What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

RV-9A Crosswind Component

Rick_Luck

Member
What is generally considered the crosswind component for a 9A? I've never seen a figure for this. I know as pilots, we all set our own limitations but I'm wondering what is considered the crosswind component for the aircraft.
 
When I asked early on I was told they don't publish for liability or some such...

So it's up to us to test.

My demonstrated is 22kts gusting to 32kts at 90deg. It's a fun ride on days like that.
 
Wow - that's not bad. I landed a c172 last week in Durango, CO with 25 gusting 32 60 degrees left, that wasn't much fun.
 
I don't know about the -9A

but in my -7A I'm out of rudder at about 18-20 knots 90 degree crosswind (I have the original rudder)
 
hecilopter said:
but in my -7A I'm out of rudder at about 18-20 knots 90 degree crosswind (I have the original rudder)
That's OK - last week I was out of rudder about 10 above touchdown speed - went from one side of the runway to the other, but kept it on....
 
With or without flaps?

I've landed my 9A before where full rudder was questionable on final due to the strong crosswind. I rode it out until just above the runway to see if the crosswind settled down closer to the ground and everything worked out. The interesting part was that a friend in his 172 landed right behind me and we were talking about the crosswind and as an 80 hour pilot he didn't think it was any big deal. He said that he was not using full rudder or even close to it. This just didn't seem possible looking at his rudder and then the massive rudder on the 9A compared to the size of the plane. Since then I've started using little or no flaps and the wind the plane can handle is dramatically better.


Best,
 
Don't know if this has been mentioned before, but in my -6 the aileron travel was limited due to my thighs getting in the way of the stick. Never had any problem keeping her lined up straight with rudder, but drift was an issue for me with a crosswind component over 15 knots.
 
On the edge

Bryan Wood said:
The interesting part was that a friend in his 172 landed right behind me and we were talking about the crosswind and as an 80 hour pilot he didn't think it was any big deal. He said that he was not using full rudder or even close to it. This just didn't seem possible looking at his rudder and then the massive rudder on the 9A compared to the size of the plane. Since then I've started using little or no flaps and the wind the plane can handle is dramatically better.
Best,

When pilots talk about landing in 20kts gusting 30kts....well that is more than likely just 20 kts...and probably less if the wind is not all crosswind.

Having said that, I was once forced to land a 182R in a real 90 degree 35 kt crosswind. So it can be done in that model but I'm not planning on doing it again. It was right on the edge.

Having said that I would imagine that the crosswind capacity of the RV(A) series would have to be better than the RV taildraggers...for obvious reasons.
 
Not sure if I agree entirely that cross-wind component is less for taildragger than tricycle. Same rudder available to keep the plane lined up with runway and same aileron to correct for drift. However, when crosswind component is exceeded, or if pilot skills are lacking there is greater likelihood of a mishap in the taildragger due to its less forgiving nature.
 
Confused

hiland said:
Not sure if I agree entirely that cross-wind component is less for taildragger than tricycle. Same rudder available to keep the plane lined up with runway and same aileron to correct for drift. However, when crosswind component is exceeded, or if pilot skills are lacking there is greater likelihood of a mishap in the taildragger due to its less forgiving nature.


Let me get this right. On the one hand you're saying that you do not agree that the cross wind component would be less for a taildragger than a tricycle (of the same model). On the other hand (in the same paragraph) you're saying that if the crosswind component is exceeded there is "a greater likelihood of a mishap in the taildragger due to its less forgiving nature".

Either I'm totally confused or you're totally confused.
 
I've been able to handle any wind in my RV-4 that my buddy could handle in his RV-6A. In either plane if your skill isn't up to high crosswind components you're probably going to get bitten. If on the ground stay on the ground, if in flight find an airport with a more favorable runway.
 
Captain Avgas said:
Let me get this right. On the one hand you're saying that you do not agree that the cross wind component would be less for a taildragger than a tricycle (of the same model). On the other hand (in the same paragraph) you're saying that if the crosswind component is exceeded there is "a greater likelihood of a mishap in the taildragger due to its less forgiving nature".

Either I'm totally confused or you're totally confused.

My "definition" of crosswind component capability is the amount of direct crosswind the plane can handle with full control inputs and remain lined up straight with the runway without drifting. If you compare an RV6 versus and RV6A, for example, they should both handle the same crosswind component until you either drift or crab. But if you exceed that point and start drifting and/ or crabbing at touchdown, the 6A is going to be more forgiving due to it's landing gear configuration. Hope that clears things up.
 
Back
Top