BigDuke6ixx

A plane flying in crosswind will not yaw in relation to the air mass it is flying in! It will appear to crab in relation to the ground though. You should stop talking off the top of your head and go do some research on the subject.

That's it.

Look, for the upteenth time, the plane will only feel gusts in an aerodynamic sense and those are only momentary in their effects and will tend to be cancelled out over time by lulls. You simple do not get a continuous aerodynamic effect from a crosswind because all the crosswind is doing is pushing the plane in the direction it's going at the speed it's going at. There is no need at all to cross control unless taking off or landing (and maybe to lose height in a hurry without gaining too much speed but that's another topic) because the tail isn't being pushed harder than the nose and there is no continuous force trying to rotate the plane!.

Only because you have change the heading to maintain the correct groundtrack. It's being claimed that you need to cross control to maintain this heading because the wind is trying to pivot the plane all the time while it is being influenced by a crosswind. They are claiming that a plane in flight in a crosswind is having its tail pushed around all the time. Utter rubbish. Apparently this is how you fly in a crosswind: Note the sustained cross control. Remember, he's talking about in free flight, cross country here, not during landing and takeoff. See windy's replies.

But according to you these forces continue acting on the plane for the duration of its encounter with a crosswind. Once up and flying with the inertia moments long gone, the wind does NOT continue to try to rotate the plane. Anyway, record a track and make a video or you have only words and no proof. Before you waste your time, you might want to review the track posted a few pages back, that actually proves you are completely wrong. And please stop quoting out of context sentences as proof that others agree with you..

The transient effects at rotation, from turbulence and as climbing through the wind gradient have been explained to them already, but they seem to be stuck on transmit. I mean, I've seen a house fly, I've even seen a horse fly but I ain't ever seen.... :noexpression:

I video of them spouting the aviation equivalent of flat Earth theorem would probably make my eyes and ears bleed.

There you go guys, this fella is an ex military and current 777 pilot and your ignorance has seen him off. Well done, you should all be proud. But explain to me how someone with his qualification can be, according to you, so completely wrong? I mean, he's go 10,000hrs of real flying yet you all know more? Take a step back and think, for flip's sake!

Someone did a track a few pages back proving that this nonsense doesn't happen. This guy has been told by several real pilots that he is mistaken in his observations and subsequent theorising. He simply doesn't know what he is talking about. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Sorry, but this is all completely wrong. There is no 'pivot point' around which the plane is rotated by a crosswind in flight.

We are not talking about the what happens during takeoff, we are talking about how a crosswind affects a plane in flight. Was my last statement about the 20kt crosswind correct or not? There isn't any confusion regarding crabbing and weathervaning, it's just that some people are insisting that a crosswind blows harder against the tail than the nose, thus causing a continuous rotation that the pilot must counter with control input. Some people have admitted their error, while some haven't.

A 20kt crosswind pushes any plane sideways at 20kts regardless of mass.

Sorry, but you still don't seem to have grasped the fact that the crosswind isn't having an aerodynamic affect which points the nose more into wind. There is no weathervane effect once airborne and the affects of gusts are only momentary. I think the rocket data is still confusing you, while in reality it's of no relevance. A crosswind only affects landing, take off and navigation, it does nothing to influence the relative wind, which is the air flowing from the nose to the tail, what we measure as airspeed. Nor is the crosswind exerting a continuous asymmetric force upon the airframe when airborne.

It was user error. Good luck getting anyone to admit fault around here.

It just hums a bit.

You explained everything perfectly it's just there are a couple of ppl in here with a totally ingrained flaw in their understanding of basic aerodynamics. They think that in flight the wind pushes continually harder against the big tail than the small nose. Until let go of that, they won't properly understand. And if they won't take your word for it, then they have real issues. I'd give them my credentials, but they'd probably throw them back in my face.

Except that you've just posted a video that shows only GS is affected by the wind. Look at the video again, into wind or with a tailwind, you had the same airspeed. What is it you don't understand about your own results?

Praise be.

You start off at 090 with the tailwind (GS 436) and end up at 270 into wind (GS 288 ) , so everything is as it should be. Clearly you need to have a good hard think about all this. Anyway, I'm looking forward to your weathervane video.

That's you changing the throttle to maintain the same GS (navigation issue) and not the wind having an aerodynamic affect on airspeed. You held about 280 all through your turn and the only thing that changed was the groundspeed. What exactly were you trying to prove?

No, completely wrong. The crosswind isn't pushing harder on the tail and trying to rotate the plane. Go and try it in the A-10 for yourself. Properly trimmed and flying hands off, you won't see a tendency for the plane to weathervane into the wind.

Yep, the only thing affected by the wind is the groundspeed as can clearly be seen before and after your 180 turn.

Right, we don't agree on the central point which is that you claim that a crosswind pushes harder against the tail of a plane in flight than it does the nose. Thus, according to you, causing the nose to point further and further into wind until it has weathervane completely into the headwind. I've got no better explanation than I've already given as to why this is completely wrong.

I agree with all that. I've already covered the transient effects from gusts in an early post, my point being that for every gust there's a lull and the net affect is close to nil over time.

This is a navigational issue and you compensate by pointing the nose more into the wind. The crosswind is not applying a continuous aerodynamic force to the plane. I don't think you understand what relative wind is versus just the wind (movement of an airmass in relation to the ground).