Simviation Forums

What settings do you guys use to setup for crosswind landings?

What exactly do you mean? Settings for what?

What exactly do you mean? Settings for what?

In the weather setting of FS2004. Do I set the wind to 25 kts or higher?

If you are a started I would say start of with 1KNT of wind then build you'r way up, thats my say as thats in  AF thats how I learned cross-winds.

Tom.

It depends on what you are flying too, somewhat.  Generally, a faster airplane can handle be bit more crosswind than something slower.  I believe the maximum crosswind component for a 747 is said to be around 30 kts, whereas in a C172, the max crosswind component is around 15 kts.  That doesn't mean you can't land with more crosswind, it just means that that was the maximum crosswind component that was tested by the designer.  If you're just starting out with crosswinds, I would start around 5 kt direct crosswind, so you can start to see what the aircraft does in the wind, and you can just keep adding on.  That's just my opinion.

I wouldn't necessarily start with a direct crosswind, either. Try twenty or so degrees off the runway heading first.

[quote]

Like you said it is the max crosswind tested and was still able to land. I for one would not suggest that you never exceed the max crosswind componet on any aircraft. One part of any crosswind is the tail wind component and you do not want to land with a tail wind as that can be very dangerous.

Sometimes landing wit h a tailwind may be necessary, like in an airport with an ILS on only one runway and with visibility below minimum for a visual on the other. The Very Important Thing is that said tailwind component has not to be above what the plane builder say it's the maximum allowed.


If above max allowed, then its the other runway, or an alternate.


As for landing in a crosswind, I've found that the freeware Beluga under X-plane is one of the most incredible beasts to handle in a crosswind situation (not to talk about flying in a mildly turbulent weather... luckily I don't get seasick, or airsick in this case ). It just simply seems something out of one of those clips on FL350.com with planes landing in borderline strong crosswind, and this only with 5 knots vectored at square 90

Sometimes landing wit h a tailwind may be necessary, like in an airport with an ILS on only one runway and with visibility below minimum for a visual on the other. The Very Important Thing is that said tailwind component has not to be above what the plane builder say it's the maximum allowed.

Usually if there's one runway with an ILS, you can do a localizer back-course approach into the opposite runway, and it's just like a localizer/DME approach, except the localizer needle moves opposite the way it normally does.  But you're right, there's still instances where there is only one direction to take-off and land in, usually where the surrounding terrain closes in on the airport.


Here's an example of a localizer back-course approach at Rockford Int'l (KRFD)

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0704/00954LBC19.PDF

Sometimes landing wit h a tailwind may be necessary, like in an airport with an ILS on only one runway and with visibility below minimum for a visual on the other. The Very Important Thing is that said tailwind component has not to be above what the plane builder say it's the maximum allowed.

Usually if there's one runway with an ILS, you can do a localizer back-course approach into the opposite runway, and it's just like a localizer/DME approach, except the localizer needle moves opposite the way it normally does.

Sometimes landing wit h a tailwind may be necessary, like in an airport with an ILS on only one runway and with visibility below minimum for a visual on the other. The Very Important Thing is that said tailwind component has not to be above what the plane builder say it's the maximum allowed.

Usually if there's one runway with an ILS, you can do a localizer back-course approach into the opposite runway, and it's just like a localizer/DME approach, except the localizer needle moves opposite the way it normally does.  But you're right, there's still instances where there is only one direction to take-off and land in, usually where the surrounding terrain closes in on the airport.


Here's an example of a localizer back-course approach at Rockford Int'l (KRFD)

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0704/00954LBC19.PDF

And in some countries (such as mine) LOC Backcourses are forbidden to perform.  :-X
And btw, the needle dont spin the other way if you flip the HSI 180 degrees.  :D

Regardless from the lawfulness or not of the backcourse approach (it is expressly illegal here in Italy too), never forget that it's a non precision approach, and in a situation where visibility is an issue its minimums are no different than a VOR-DME (this is the reason that in real life LIRN lately it's been installed an ILS on the runway 6 too, sending the old VOR-DME 6 on POM VOR into the back-up approaches when and if the ILS's are out of commission).

It's one of the worst issues with default ATC of FS (from 2002 to the most actual) that it suffices a fraction of knot on the wrong direction and no matter if the visibility grants for a complete autoland in CAT IIIc on the only ILS, to the visual on the other runway you go. And if you insist in wanting a ILS on the runway they don't want to give you, they order you to make a circle to land on the non ILS runway...

...in a CAT IIIc...

...a circle to land...

I'd like to know who certified those idiots in the tower. Not even the traffic of ants should they be allowed to direct.

This is why I found the workaround I explained in another thread. After the last vector to the ILS beam, when told to switch on the tower, the hell with it, forgot to switch, and land on my own. Unchallenged.

I have to say many a time at Genova and Venezia ATC have given the instruction to circle to land. I just ignore it and play chicken with any a/c that happens to be thundering down the rwy in my direction. Amazing what one can do in a sim!!!!!!
I really do wish that in any future releases the problems with ATC are addressed and that we can fly proper SIDS and STARS with speed advisories.
Vololiberista

I really do wish that in any future releases the problems with ATC are addressed and that we can fly proper SIDS and STARS with speed advisories.

Don't get me started, Volo. Just don't get me started.


Been POed to death about this with you-know-who. Better buy Radar Contact and forget about M$ ATC.