What GA Planes Would Fly In This Wx

luvflyin said:
??? How is it related to stall speed?
Click to expand...
By regulation. The certification requirement was the design must have been demonstrated to have the ability to land in a direct crosswind that was some specified fraction of the stall speed. I think the fraction was 0.4 but don't recall the exact number.
 
Sinistar said:
I WAS thinking of flying on Friday or Saturday. So I do my usual, peak the NOAA hourly wx several days out to see if its even worth it. As you can see, our winter will never end :( .

Our runway is 13/31 and 75ft wide. It is a full crosswind component. So this has me curious, are there any of the more common GA planes that have demonstrated crosswind component of 20kts (not to mention the gusting over 30)? And how many of you out there would fly in this wind and that runway configuration in your GA plane?

View attachment 61804
Click to expand...

I might go out and make sure I didn't forget to put the gust lock in and check the tiedowns.
 
Clark1961 said:
By regulation. The certification requirement was the design must have been demonstrated to have the ability to land in a direct crosswind that was some specified fraction of the stall speed. I think the fraction was 0.4 but don't recall the exact number.
Click to expand...

Ah. got it
 
Clark1961 said:
By regulation. The certification requirement was the design must have been demonstrated to have the ability to land in a direct crosswind that was some specified fraction of the stall speed. I think the fraction was 0.4 but don't recall the exact number.
Click to expand...

You are correct, but I believe it is 0.2. So if a plane has a stall speed of 61 KCAS, the plane must be able to handle 61 (0.2) or 12 kts. direct x-wind. So once the OEM establishes something in that ballpark they are done. It is not in there best interest to publish much more than the minimum required, since that just opens them up to liability. Well you said it could do 30 (with a test pilot??? ) The only purpose to go higher is advertising. So that is one of the reasons you see x-wind components much lower in some aircraft than what we know the aircraft can do. But if you bend it above the demonstrated x-wind, you have no claim with the OEM.
 
Clark1961 said:
By regulation. The certification requirement was the design must have been demonstrated to have the ability to land in a direct crosswind that was some specified fraction of the stall speed. I think the fraction was 0.4 but don't recall the exact number.
Click to expand...
On the cherokee 180 - stall @ 58 kts, max xwind 17 kts = just a smidge below 0.3.
 
Clark1961 said:
By regulation. The certification requirement was the design must have been demonstrated to have the ability to land in a direct crosswind that was some specified fraction of the stall speed. I think the fraction was 0.4 but don't recall the exact number.
Click to expand...
Thank you for enlightening me here!!! I always thought the stall speed was just how far out on a limb the manufacturer was will go - kinda like a Ford/Dodge/Chevy truck specs. Obviously their test pilot can land in even stronger crosswinds. I had no clue stall speed was included. When I ran this by my wife her first response was "Rudder authority, you might run out of it before aileron."
 
murphey said:
On the cherokee 180 - stall @ 58 kts, max xwind 17 kts = just a smidge below 0.3.
Click to expand...
That stall speed seems a bit high for a Cherokee. Mine is about 50 knots but it’s a taper wing.
 
Sinistar said:
Thank you for enlightening me here!!! I always thought the stall speed was just how far out on a limb the manufacturer was will go - kinda like a Ford/Dodge/Chevy truck specs. Obviously their test pilot can land in even stronger crosswinds. I had no clue stall speed was included. When I ran this by my wife her first response was "Rudder authority, you might run out of it before aileron."
Click to expand...
Your wife’s response was better than my first instructor’s response which was: that’s all the wind they could find when doing test flights. The guy knows more about flying than I ever will but he wasn’t real big on design regs. :)
 
Clark1961 said:
I've heard the 210's crosswind capability described as 'legendary' and watched a 210 land in 26G30 knots direct crosswind with nary a bobble a couple weeks ago. When I landed in the same wind I got to do the landing three times. :D Oh well, at least all three landings only had one approach...
Click to expand...
So why is the 210 crosswind capability so much better than a 172 or 182. Is it because the landing speeds are higher or is there just way more rudder?
 
Rgbeard said:
Sinistar:

You've earned this from me:

2585233-stripes_lighten_up_francis.jpg
Click to expand...
Oh no, not Francis :eek: .

I did what any aspiring newbie pilot would do...I took a half day off yesterday and flew in winds at 12kts :)
 
Sinistar said:
So why is the 210 crosswind capability so much better than a 172 or 182. Is it because the landing speeds are higher or is there just way more rudder?
Click to expand...
I'd lean towards an "all of the above" answer but never have compared the rudder size and travel limits. Cessna's big singles certainly are capable aircraft in many regards.
 
Used to be in my Cherokee (and my little C150) that if the winds were that bad and I really had to get down I'd come in a few knots faster, increase effectiveness of the control surfaces. I did more than one landing where the winds overcame full rudder deflection. Coming in a bit faster fixed that, and the aircraft were draggy enough to scrub off the speed in ground effect safely. I hesitate to do that in my Mooney, damn thing would float all the way to Canada. Thankfully there are a couple of twelve thousand foot runways not far from my home airport should the need arise.
 
coloradobluesky said:
I landed in 33 knots crosswind component in my Husky. It was a steady wind. The rudder was all the way to the floor. So thats where the Husky runs out of rudder. Its the gusts that make it hard. I can usually handle winds in the 20's, when they get into the 30's it gets to be a no-go (or find a headwind runway). Even if you find a headwind runway, you still have to taxi.
Click to expand...

I landed my tw Maule in KEYW with a direct xwind like that. I recall it being something like 30G36 but in fact it was pretty steady. I had departed KOPF with full knowledge of the wind and a plan to return without landing if necessary.

Entering final I discovered I didn’t have enough rudder to keep it straight. I proceeded anyway with reflex flaps set; stalling in a 3 point is a non issue in that config. And the quirky little Maule still prefers 3 pointing even in high winds.

In the flare I found that I had just enough rudder to keep it straight so I landed. Wind gradient had reduced the reported wind just enough, even on that flat spit of land.

I got kudos from the tower then was told that a Mirage (!!) had ground looped earlier and pushed a gear up into the wing. They had to close for a bit while it was removed.

This was runway 27 but I was unable to make the downwind turn off the runway. A 270deg turn did the trick. Then the FBO left me to fend for myself getting it parked.

Fun flight it was. Had a great time at the top of the Bull.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Sinistar said:
I WAS thinking of flying on Friday or Saturday. So I do my usual, peak the NOAA hourly wx several days out to see if its even worth it. As you can see, our winter will never end :( .

Our runway is 13/31 and 75ft wide. It is a full crosswind component. So this has me curious, are there any of the more common GA planes that have demonstrated crosswind component of 20kts (not to mention the gusting over 30)? And how many of you out there would fly in this wind and that runway configuration in your GA plane?

View attachment 61804
Click to expand...

I'd do it. I've landed in direct crosswinds gusting to 35 knots in a 182 and upper 20s in the Mooney. I didn't run out of rudder on either one, so I haven't truly found the maximum crosswind...

The demonstrated crosswind component, as discussed elsewhere in this thread, is not a limitation, nor is it any indication of what a particular airplane can handle.

Now, what the pilot can handle is a different story. I wouldn't recommend a freshly minted PP who just bought themself a 182 run out and land in G35 crosswinds. Work up to it a couple knots at a time, and find what the limits of your own skill and comfort are as well as those of your airplane.
 
There's way more to this weather picture than the wind.

Temp/dewpoint spread implies clouds in the 2-3000' area. Sky coverage nearly 100%.
Chance of precip >60%, rain switching to snow.
Almost certainly will be icing in the cloud.
Winds 20G30

If you want to fly low and get beat up on a nasty, blustery day, it's doable if you're confident in your x-wind skills. But, for the love of god, why would you want to?

Where are you located, by the way? Maybe you should drive to the NE? We're forecast to have a high pressure system move in Friday night, so the weekend looks pretty good.
 
Eric Gleason said:
There's way more to this weather picture than the wind.

Temp/dewpoint spread implies clouds in the 2-3000' area. Sky coverage nearly 100%.
Chance of precip >60%, rain switching to snow.
Almost certainly will be icing in the cloud.
Winds 20G30

If you want to fly low and get beat up on a nasty, blustery day, it's doable if you're confident in your x-wind skills. But, for the love of god, why would you want to?

Where are you located, by the way? Maybe you should drive to the NE? We're forecast to have a high pressure system move in Friday night, so the weekend looks pretty good.
Click to expand...
Take a look at Post #50, I just waited until another day. I am way, way to inexperienced for that crosswind (gust or not). And with the winds so bad I didn't even bother looking at the temp/dewpoint spread for potential ceilings - that was irrelevant. Plus everyone was talking mega snow. Definetly not a flying day. Turns out no flying from Friday afternoon to Monday sometime.

I can say one thing about the forecast I originally posted. Even though is was out several days that plot and what actually happened where very close!

I am just west of the Twin Cities. That storm dumped about 14" of wet slushy snow at our house. At the airport a friend texted a picture of a few 5' drifts in front of our hangar raw (being on the North side sucks in the winter). The airport was closed for almost 2 days as the city gave precedence to city street snow removal first. It was probably one of the longest/heaviest snow falls I can remember. Thankfully it was now and not in January where it would have been 3ft and mega blizzard.
 
Did you say your runway is 3000 feet wide and 75 feet long? You will need about 35 MPH wind to TO and land on a 75 foot long runway!
 
Sinistar said:
Take a look at Post #50, I just waited until another day. I am way, way to inexperienced for that crosswind (gust or not). And with the winds so bad I didn't even bother looking at the temp/dewpoint spread for potential ceilings - that was irrelevant. Plus everyone was talking mega snow. Definetly not a flying day. Turns out no flying from Friday afternoon to Monday sometime.

I can say one thing about the forecast I originally posted. Even though is was out several days that plot and what actually happened where very close!

I am just west of the Twin Cities. That storm dumped about 14" of wet slushy snow at our house. At the airport a friend texted a picture of a few 5' drifts in front of our hangar raw (being on the North side sucks in the winter). The airport was closed for almost 2 days as the city gave precedence to city street snow removal first. It was probably one of the longest/heaviest snow falls I can remember. Thankfully it was now and not in January where it would have been 3ft and mega blizzard.
Click to expand...

Sorry about that, I missed it when I was skimming past the inevitable posts about taking off in a Cub across the runway. (Seriously, I think you need more like 150' in an unmodified Super Cub)

Where did that forecast chart come from? It's a good one, and I like it.
 
Eric Gleason said:
Sorry about that, I missed it when I was skimming past the inevitable posts about taking off in a Cub across the runway. (Seriously, I think you need more like 150' in an unmodified Super Cub)

Where did that forecast chart come from? It's a good one, and I like it.
Click to expand...
No problem.
That chart comes from NOAA.GOV
1.) Click on the Find Your Location on the right side
2.) Enter the location you want weather for
3.) Click on "See Full Forecast"
4.) On the right side under "More Information" click on hourly forecast, then tweak as you want

I mainly look at temp/dew-point spread, winds, precip potential. There is one for ceilings which has been good but just not far enough out to warrant not using TAF's and METAR's, aviationweather, etc.

I also like to re-adjust the time to start right at sunrise so skipping ahead 2 days is lined up nice. For all of my flying, especially cross countries for PPL I would look here about 4-6 days out to get a general idea, especially for putting in for time off work, instructor availability, etc.

When I get about 2 days out I load one for departure point, one for arrival point and one in the middle. If all still looks good I switch over the aviation weather tools for the last day. This method has worked pretty good for me so far. Its mainly for the 4+day best weather guess :)
 
Thanks for that detail. I'll look up those graphs tomorrow.

Do you also use the prog charts for your long range planning?
 
I would do a 30kt x-wind in most of the nosewheels I fly. Wouldn’t attempt it in any of the tailwheel I fly, however.
 
The thing about landing in high crosswinds is to make sure you're spring loaded for a go around and divert to a better runway alignment. I three-pointed my old Citabria in something like 20G35 direct crosswind in Orlando, but was totally prepared to divert to Sanford at the first sign of trouble. Had to turn 270 degrees left instead of 90 right to exit the runway, and the rest of the taxi was interesting.
 
Eric Gleason said:
Do you also use the prog charts for your long range planning?
Click to expand...
No - perhaps I should learn them better. During PPL training just the word "prog charts" made me fear failing the checkride - so only negative association! And I thought certain charts were going away...are prognostic charts among them?
 
Sinistar said:
No - perhaps I should learn them better. During PPL training just the word "prog charts" made me fear failing the checkride - so only negative association! And I thought certain charts were going away...are prognostic charts among them?
Click to expand...

Don’t think so. Booga booga.

What’s so scary about this nice little prog chart? You’ll hurt his feelings. Mean ol’ @Sinistar. :)

ac0bc3d67d0788f272014176c5c81bcd.jpg
 
Give me a 207 and I wouldn’t even blink....
That’s barely enough to get the weather rock moving!

If I’m just flying for fun however...I see no reason to go buzz around in that weather. A 30 max is about the most a 172 or any other light trainer will do.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top