-
:

On Mar 3, 1:50*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"gatt" wrote in news:13sol8u8jlhokb5
@corp.supernews.com:

WTF kind of crosswind does it take to cause this?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185

Wasn't so much the crosswind as the technique used to deal with it.

Bertie

Hah, I was about to post this vid and ask Bertie about it.

He crabbed in, then straightening out his upwind wing (not lowered)
got caught by the x wind.

I've seen numerous vids of jetliners crabbing in.

So if he'd sideslipped in with the upwind wing down and HELD it after
touch down maybe that is what would have worked? I'm assuming the the
GA approach holds for jetliners, like I said, I can't tell if I've
ever seen a jetliner sideslip vid.

If that's not the way, what is (other than the obvious find a better
runway option).




Well, if ground clearance isn;t an issue, and it isn't for most, the
technique is the same except most guys who slip just do it as they enter
the flare, crabbing up to that point. Boeing recommend slipping from
about 200 feet down and in fact the autpilot will do that itself if
you're doing an autoland.. Another poster has said that the A320 won't
slip no matter what. I've asked a few A3whatever pilots in the past
about how the flight controls work in that thing and never did get a
saitisfactory answer. I've even flown an A320 for a little bit and i
whatever mode we were in was very like an autpilot mode in most
airplanes. The airplane merely held whatever attitude I left it in in
pitch and would only turn if the stick was held..


Bertie


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Jim Logajan wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"gatt" wrote in news:13sol8u8jlhokb5
@corp.supernews.com:

WTF kind of crosswind does it take to cause this?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185




Wasn't so much the crosswind as the technique used to deal with it.

Perhaps so - but it's been alleged there was a wind gust of 155 mph:

Nah. has to be a misprint. probably 55 mph.

He may have encountered a gust at that point, but it wouldn't have
done
that to the airplane.

I've flown smaller in heavier winds than that.
In fact, I was flying in that storm not a million miles from where he
was. Our runway was more aligned with the wind than his was, though.
We were getting 50 plus in gusts about twenty degrees off with a
baseline of about 38.

This article has more details that do seem to suggest a misreporting (if
not a typo) of the wind speed:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...538926,00.html

Scroll to the bottom for an editor's note: "An earlier version of this
story contained information from German wire service DPA that listed the
strength of storm winds near the airport at 250 kilometers-per-hour (155
miles per hour)."

Jim Logajan wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Jim Logajan wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"gatt" wrote in news:13sol8u8jlhokb5
@corp.supernews.com:

WTF kind of crosswind does it take to cause this?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185




Wasn't so much the crosswind as the technique used to deal with it.

Perhaps so - but it's been alleged there was a wind gust of 155 mph:

Nah. has to be a misprint. probably 55 mph.

He may have encountered a gust at that point, but it wouldn't have
done
that to the airplane.

I've flown smaller in heavier winds than that.
In fact, I was flying in that storm not a million miles from where he
was. Our runway was more aligned with the wind than his was, though.
We were getting 50 plus in gusts about twenty degrees off with a
baseline of about 38.

This article has more details that do seem to suggest a misreporting
(if
not a typo) of the wind speed:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...538926,00.html

Scroll to the bottom for an editor's note: "An earlier version of this
story contained information from German wire service DPA that listed
the
strength of storm winds near the airport at 250 kilometers-per-hour
(155
miles per hour)."

Yeah, I think there were regions that did get winds of near that
strenght, but even leaving the reporting aside, it's pretty plain to see
that it;s the airplane itself causing those gyrations, not the wind. If
you eliminate the ground from that picture and just look at the
airplane's control deflections. wind or no wind it will do just what it
did if the rudder is kicked with nothing to stop the roll.


Bertie