Oshkosh was crazy on a couple of days this year. Cross wind landings with gusts in the mid twenties! A lot of close calls and a few landing accidents. I thought this guy was going around on the first attempt but he tries to put the Bonanza down a second time. He was lucky! Go to 17:33 of this video. 

 

2 minutes ago, jrw4 said:

So true, plus (in some older models), one starts to run into problems associated with loss of elevator authority at normal landing speeds, which makes these activities even more exciting. I used to practice crosswind landings at KPAO in the afternoon when the onshore breeze kicked up and got good at it for a while. Then life intervened....

I took my boss up for a short flight in a C 152, years ago, and we landed at KPBI  rwy 9R ,with about a 12 mph crosswind component from the North. As we were approaching the runway, he freaked out because we were looking through the right side of the windscreen and side window  at the runway, and he was sure we were going to crash. I had to keep telling him, " We are fine, don't worry" I don't think he believed me. 😉

Anyone using the "sideslip method"? Ever since my flight training days I've been used to de-crabbing just before touchdown. 

1 hour ago, lwt1971 said:

That could be due to the well known ground handling issues, and the PMDG 737 not making use of the SU10 improvements for this (flight model tuning parameters) for this yet, see https://forum.pmdg.com/forum/main-forum/general-discussion-news-and-announcements/212095-new-ground-friction-variables-in-su10 ... The latest Fenix update does and it's markedly improved now without that ice skating feeling when encountering cross winds on the ground (don't know of any other aircraft default or 3rd party that makes use of these new features in their FM yet).

Thanks for the insight. Ill look into it.

13 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Anyone using the "sideslip method"? Ever since my flight training days I've been used to de-crabbing just before touchdown. 

Not so good for airliners, especially the newer ones with high bypass engines with little ground clearance. I guess it's too easy to ding the upwind engine in a side slip. Of course, even with a crab approach, one does kick out the crab in the instant before landing, but I doubt one uses much aileron in a MAX, for example to compensate for the side drift.

In GA aircraft, I guess I was never crazy about extended flight in a crossed control configuration. However, here's an FAA site that seems to recommend the sideslip

https://www.faasafety.gov/gslac/alc/course_content.aspx?cID=34&sID=167

This site does note that in strong winds, some aircraft will not have sufficient rudder authority to overcome the turning induced by the ailerons. Frankly, this was not something I was interested in testing at low altitudes.

I would add that if you feel that things are wrong in MSFS, there's a place to submit your complaints to the actual developers. Venting here will not get you any where or resolve what ever issues you have. Especially when you have a very subjective view. Us so called "Alleged real world pilots" come to these forums to add to the community and share our experiences because there are those who would unfortunately never get the experience. All they have is simulation. We collectively add to the community with a give and take mentality. Can you fully simulate flying with a simulator, no. They don't fully simulate it in a level D sim, it's more procedural based for qualification. There are so many aspects of weather that is not simulated and some of those items such as contaminated runways are hard to simulate. In fact, the FAA doesn't take a stance on it and refer you to the manufacturer's recommendation, which is simply a factor. It's too difficult to flight test contaminated runway conditions especially when the friction changes at varying temperatures.

Speaking of winds and gusts, when I was stationed at McGuire AFB flying C141Bs and KC10s, we had a hanger called big beige. It was big and beige lol. If you wanted a student to work on crosswinds, you wanted a right to left crosswind on the approach to runway 24. Between 1000 to 500ft, you would kick the AP off so that you could warm up your hands/feet to get a feel of what crosswind controls are needed. I'm a wing low method guy and stand by it. You would be drift killed with your controls and suddenly the plane would rapidly yaw and roll. This leads to dancing on the rudder pedals and yoke cardio as you try to find that new drift killed combination. All of this happening as the RADAR ALT call outs start. This was all due to the way the wind would funnel through hangers and become intensified passing big badge. It didn't take much wind and landing on gusty days made landing in those conditions a fight for your life. Most would prefer to do back end transition work at another location and shoot one to a full stop back home under those conditions. It was a basic case of mechanical turbulence that you won't find in simulation.  

Another item missing is wake turbulence. In the C141B, we would do 10 second interval formation departures. Basically, as the jet in front of you took the runway and started their roll, you taxied into position. You would hold the brakes and power up to TRT. The navigator would count down to 0 from 10 and call brake release. You would be literally rolling down the runway while the other jet was still rolling. If you were #2 on back, you encountered strong wake at lift off and would be going stop to stop trying to keep the wings level long enough to side step the stream and start the rejoin. We used same altitude formation using the SKE system, which means #3 on back would be in wake turbulence the whole flight. You would be in it during the low level route and airdrop over the drop zone. There was nothing better than flailing on the controls doing airdrops as the plane rolled, bucked and dropped due to wake and thermals. We all had to cross the same geographical position to ensure your loads fell within the bulls eye. You won't get that sudden snap or disturbance in clear air during the climb in MSFS. That was the indication that you just flew through someone's wake who is long gone. Imagine being in the weather(IMC) in a KC10 formation rejoining while painting the jet you are following with the weather RADAR. You are trying to keep that blip on the screen, judge the winds and get to the trail position. So many times you are turning trying to close and suddenly the jet snaps left and then right on you as you finally find that jet's wake. You try to use the winds on the EHSI to judge where the wake is drifting so that you can stay upwind of it. You won't find this in MSFS yet. There's a reason why wake turbulence is respected. 

There are many aspects of real world flying that are missing. Us so called "alleged real world pilots" push the developers to make changes so that all will get the same experience we have. Attacking us and others here will not solve your issue. What you say could never impact the real world experience we have because we do it for real. I recommend you go out and gain your experience the way we did so that you have better information to pass on to the developers.

Rick   

42 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Anyone using the "sideslip method"? Ever since my flight training days I've been used to de-crabbing just before touchdown. 

That is what I do, the de-crabbing, .  never felt comfortable with side slipping.  

8 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

That is what I do, the de-crabbing, .  never felt comfortable with side slipping.  

Yeah it's demanding flying with crossed controls for any extended time period. Just for fun I might try being in sideslip for a whole crosswind approach though. 

3 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Yeah it's demanding flying with crossed controls for any extended time period. Just for fun I might try being in sideslip for a whole crosswind approach though. 

Yeah, if you are crossed controlled,  and raise the nose into a stall, you will land alright, straight down. 😉

Edited October 5, 20223 yr by Bobsk8

Personally, I teach the sideslip (aka wing low) method vs. crab and kick. The rationale being that if I don’t have enough rudder authority for the cross wind, I want to know sooner rather than later in the approach. 

The MSFS 172 seems to have weird crosswind problems compared to other planes like the 152. I tried a 15 knot direct crosswind and it was impossible to go straight. From the moment it began to move it very suddenly turned into the wind so hard that no rudder input did anything good. The 152 or the Bonanza reacted much smoother and I was able to keep them on the centerline with no big problem.

To stay at least partially on topic: I really love the gusts.

29 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

Personally, I teach the sideslip (aka wing low) method vs. crab and kick. The rationale being that if I don’t have enough rudder authority for the cross wind, I want to know sooner rather than later in the approach. 

Had long discussions about his at an AOPA meeting, and the crab method, you will see when you are about ready to flare. If you can't align with the runway, go around.  With the sideslip, you may think you can line up with the runway, while up a few hundred feet, but things could quickly change when you are about ready to touch down. Two approaches to the same problem. 

Edited October 5, 20223 yr by Bobsk8

2 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Had long discussions about his at an AOPA meeting, and the crab method, you will see when you are about ready to flare. If you can't align with the runway, go around.  With the sideslip, you may thing you can line up with the runway, while up a few hundred feet, but things could quickly change when you are about ready to touch down. 

There are merits to both methods. However, when there is a crosswind, In a light GA plane you will land in a sideslip eventually (or not… and side load the word not allowed out of gear.)  I have found it more beneficial to my students to practice a sideslip longer on final and adjust for changing conditions as they descend. I have found that when a student is able to master the sideslip, all of their landings benefit. I also teach primarily and advanced Cirrus transition. Most SR22 and SR22T have automatic yaw dampeners that kick off at 200 AGL. Most of those pilots are more comfortable with crab and kick. Both are valid. 

 

7 hours ago, Jeeeno said:

Gusts and turbulence post SU10 is not correct because I want turbulence and gusts when there are turbulence and gusts not everywhere: and if that is too hard to understand for the alleged real world pilots, I'm sorry.

They are not everywhere. There is no evidence, that gusts are everywhere and all the time. How do I know? I did not encounter them during the last few flights.

 

6 hours ago, Jeeeno said:

I get turbulence and gusts when the metar says wind is 3 knots. But according to the alleged real world pilots it's correct (it's not, but let's them believe so)

Gusts strength does not necessarily correlate with wind strength. Also, in real world the weather changes first, then the metar. The wind does not know what the metar says.

 

6 hours ago, Jeeeno said:

then the real B737 has wrong physics. 

An aircraft does not "have" physics.

Physical laws are generic and the 737 adheres to them not different than any other plane.

6 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

And no, I’m not going to post a picture of my PPL license, lol 😂

Oh go on please! I feel lonely 😄