Downwind Landings

On Sep 23, 5:06 pm, Matt Whiting wrote:
It would depend on what aircraft type you fly. With Cessna's and
Piper's, there is no need for rudder authority below 30 knots or even
higher. I've never flown an airplane with a free castering nose wheel,
but I suspect rudder authority is more important there, however, it
still seems like the brakes would work fine for directional control at
10 knots.

Matt

I've done downwind takeoffs and have scared myself a few times.
Even five or ten knots leaves you with less control, and I might wish
I had that control. Taking off in a gusting tailwind might drop you in
the weeds off the end of the runway, too.

Dan

Depends heavily on the aircraft. I know for a fact that a lightly
loaded DC-10 will not be able to
land and stop at McCarran with a 10+knot tailwind. Been onboard when
it was tried and
remember going off the airport boundries at less than 30 AGL You get a
new perspective on
things when you see TV antennas go by above you and chimmneys just
below you!

Lockheed L-10A is virtually impossible to land safely with any
tailwind. It has so much tail
surface that it either slams the tail down or tries to put it on the
nose.

deHaviland Super Chipmunk with a Krier tail gets super squirrelly with
any kind of tailwind. Of
course the tail will come off the ground at about 15 knots forward
speed

wrote in news:1190595059.529602.74370
@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:

Depends heavily on the aircraft. I know for a fact that a lightly
loaded DC-10 will not be able to
land and stop at McCarran with a 10+knot tailwind. Been onboard when
it was tried and
remember going off the airport boundries at less than 30 AGL You get a
new perspective on
things when you see TV antennas go by above you and chimmneys just
below you!

Lockheed L-10A is virtually impossible to land safely with any
tailwind. It has so much tail
surface that it either slams the tail down or tries to put it on the
nose.

deHaviland Super Chipmunk with a Krier tail gets super squirrelly with
any kind of tailwind. Of
course the tail will come off the ground at about 15 knots forward
speed





These are all completely incorrect.

You can get a DC-10 at max landing weight into a 6,000 foot strip
easily. Even hot and high.

I've routinely operated an A300 into a 6,000 fooot strip with a fifteen
knot tailwind limit (which we often were up against due to the natur of
the strip) fro take off and landing.

I've landed ( a real) kissing cousin f the Lockheed 10, the Twin Beech,
with more than a 10 knot tailwind. It's fine... So would the Lockheed
be.

The Chipmunk, the same. All tailwheel airplanes get more demanding with
a tailwind as the groundspeed sinks to a point at which the surfaces
aren't doing much, but if the airplane was straight up to that point and
there isn't a massive crosswind, then the tailwheel and brakes take care
of the rest.

And I've flown a real Chipmunk...

Bertie

The tricky part of downwind landings is the necessity to extend your
traffic pattern's Downwind Leg (actually against the wind in the case
of a downwind landing) WELL BEYOND (perhaps double or more) what you
are accustomed to in a normal into-the-wind landing. If you fail to
do this, you will overshoot.


You are getting close to one of the answers.

Yes with a downwind landing you much more likely to overshoot. Since
you may overshoot you are much more likely need to Go Around. On the
Go around two more things happen. One, your climb out will climb out
at a much lower angle which may make it difficult or impossible to
clear obstacles. 2nd you will be close to the ground with a higher
than normal ground speed. The illusion of speed when combined with
approaching obstacles will make you want to climb a slower than normal
airspeed setting you up for a perfect Stall/Spin scenerio.

In fact I know of several Stall spins that have occurred exactly this
way.

One of my favorite demostrations is to simulate a power failure on a
windy day (and no one else in the pattern) when the only runway option
is the downwind runway. Once the student shown me they have they have
the runway made or they overshoot, (as they often do) I request a go
around so they can see how poor the climb angle really is when
departing downwind. With a 15 to 20kt tailwind in a C-150 or Tomahawk
this climbout can be impressively low.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 19:37:38 -0700, Brian wrote
in . com:


The tricky part of downwind landings is the necessity to extend your
traffic pattern's Downwind Leg (actually against the wind in the case
of a downwind landing) WELL BEYOND (perhaps double or more) what you
are accustomed to in a normal into-the-wind landing. If you fail to
do this, you will overshoot.


You are getting close to one of the answers.

The answer to which question?

Yes with a downwind landing you [are] much more likely to overshoot.

Right. But I can't emphasize too much the necessity to extend the
"Downwind Leg" to WELL beyond the point where the runway threshold is
at a 45 degree angle to the aircraft's position on the Downwind Leg
(as would be normal for an into-the-wind landing approach), so that
there is enough time to descend on final approach without the wind
blowing the aircraft past the threshold while it is still too high to
touch down.

What do you teach as a rule-of-thumb to determine the point to turn
from Downwind Leg to Base Leg?

Since
you may overshoot you are much more likely need to Go Around. On the
Go around two more things happen. One, your climb out will climb out
at a much lower angle which may make it difficult or impossible to
clear obstacles.

Right. While the approach descent-rate can be increased by employing
a forward slip to increase the angle, unfortunately, there is no
reciprocal method available to increase the climb angle.

2nd you will be close to the ground with a higher
than normal ground speed. The illusion of speed when combined with
approaching obstacles will make you want to climb a[t] slower than normal
airspeed[,] setting you up for a perfect Stall/Spin scenerio.

Good point.

Fortunately, I haven't experienced a downwind go-around into rising
terrain, but wouldn't the orographic lifting of the wind against the
terrain produce some updraft (or vertical component) to assist in
increasing the rate of climb? Or is that just wishful thinking?

In fact I know of several Stall spins that have occurred exactly this
way.

The illusion is so strong, it's easy to understand how that might
happen if the pilot fails to monitor the airspeed indicator to
maintain Vx speed on climb-out.

One of my favorite demostrations is to simulate a power failure on a
windy day (and no one else in the pattern) when the only runway option
is the downwind runway. Once the student [has] shown me they have they have[sic]
the runway made or they overshoot, (as they often do) I request a go
around so they can see how poor the climb angle really is when
departing downwind. With a 15 to 20kt tailwind in a C-150 or Tomahawk
this climbout can be impressively low.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

I can see how that would be important.

And I've flown a real Chipmunk...

Hope the ASPCA doesn't hear about this...

http://www.aspca.org

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote in news:1190639592.333060.145150
@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:

And I've flown a real Chipmunk...

Hope the ASPCA doesn't hear about this...

http://www.aspca.org


Groan!


I think we just heard from one of Anthony's simmer buddies...



Bertie

"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message


There is always the consideration of an engine failure. On takeoff or
landing, I'd prefer to be pointed into the wind if the prop stops,
rather than having to land downwind or attempt a low altitude turn
into the wind...

I'd rather be pointed into the wind, too, but if the failure happens away
from the field, I think I'd be a lot less concerned with landing into the
wind than I would in actually making the field.

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
http://sage1solutions.com/products
NEW! FlyteBalance v2.0 (W&B); FlyteLog v2.0 (Logbook)
____________________

("Bertie the Bunyip" wrote)
And I've flown a real Chipmunk...

Hope the ASPCA doesn't hear about this...

http://www.aspca.org

I think we just heard from one of Anthony's simmer buddies...


You decide.

http://www.alexisparkinn.com/flight_simulator.htm
The "Kiwi" @ The Alexis Park Inn & Suites

BTW - BTDT


Montblack :-)

"John T" wrote in
m:

"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message


There is always the consideration of an engine failure. On takeoff
or landing, I'd prefer to be pointed into the wind if the prop stops,
rather than having to land downwind or attempt a low altitude turn
into the wind...

I'd rather be pointed into the wind, too, but if the failure happens
away from the field, I think I'd be a lot less concerned with landing
into the wind than I would in actually making the field.


True, but downwind off field landings can be nasty. If it all goes horribly
wrong on you you'll be travelling a lot faster with a lot less control than
you would have with an into wind landing in an inferior field. Also, your
glide path control will be much more difficult with a tailwind for two
reasons. One, the angle will be much more shallow giving you progress
judgement difficulties and of course your glide angle will deteriorate as
the wind gradient gives you less tailwind as you descend. But as well as
this you won't be used to making a glide approach this way and your chancs
for success will be reduced because of this.
Having said all that, if you've only got one place to land and downwind is
the only way you can do it, well..


Bertie