|
Here is my take. I have manuals of many of those aircraft as well as many other W.W.II aircraft. The common theme for all of them is that there are generally no published crosswind limitations - at least in the official Pilot Operating Handbooks. Now, granted, maybe there were published limits at the local level or the RAG's prior to employment to the operational units, I don't know.
From my many manuals that I have, I have come to the following conclusions:
1) In almost all U.S. W.W.II era flight manuals, there are no published limits. Remember, this was a different era back then. It was all about pumping out the most amount of aircraft and trained pilots to the fronts. Safety was not a primary consideration because both were considered "disposable" and easily replaceable.
2) Due to this mindset, I've never seen published crosswind limits in any of the POH's that I have for those aircraft and even Army Air Corps aircraft as well. Aviation safety, as we know it today, didn't really become a primary consideration until after the Korean War. In the manuals I have, there seems to be a marked difference from about 1954 and onwards. It was at this point, that safety, performance and operating limitations seemed to play a more prominent role in being published in many of these manuals. I'm guessing a lot of that has to do with the amount of time it took to actually flight test crosswind limitations at Pax River and/or Muroc back then. With the war effort in full swing, the thought of wasting valuable test and engineering time on something so seemingly insignificant to saving lives was probably considered trivial. Different era, different mindset type of thing.
3) I have many friends who fly many different warbirds. Anytime I ask them a question like "what is your crosswind limitation on this aircraft?", I usually get an answer like, "Well, I start feeling uncomfortable when the crosswind component starts approaching XX knots". The way they answer that indicates to me that it is an unknown, and completely dependent upon pilot experience and comfort level. This is in synch with #2 from above.
4) Some organizations do have published limits on those aircraft you mention. They are "in-house" numbers developed for the experience level of the pilots that fly their aircraft. As an example, the CAF, has definite limits. I know a pilot who used to fly their Wildcat. IIRC, he told me that their crosswind limits are really low for that aircraft - something like 4 knots crosswind component from the left and 7 or 8 from the right, or something similar. He told me that the aircraft is capable of more, but they just try to have conservative limits since sometimes they have relatively inexperienced Wildcat pilots flying the aircraft.
5) I don't think you will find any definite published limits in any of the POH's from those aircraft, unless they were published in relatively "modern" times, like post-Korean War era or later. I don't have an AD-4 POH, but I do have a '72 version for the A-1 E/G/H/J POH. In there it states that the maximum recommended limit is 20 knots of crosswind component for the Skyraider.
6) Because it appears that virtually none of these aircraft have been officially tested to their crosswind limitations during flight testing, it all boils down to the experience and comfort level of the pilot flying it. When I learned how to fly taildraggers many years ago, my instructor, a former W.W.II Pilot, told me the following when I asked him the crosswind limitation on the aircraft I was flying:
"Wheel land the aircraft and do whatever it takes utilizing opposite rudder and aileron into the wind to keep the aircraft tracking straight with no drift, no crab and no sideload. If you have not run out of either rudder or aileron authority, you can attempt the landing. If you are getting close to running out or have gusty winds, or it exceeds your comfort level, go-around and divert to somewhere else."
I've used that as my mantra for flying various taildraggers over the years and it appears to work. That might be the mindset one could use when flying some of these old aircraft. I would also go seek the pilots who have a lot of hours in these aircraft. Undoubtedly, they have experiences that can give you some sense of what maximum crosswind limitations to use.
7) Even if you have some definite limitation numbers, you can exceed them by using very advanced landing techniques. I learned to fly one of my taildraggers by employing an old Bushpilot trick of landing in a "curved approach" where you don't land in a straight line. You can either land diagonally across the runway, or land in a curved ground track starting on the downwind side of the runway and finishing on the upside side. Both of these techniques can decrease the effective crosswind component substantially and allow you to land with a crosswind out of limits. As both of these are very advanced techniques, they are not something to be used lightly. Even though I can employ them, I've never had to use them out of necessity and consider them "emergency use" maneuvers. I would only use these if I absolutely had to get the aircraft on the ground right away or didn't have enough gas to divert. Then, of course, for multi-engine aircraft, you can use asymmetrical power settings to negate crosswind effects. As you know, there are many, many tricks you can use to help you out to decrease the effective crosswind component, thus rendering crosswind limitations to guidance and not necessarily hard limits, never to be crossed.
8. As far as a "modern limitation", that is completely dependent upon a multitude of variables - too many to count. I would say, however, that every aircraft is probably different and should have different limits. In my opinion, I would be dead set against a "blanket limit" applicable to all aircraft. Every aircraft is unique and should have limitations reflecting that. If all aircraft were the same, the FAA would not require specific, individualized training for aircraft and things such as "type ratings", "EAA's", "tailwheel endorsements", "complex endorsements", etc., wouldn't exist.
Just my 2 cents, for whatever that's worth.
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
