Then wrap it in speed tape. Nobody'll know the difference!!!

Looks like it was the 24 year old co-pilot flying. Another Ab Initio prodigy and poor CA oversight.

The A320 does not have castoring mains. Use of wing low technique (roll input) results in spoiler panel deflection on the upwind wing to assist in roll control, thereby reducing lift on the upwind wing. This causes proverse yaw, which opposes rudder input. It can also result in an unexpected "dipping" of the upwind wing close to the ground, potentially resulting in a situation like you see in the video.

I had to make 2 landings at the max demonstrated crosswind limit (33G38 at 90 degrees) in one day in the A320. On both landings, I used only rudder, no aileron, and they worked out fine. Same thing goes for takeoff. Rudder (with a little extra forward stick pressure) is sufficient to maintain centerline at the max demonstrated limit of 29G38.

I think you're missing the technique of "de-crab." The "de-crab" is also known as the "Crab and Kick" and basically the technique should be flown as - you fly the approach in a crab and "prior" to touchdown you input the rudder to align the longitudinal axis with the runway and the bank angle into the wind to prevent the drift. Not just align the longitudinal axis and maintain wings level and wait for impact! Effectively you transition from a "crab" to the "Side-slip" method; you're just doing it very late into the approach - Some pilot's will do it prior to the flare, some in the flare, some pretty much at touchdown (that variation WILL cause a sideload if you wait for impact.) But, the "De-crab" will not cause a side-load as you inferred it would, provided it's implemented prior to touchdown.
The whole reason to use the "de-crab" rather than the sideslip method is simply - drag (and the engine scraping the runway factor too!)
Keep in the mind, the sideslip method called that because effectively that's what it is, a sideslip - uncorrdinated flight creating more drag and you will typically need more power to maintain that attitude, however, if you fly the crab, you're flying coordinated until the last moment until you transition to the sideslip AND you won't have to reduce all that power you carried in the sideslip (which may cause you to float if you're late getting it reduced!) Anyway, just my two cents?

PS - The 737 does not have a castoring main gear for the one who asked? Not sure about whether it can take a landing in a crab anyway though?

I was just on another site where Lufthansa issued a statement praising the pilots for averting a disaster.

I'm not really sure I would agree. As a monday morning quarterback, it looked like a somewhat unstable approach followed by poor rudder and aileron technique resulting in a unstable flare and rollout and a subsequent wingtip strike.

I guess it could have been worse is what Lufthansa is contending.

FF

Not according to our manuals. The de-crab method is aircraft parallel to center line with enough aileron to land with the wings level. It maybe different for your company or fleet. I have never seen anyone fly an approach in a side-slip which as you stated would require more power. I have seen the majority of the pilots I fly with apply a side-slip just prior to the flare which does not require more power. Your de-crab method is what we call the side-slip method.

I'm pretty sure I'm not "missing the technique of the de-crab," as yoy say.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adolphus Coors

Not according to our manuals. The de-crab method is aircraft parallel to center line with enough aileron to land with the wings level. It maybe different for your company or fleet. I have never seen anyone fly an approach in a side-slip which as you stated would require more power. I have seen the majority of the pilots I fly with apply a side-slip just prior to the flare which does not require more power. Your de-crab method is what we call the side-slip method.

Mr. Coors (nice!),
Your company manuals may say whatever they say but they don't change basic aero. If you've got a crosswind to land in and you want to track the runway centerline through rollout, two things must happen.
1 - You've got to align the aircraft fuselage/gear with the runway with rudder.
2 - Since #1 will remove the portion of the aircraft's flight vector that was countering the crosswind, you must now drop the upwind wing with aileron to counter the drift.

I know you know both those things. Call it a "de-crab" or "side slip", whatever. Maybe whoever wrote your company manuals never landed in a significant crosswind. There's no way rudder to align and "enough aileron to land wings level" will hack it. It may work to some extent on a large majority of mild to moderate crosswinds due to the forgiving nature of most aircraft designs and a nice, wide, dry runway with lots of friction. However, you’re either not completely aligning with the runway and putting extra wear on your tires or you’re landing with a downwind vector that needs to be countered with steering once you’re on the runway. Either way, you’re not really dealing with the crosswind completely and kind of just hoping for the best. Try doing it in crosswinds approaching the design limits of the aircraft on a wet or snow covered runway and the drift induced by the lack of aileron may become a significant problem. Just my two cents on that.

It's not like company's are inventing new ways to land in crosswinds. You've got to align the aircraft with the runway with rudder and kill drift with upwind aileron - period-dot. When you put those flight controls in is really what we're all talking about (and apparently what you call the maneuver). I've landed 757, 767, A320/319, 737 and MD-11s performing the above maneuver in the flare with no problem. I prefer to do it that way. Now, thanks to Fedex company policy, I must establish those control inputs (they call it an “align maneuver”) no later than 100’ AGL. I’ve warmed up to doing it this way but I’d still prefer to do it in the flare. You’ve never seen someone fly an approach in a side slip because that’s not the way your company chooses to land their aircraft. When you do it at 200-ish feet, it absolutely induces extra drag that must be countered with additional power.

Cheers.

Coors,

If the "de-crab" method is defined as you say it is in your manual, then it is definitely a "different" definition than the "crab & kick" or the "crab method" as defined by the FAA that I was referring.

Here's the paragraph out of the FAA's Flight Training Handbook I was referencing - There are two usual methods of accomplishing a crosswind approach and landing—the crab method and the wing-low (sideslip) method. Although the crab method may be easier for the pilot to maintain during final approach, it requires a high degree of judgment and timing in removing the crab immediately prior to touchdown. The wing-low method is recommended in most cases, although a combination of both methods may be used. The "crab & kick" I was referring two IS the "crab method" sounds like you are referring to a "combination of both."

Anyway, I think we're actually trying to get to the same place. I do apologize for saying you were "missing the technique." I re-read that and that wasn't what I mean't (I was referring to the phraseology.) Anyway, so long as we're both aligned and tracking down the runway at touchdown and during rollout, I guess it really doesn't matter how we got there; end result's the same!

There is one thing that everybody is forgetting, it is Newton's second law. Objects in motion tend to stay in motion. Objects at rest tend to stay at rest. An airplane that puts rudder in at the last minute during landing has a significant delay time before the crosswind affects the aircraft. Therefore kicking the rudder and keeping the upwind wing level does not produce side loads and makes for a good landing. But of course this changes with lighter or heaver aircraft.

Bingo! Seriously, great post!!