With the wind?

"smallg" wrote in message news:JFPXf.4877

.....and noticed
that the tower had them all taking off and landing
more *with* the wind than against it.

You didn't give any wind direction or runway info, so it is hard to say.
But I can tell you this: The notion of tailwind or headwind on a runway can
be somewhat misleading when the wind is running more or less across the
runway. IIRC, in light airplanes, the wind direction has to be about 20
degrees aft of the wing before you start to pick up significant tailwind
effect.

I can remember at least one tower communication, "N12345 cleared for
downwind takeoff". And, at the standard procedure at Pepperell, MA
where I learned gliders, was to take off on 06 and land on 24. This
allowed for an aborted take off into a cornfield rather than a pile of
granite. So, downwind is not unheard of, but not preferred because it
uses more runway.


smallg wrote:
Okay, I've never even had a flying lesson, which
may explain it, but yesterday afternoon I stopped
by a local airport to watch some planes, and noticed
that the tower had them all taking off and landing
more *with* the wind than against it. The wind
was blowing at around 10-12 mph (around 10
or so knots) and the windsock appeared to agree.
I know about crosswind landings and t-offs,
but I always thought once the wind was giving
more of a tailwind than headwind, it was time
to change directions. BTW, these were all small
planes, as this airport doesn't accomodate anything
bigger than corporate jets. Just curious, thanks!

-----
Jay McKenzie
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/pwp-wstviews

If a tower phrased a take-off clearance "cleared for |
downwind takeoff" it would be because the pilot requested
that runway and the tower was getting it on tape, that the
pilot knew and accepted the procedure. If the wind was not
significant and a taxi to the other end of the airport was
long, using a runway with a little wind component on the
tail might be very reasonable. It depends on runway length,
departure profile and terrain balanced by aircraft
performance.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Stubby" wrote in
message . ..
|I can remember at least one tower communication, "N12345
cleared for
| downwind takeoff". And, at the standard procedure at
Pepperell, MA
| where I learned gliders, was to take off on 06 and land on
24. This
| allowed for an aborted take off into a cornfield rather
than a pile of
| granite. So, downwind is not unheard of, but not
preferred because it
| uses more runway.
|
|
| smallg wrote:
| Okay, I've never even had a flying lesson, which
| may explain it, but yesterday afternoon I stopped
| by a local airport to watch some planes, and noticed
| that the tower had them all taking off and landing
| more *with* the wind than against it. The wind
| was blowing at around 10-12 mph (around 10
| or so knots) and the windsock appeared to agree.
| I know about crosswind landings and t-offs,
| but I always thought once the wind was giving
| more of a tailwind than headwind, it was time
| to change directions. BTW, these were all small
| planes, as this airport doesn't accomodate anything
| bigger than corporate jets. Just curious, thanks!
|
| -----
| Jay McKenzie
| http://home.bellsouth.net/p/pwp-wstviews
|
|

There's no such phraseology as "downwind takeoff." The controller is
required to issue the wind when you takeoff with a tailwind component,
this can be accomplished via the ATIS and would be obvious when you
listened to the tape.

Jim Macklin wrote:

If a tower phrased a take-off clearance "cleared for |
downwind takeoff" it would be because the pilot requested
that runway and the tower was getting it on tape, that the
pilot knew and accepted the procedure. If the wind was not
significant and a taxi to the other end of the airport was
long, using a runway with a little wind component on the
tail might be very reasonable. It depends on runway length,
departure profile and terrain balanced by aircraft
performance.

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:ZPVXf.7715$t22.1714@dukeread08...

If a tower phrased a take-off clearance "cleared for |
downwind takeoff" it would be because the pilot requested
that runway and the tower was getting it on tape, that the
pilot knew and accepted the procedure.


The phraseology is just "cleared for takeoff", the pilot's request would
already be on the tape so adding "downwind" would accomplish nothing..

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:ZPVXf.7715$t22.1714@dukeread08...
It depends on runway length,
departure profile and terrain balanced by aircraft
performance.

Sure does. I remember a CAA safety evening, where the presenter showed a
photo with an aircraft poised to take off with the windsock pointing in
pretty much the same direction, and said: "Why isn't this as mad as it
looks?"

The photo had been cleverly taken/cropped and done at a jaunty angle so that
the pole of the windsock was just off the side of the picture - and there
were no reference points from which you could realise that, in fact, the
runway had a socking great downslope.

D.

It depends on the situation. When I worked at GFK we had a lot of
operations from the UND, the large college flight school. The airport
had parallel Ry 35's and a crossing Ry 26. The wind mostly blew north
and south but once a week or so the wind would go strong out of the
west, favoring 26. Due to the volume of traffic we stayed on the
parallels until the wund exceeded a 15 knot crosswind. The same thing
happens at any major airport, changing to the other runway is quite a
production.



smallg wrote:

Okay, I've never even had a flying lesson, which
may explain it, but yesterday afternoon I stopped
by a local airport to watch some planes, and noticed
that the tower had them all taking off and landing
more *with* the wind than against it. The wind
was blowing at around 10-12 mph (around 10
or so knots) and the windsock appeared to agree.
I know about crosswind landings and t-offs,
but I always thought once the wind was giving
more of a tailwind than headwind, it was time
to change directions. BTW, these were all small
planes, as this airport doesn't accomodate anything
bigger than corporate jets. Just curious, thanks!

-----
Jay McKenzie
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/pwp-wstviews

In article ,
says...

Due to the volume of traffic we stayed on the
parallels until the wund exceeded a 15 knot crosswind.

Were you reading "Gone with the Wund, or Withering Heights?"
(sorry - couldn't resist)

The same thing
happens at any major airport, changing to the other runway is quite a
production.


True. They could even have been in the process of changing, but by the
time they get turned around quite a few have landed with a slight
tailwind.

I have also seen airports where the apron and terminal are all the way on
one end of the runway. In these cases pilots sometimesprefer to take a
slight tailwind to land toward their destination, rather than have to
taxi back.

"Greg Farris" wrote in message
...
The same thing
happens at any major airport, changing to the other runway is quite a
production.

Yeah, I was a passenger on a commercial flight into Schiphol (Amsterdam)
last year; the captain came onto the intercom to say: "We were second in
line to land, and they just changed runways on us". Took us the best part of
15-20 minutes to muck about and get down.

I have also seen airports where the apron and terminal are all the way on
one end of the runway. In these cases pilots sometimesprefer to take a
slight tailwind to land toward their destination, rather than have to
taxi back.

We used to see this a lot at Norwich (probably still do if they've reopened
04 - last time I flew there it was shut for maintenance). The main runway is
27/09, but we also have 04/22. The terminal is right at the starting end of
04 (in fact, there's a displaced threshold because the terminal building is
in the way). So the smaller commercial aircraft, particularly those heading
to Amsterdam, would often choose 04 if the wind was within limits, because
it was only a 60-second taxi and a quick right turn instead of a drive
around the airfield.

D.

On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 08:46:48 -0400, "smallg"
wrote:

The wind
was blowing at around 10-12 mph (around 10
or so knots) and the windsock appeared to agree.

The local airport PSM has a single runway, with the SE end more or
less pointing toward the small city nearby. I believe the "calm"
status is defined as up to 7 knots (possibly 7 mph). So if the wind is
blowing 7 knots or less, you take off to the NW. Perhaps your airfield
has a like orientation and reason for taking off into the wind.



-- all the best, Dan Ford

email: usenet AT danford DOT net

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com