Who was taught this (crosswind technique)

Aeronautik

Aeronautik

New Member
Just wondering, as I and a lot of people I've known have been taught this contrary to what the AFH says.

X/Wind takeoff: Aileron into the wind. As you accelerate, slowly remove the aileron and lift-off with ailerons neutral.

I was always taught this throughout my training and actually have always been doing it this way. It was continuously reinforced: "ailerons NEUTRAL on liftoff"...

However after another look at the AFH and some talk with others, it's preferred technique to lift off with the aileron still in place (I was always afraid of a windstrike when taking off with aileron correction).

Some even lift off with full aileron into the wind.

Anyone else taught what I was taught?
 
Aeronautik said:
X/Wind takeoff: Aileron into the wind. As you accelerate, slowly remove the aileron and lift-off with ailerons neutral.
...
Some even lift off with full aileron into the wind.
Click to expand...

In my limited experience, I've never heard of either technique. They both go to extremes.

I was taught that taking off is basically the opposite of landing in crosswinds.

In landing, you have partial aileron deflection in order to hold a slip and as your airspeed is lowered, you must roll the ailerons "into the wind" in order to get the same effect out of them. So as you slow to a stop on landing, you gradually roll the ailerons to a full deflection.

On takeoff, just do the opposite--start with a full deflection, then as you gain speed, they become more effective, therefore you roll them more *towards* neutral, but not all the way to the neutral position. After all, you're basically taking off in a slip, so you need to have some deflection to hold the slip.
 
Aeronautik said:
Just wondering, as I and a lot of people I've known have been taught this contrary to what the AFH says.

X/Wind takeoff: Aileron into the wind. As you accelerate, slowly remove the aileron and lift-off with ailerons neutral.
Click to expand...


That is pretty much how I was taught and how I teach it except I use full wind correction while in position and roll it out as my airspeed increases. At the point of rotation it isn't quite neutral because, well if it was, then you would just be using rudder and that isn't going to work. Just as you need more than rudder to do a good sideslip on landings, you need more than rudder to do a sideslip while taking off. I would say, my ailerons are close to neutral but while climbing out if you want to stay on center line and not drift you need to keep the wind correction in enough to maintain flight over the extended centerline.

Never really thought about calling it a sideslip on takeoff but the same theory applies... I fly out of an airport with two pretty busy parallel runways so center line is important to me.
 
I'm just embarassed, now. I have about 80 hrs of dual given, and up till this point, I've had about 2 private students (the rest IR), and I've taught them to lift-off neutral (I guess we've never had strong enough crosswinds here for us to actually skid on rotation when we put the ailerons to neutral so I could figure this out). But now I have to have them unlearn this. And I have to learn it myself. I was specifically taught, no in fact, it was POUNDED into me to always rotate with neutral. "As you accelerate, slowly bring the ailerons to neutral, and rotation at neutral" so as not to strike the wing (of course, when thinking about it, that wouldn't happen unless you use excessive amounts and the wind isn't that strong, otherwise it would just be counteracting the lift provided from upwind).
 
I always lift off and land neutral, this is just cause i just cant get myself to do anything else. I dont know why but just doesnt feel natural at all. Rudder has always been enough....well that and a 100 foot wide runway.
 
If done correctly you should still have a little aileron in during rotation to help keep that upwind wing down. Once mains are off, I teach to transition from a slip to a crab for the climbout.
 
FOD said:
If done correctly you should still have a little aileron in during rotation to help keep that upwind wing down. Once mains are off, I teach to transition from a slip to a crab for the climbout.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:
 
Champcar said:
I always lift off and land neutral, this is just cause i just cant get myself to do anything else. I dont know why but just doesnt feel natural at all. Rudder has always been enough....well that and a 100 foot wide runway.
Click to expand...
Maintenance must love you. You're not paying for the tires, right? Proper technique is overrated, anyways.

Think your technique would work landing a larger airplane on a 40' x 2900' strip with a 20 knot crosswind? Ummm, no. You'd be picking the seat cover out of your ass and dingweeds out of your landing gear (or worse).
 
I think it depends mostly on how strong the crosswinds are. You should be crabbing after you lift off with a crosswind, just how much depends on the strength of the winds.
One thing I've found my students doing is on particularly strong crosswind days during the takeoff roll, they freeze their controls and wind makes the aircraft act like a weathervane. This translates to a sudden turn into the wind on the runway, which they try to counteract with rudder only (or sometimes aileron in the wrong direction!).

Slowly rolling ailerons to neutral as the aircraft picks up speed works pretty well, but still have a little roll input left in before you lift off. As long as there is a conscious effort being put in to counteract the xwind's effects the aircraft should takeoff with little incident.

-ColM

EatSleepFly: Your avatar is hilarious!! :)
 
EatSleepFly said:
Think your technique would work landing a larger airplane on a 40' x 2900' strip with a 20 knot crosswind? Ummm, no. You'd be picking the seat cover out of your ass and dingweeds out of your landing gear (or worse).
Click to expand...
WEll i wouldnt try that landing cause I know I wouldnt be able make it. Its that simple....ofcourse you 135 drivers wouldnt know how to not fly into a unsafe situation :)
 
EatSleepFly said:
Maintenance must love you. You're not paying for the tires, right? Proper technique is overrated, anyways.
Click to expand...
No I just dont have enough experiance doing that. Im not going to try a technique thats new to me with no instructor...thats just not safe.
 
Champcar said:
. . . ofcourse you 135 drivers wouldnt know how to not fly into a unsafe situation :)
Click to expand...

40' X 2900" is unsafe?:confused:

I guess the fad of the week is to say silly things about freight dogs that make no sense . . .
 
Champcar said:
No I just dont have enough experiance doing that. Im not going to try a technique thats new to me with no instructor...thats just not safe.
Click to expand...

That means that you grab an instructor and go do it the correct way.

Champ, being a 135 pilot has nothing to do with this discussion. Being a pilot that doesn't know how to fly an airplane to Student Pilot standards IS . . . ;)
 
Yeah, I'm not even going to bother with a response. Ignorance is bliss.

Yet another reason to get working on my "project" I guess.

BTW Champcar- If you weren't taught that "technique" to begin with- you had a PISS POOR instructor! That's basic airmanship.
 
Well, here goes nothing. Although I have only 110 hours logged. I xcan with a certain level of confidence tell you that Flying here in Kansas, I can tell you plenty about Crosswind TO/Landings.

I had trouble with this myself, the takeoffs were actually more difficult than the landings in Crosswinds. After having a wing picked up on rotation and blown sideways about 50 at just above stall speed at K81, I decided to go over this again with my CFI. I also was under the impression that you neutralized the Ailerons prior to rotation. Well afteer having the crap scared out of me in those 25 kt crosswinds, I decided that there has to be a better way.

My CFI, said to go ahead and leave the ailerons rolled into the wind, rotate and lift off with the ailerons still rolled into the wind. I tried it in some good gusty direct crosswinds a few times since then, and it is way more manageable, in fact almost easy doing them that way. I compare it to when you master the wing low method on crosswind landings as opposed to the crab technique. The side loading is not an issue and you are in better command of the aircraft.

Give that a try, and I think you will like the results. :)
 
Wow. And once again we manage to prove why airlines prefer military pilots that have standardized and correct training (even if the pilots don't always apply it, at least they were TAUGHT it!).

Wow. This thread so highlights the problems with GA training in the U.S. Lack of standardization, lack of knowledge (like the dingbat instructor using the "equal transit theory" or "newton is correct, bernoulli is not" for aerodynamics. It never ceases to amaze me.

You would not do what is correct because you weren't taught that? I would suggest you hire an instructor to LEARN the correct technique BEFORE your next flight!
 
seagull said:
Wow. And once again we manage to prove why airlines prefer military pilots that have standardized and correct training (even if the pilots don't always apply it, at least they were TAUGHT it!).

Wow. This thread so highlights the problems with GA training in the U.S. Lack of standardization, lack of knowledge (like the dingbat instructor using the "equal transit theory" or "newton is correct, bernoulli is not" for aerodynamics. It never ceases to amaze me.

You would not do what is correct because you weren't taught that? I would suggest you hire an instructor to LEARN the correct technique BEFORE your next flight!
Click to expand...

Geez, when did GA piss off the military? I agree with the last paragraph, but I'm pretty sure that the airlines prefer "qualified" pilots.

And as for the standardization comment, its called the PTS. I'm pretty sure most (if not all) instructors refer to it when teaching someone to fly.

-ColM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top