| Re: Ack!! video A320 xwind in Germany |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: rec.aviation.ifr · Group Profile
Author: Bertie the BunyipBertie the Bunyip Date: Mar 3, 2008 22:19
Jim Logajan Lugoj.com> wrote in
news:Xns9A56851BEB9ABJamesLLugojcom@216.168.3.30:
> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:>> Jim Logajan Lugoj.com> wrote in
>> news:Xns9A567A073C7F4JamesLLugojcom@216.168.3.30:
>> >>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:>>>> "gatt" godhateskansas.org> wrote in news:13sol8u8jlhokb5
>>>> @corp.supernews.com:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> Wasn't so much the crosswind as the technique used to deal with it.
>>>
>>> Perhaps so - but it's been alleged there was a wind gust of 155 mph:
>>
>> Nah. has to be a misprint. probably 55 mph.
>>
>> He may have encountered a gust at that point, but it wouldn't have
>> done
>> that to the airplane.
>>
>> I've flown smaller in heavier winds than that.
>> In fact, I was flying in that storm not a million miles from where he
>> was. Our runway was more aligned with the wind than his was, though.
>> We were getting 50 plus in gusts about twenty degrees off with a
>> baseline of about 38.
>
> This article has more details that do seem to suggest a misreporting
(if
the
> strength of storm winds near the airport at 250 kilometers-per-hour
(155
> miles per hour)."
Yeah, I think there were regions that did get winds of near that
strenght, but even leaving the reporting aside, it's pretty plain to see
that it;s the airplane itself causing those gyrations, not the wind. If
you eliminate the ground from that picture and just look at the
airplane's control deflections. wind or no wind it will do just what it
did if the rudder is kicked with nothing to stop the roll.
Bertie
>
| 
