New X-wind landing technique

[Mtns2Skies]

I'm in the process of doing my tailwheel transition in a 7KCAB Citabria. Rather than the typical rudder in and wing-low input for x-wind, The CFI had me do a no-rudder aileron turn to drop the upwind wing while in the flare. Because the turn was uncoordinated, the nose swung out and lined up with the runway and we touched down one wheel first, as a typical X-wind landing should.

Ever do this technique before? Would it work in typical training aircraft?

 

[Skip Miller]

I think your Citabria is yawing away from the wind due to adverse yaw. (But... I have no experience in a Citabria.) Typical trike trainers are designed to be so docile that adverse yaw is almost undetectable. So I think your new technique is not generally transferrable to the training fleet....

-Skip

 

[Fearless Tower]

I'm in the process of doing my tailwheel transition in a 7KCAB Citabria. Rather than the typical rudder in and wing-low input for x-wind, The CFI had me do a no-rudder aileron turn to drop the upwind wing while in the flare. Because the turn was uncoordinated, the nose swung out and lined up with the runway and we touched down one wheel first, as a typical X-wind landing should.

Ever do this technique before? Would it work in typical training aircraft?

Never tried it....but how well it would work would depend on the airplane. Just guessing it probably wouldn't work as well with an airplane that has differential aileron travel to minimize the adverse yaw.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

I've got a heap of instruction time in the 7 series, not sure I ever did that one, whatever lines her up before touch down works!

Like the others said, that might not work so well on a different plane, or with a different swinging prop, or a different x-wind.

 

[Mtns2Skies]

The instructor is older than dirt, great guy, but he does notoriously have an "older" teaching style. Not bad but unique. I figure it will give me an interesting perspective.

 

[NineThreeKilo]

Dont get too confident in a CFI based on age.

We used to get these old timers that had 4000hours, been flying since the 70s etc who caused all sorts of issues. Heck 4k hours into 52 years is only like 76hrs a YEAR, my buddies and I do more then that a month.

 

[Mtns2Skies]

He was flight leader for the Red Baron exhibition team flying Stearmans... He knows what is going on

 

[denverpilot]

He was flight leader for the Red Baron exhibition team flying Stearmans... He knows what is going on

Well that narrows it down.

If its who I think it is, tell him to say hi to Sharon. Well assuming nothing has happened there... Used to work with her many moons ago.

Remember talking at the office about the Florida 1998 crash like it was yesterday.

PM me who it is if you're okay with that. I'm curious if it's who I think it is. Haven't seen them in 20 years or so.

Never flew with him. Can't say as I ever had an opportunity.

 

[Clark1961]

He was flight leader for the Red Baron exhibition team flying Stearmans... He knows what is going on

Say hi to John from Clark.

 

[SkyHog]

I'd be worried of either over or under correcting with this technique and landing with a side load. It's interesting though.

 

[lr60plt]

Hmm...never heard of that one. Seems like if you upset the timing that could throw everything out of whack.

Not sure why one wouldn't just want to do a stabilized approach with correct x-wind technique.

 

[Mtns2Skies]

Not sure why one wouldn't just want to do a stabilized approach with correct x-wind technique.

Why would you assume this was is incorrect? Worked just fine for a complete newbie to the airplane. It is a different technique, different doesn't mean wrong.

 

[jesse]

I see absolutely no advantage to that technique. The last thing I want to do in a taildragger is have absolutely any doubt as to if I'm going straight when I touch down. That technique would provide a very small window of opportunity for the touchdown to occur. No thanks.

 

[brcase]

Hmm...never heard of that one. Seems like if you upset the timing that could throw everything out of whack.

Not sure why one wouldn't just want to do a stabilized approach with correct x-wind technique.

A stabilized approach in a crosswind sounds really good in theory but seldom actually works all the way to the ground since the wind usually changes pretty significantly the last 10 feet or so. You have probably noticed in a cross wind that you have to change the bank angle and consequently the rudder input just before touch down.

As to the OP's post it sounds just like the Crab approach and transitioning to the Wing Down touchdown just before touch down. It just happens in the Citabria it has enough adverse yaw that only minimal rudder input is required for the touchdown. Can't say I have ever heard it taught that way but it probably works just fine.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

 

[lr60plt]

I see absolutely no advantage to that technique. The last thing I want to do in a taildragger is have absolutely any doubt as to if I'm going straight when I touch down. That technique would provide a very small window of opportunity for the touchdown to occur. No thanks.

Exactly.

My comment in regards to a stabilized approach with correct xwind technique was two-part....not a stabilized approach to the assault. I meant it to read a stabilized appraoch....then (with) using correct xwind technique, my mistake in how i wrote it.

As mentioned the winds will be changing as you get close to the ground especially in gusty situations...what happens when you miss that small opportunity to utilize adverse yaw to touch down straight due to a gust? Are you going to keep going down the runway trying to swing the nose straight with adverse yaw? Sounds kind of ridiculous. I bet it might work for some, a lot of different things do...but i would still consider it "incorrect" in terms of teaching crosswind landings in a taildragger.

-Current Citabria instructor.

 

[Mtns2Skies]

As mentioned the winds will be changing as you get close to the ground especially in gusty situations...what happens when you miss that small opportunity to utilize adverse yaw to touch down straight due to a gust? Are you going to keep going down the runway trying to swing the nose straight with adverse yaw?

no... use rudder?

 

[lr60plt]

.....The CFI had me do a no-rudder aileron turn....

.....


So you are saying you DO use rudder while that upwind wing is lowered on touchdown....so how is this a "new landing technique" other than just realizing what adverse yaw does?

 

[whifferdill]

Mtns, your description is a little lacking. You state a "no rudder aileron turn". Are you actually turning the airplane or just dropping the upwind wing without a simultaneous opposite rudder input? Once your bank is set are you then applying opposite rudder, or simply timing the touchdown so that the upwind wheel makes contact right after the aileron input, before the airplane actually starts turning into the wind and getting you all messed up?

You're implying that you're not using the rudder at all during the approach/flare/touchdown process. What others are saying is that if your timing isn't perfect and you miss your small "window of opportunity" to get the airplane down during the brief moment or two the airplane is aligned and not drifting, then you're going to have some issues or traditional corrections to make. If what you really mean is that you're making the intial bank input without rudder (due to adverse yaw effect) and THEN applying opposite rudder to KEEP the nose straight, then it doesn't seem so unique, except that you're simply allowing the the adverse yaw to do what you'd otherwise do with the rudder in other airplanes. Not sure which one you mean. When it gets gusty/turbulent, you can't always plan your exact moment of touchdown due to gusts and balloons or sinkers. I could see this technique working fine in smooth x-wind...just like the pure rudder and no aileron "kick it out" method....as long as your timing is good.

Use whatever works for you. But I wouldn't necessarily teach that technique, since very few airplanes have as much adverse yaw as the Citabria, and it's just not going to transfer well to most other airplanes. This and the fact that it's only momentarily causing the airplane to track the runway without crab or drift in a x-wind.

 

[Silvaire]

I don't see this as being much different from traditional methods but, as noted, it's only going to work on airplanes that have an extreme amount of adverse yaw like Champs, Citabrias, Cubs etc. In those planes you must lead with coordinated rudder to make a smooth turn entry and once established in the bank you will be holding opposite aileron to maintain it. So, by inputting aileron without moving the rudder you are basically doing the same as applying opposite rudder in an aircraft that has very little adverse yaw. You're still inputting opposite rudder by holding it centered but not as much is needed.

A simple way to determine if this is going to work is to slow the aircraft down to approach speed at altitude and, while keeping the rudder centered, apply left aileron input and see which direction the nose goes. In a Champ, Citabria or Cub it will go right.

Now as to why you would want to go about it this way, because it seems you are consciously determined NOT to move the rudder, I'm not sure I get it. I normally don't think much about what my feet are doing in regards to the actual position of the rudder, they just go to wherever they need to go to keep the nose pointed straight down the runway.

Unless this is an exercise on how to land an airplane with a busted rudder cable....

 

[j1b3h0]

There are some airplanes in which ailerons are more effective at directional control (on the runway) than rudder. Weak rudder(s) and powerful ailerons - Twin Beech, for example. I used to think employing all that aileron into the crosswind was to keep the upwind wing from lifting up and creating lift. But it's the downward aileron on the other wing causing all that additional drag, and hence counteracting the weather-vaning vertical stabilizer that helps control direction during the landing or takeoff roll. So, kudos to your instructor for that trick.
But aligning the airplane to the runway, or "kicking the rudder" to straighten out the airplane is only part of the solution: one still has to adjust the bank to keep the airplane tracking over the centerline.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

There are some airplanes in which ailerons are more effective at directional control (on the runway) than rudder. Weak rudder(s) and powerful ailerons - Twin Beech, for example.

I've heard of this technique in relation to large twins like that before, too... But it certainly won't work with your average trainer, which is engineered to eliminate adverse yaw.

I can see it working somewhat on the Citabria, though. After all, "Citabria" is "Adverse Yaw" spelled backwards.

 

[Henning]

Dont get too confident in a CFI based on age.

We used to get these old timers that had 4000hours, been flying since the 70s etc who caused all sorts of issues. Heck 4k hours into 52 years is only like 76hrs a YEAR, my buddies and I do more then that a month.

You call them "old timers"? Old timers I flew with in the 90s started flying in the 30s and 40s and had 30,000 and 40,000. One of my CFIs had flown with Lindbergh in WWII for instruction. Old timers belong to the UFOs and OX-5s.

 

[WileyP]

...The CFI had me do a no-rudder aileron turn to drop the upwind wing while in the flare. Because the turn was uncoordinated, the nose swung out and lined up with the runway and we touched down one wheel first, as a typical X-wind landing should...

That'll work, but just for a moment. Assuming a wind from the right, you'd be crabbed to the right coming down final approach. As you begin to flare you apply right aileron pressure (into the wind) without the coordinated rudder input. Adverse yaw causes the nose to yaw left. So long as you touch down on the upwind wheel right away, okay, but you will still need to apply left rudder to keep that puppy straight on the runway!

I'd rather stabilize the approach further out than the flare. Use the rudder to align the aircraft's longitudinal axis with the runway and the aileron to counteract drift. As mentioned earlier, the crosswind will usually (usually) reduce as you reach the flare altitude and you will be able to reduce your inputs appropriately. But you will be in positive control of all three axes all the way through the approach, landing and after-landing rollout.

But that's just my humble opinion.

And above all,
FLY SAFE!

WileyP

PS: Ol' Joe Miller was a great example of the old, experienced instructor. He was the airport manager at ONP, had a couple gazillion hours logged (and a couple more not logged). He loved teaching and was really, really good at it. Oh, and his pilot certificate was signed by Orville Wright. RIP, Joe!

 

[ja_user]

You call them "old timers"? Old timers I flew with in the 90s started flying in the 30s and 40s and had 30,000 and 40,000. One of my CFIs had flown with Lindbergh in WWII for instruction. Old timers belong to the UFOs and OX-5s.

Are you older than Wayne?

 

[Henning]

Are you older than Wayne?

Nope, I just knew who to go learn from at the airport. I lucked into a very interesting group at LGB by giving an 'old timer' a hand hanging an engine on his Navion when I saw an 80+ year old man out on the ramp installing it himself. I was 25 at the time, only 47 now.

The guys you want to look for to learn from typically all belong to and organization referred to as the "QBs", Quiet Birdmen.