Pilot nails sideways landing in 40-knot crosswinds at Bristol Airport

My wife just sent this to me. Very impressive landing.


Just wandering what is the max x/wind for that airframe.

Whilst great it got down, the fact that its all over the news with a verbalised gust of 40knots may make a few peeps in management cringe if its above landing limitations.

1 Like

Bl00dy Heck!

My mind is boggling thinking of the loads placed on the undercarriage :hushed:

Wonder if the passengers on the right side of the aircraft thought it a bit odd that they were able to look right down the runway on the approach?


The RWY at Bristol runs east/west, and I think they say winds are due south 180/26G40. That is the maximum winds last two minutes, and is usually what limits your landing calculations, including gust.

I don’t know the max demonstrated x-wind component of that aircraft, but I know in my aircraft it’s 36kts. 32 on a wet RWY. While my aircraft doesn’t approve of landing in a crab (sideways), I know these big birds do. There are limits, of course.


Not just that, the side loading on those tyres is tremendous… The plane didn’t look too happy with this landing.

1 Like

Its not called limitation it is called this :slight_smile:


While that is true, for all practical purposes it is a limit and you should hav a very good reason to exceed it.
If you do exceed it, and something breaks, what are you going to say? Nah, I thought I could do better than the producers testpilots… :wink:

The max crab angle is a limit, though. Exceed that, and @TheAlmightySnark and his friends will have to come and change all of the tires. And they will do so with a smile :wink:


Yes, and we use our friendship tooling as well to amend some of the root causes of the blown tyre issue!


Bullet proof flight deck doors really is a blessing! :wink:


Yeah, nice door you’ve got there… Would be a shame if there would be anything to happen to it eeh? Capiche? :wink:

1 Like

Max demonstrated x-wind is a certification process of an aircraft. This is done with Poo hot pilots who are very experienced. And yes a plane can land outside of these limits…

… HOWEVER… and here is the gotcha.

The plane world is supposed to be a non blame culture and that is a load of croc.

If you land a plane above max demonstrated x-wind and the plane gets some damage or worse a passenger gets injured, do you think the word “DEMONSTRATED” will stand up in a court of law?

You will get nailed by the company and by the government and have zero recourse unless on a mayday. Simply put your career and butt will be firmly nailed to a wall.

So with that in mind, that word “demonstrated” is actually a limit. A limit to the legality of your landing.

EGGD is a nightmare generally, in that it is on top a steep hill which means it is nearly always in cloud, the runway slopes like a black diamond run and it really isn’t that close to Bristol to be handy either. 9/27 layout when the strongest winds come from the north as well. I’ve flown out of there a bit and always disliked it.

Given that it is the UK, and were a lot of alternatives to safely land at in that wind, I wonder if a few of these budget/regional airlines struggling to make a buck are pressuring the pilots to commit to landings where it would be better to skip? I know with Easyjet / Ryanair and the like there were stories of pilots having to pay for fuel on personal credit cards…

1 Like

I have it on good authority that doesn’t happen at easyjet, and its probably firmly linked to that conspiracy radio talk show called “galley fm”.

Easyjet is not short of a buck and was even listed in the top 500 companies. I can’t comment for Ryanair, but so i am led to believe, they have more cash hanging around than easyjet.

I think the general perception of budget airlines is sorely misconstrued. You will find that companies like those make a very hefty profits not because their pilots are forced to pay for fuel, but instead cut out a lot of un-needed fat in company structure and operations. This is why we see legacy carriers today trying to emulate that which airlines like easyjet are doing now.

Also on good authority, i can safely say for easyjet, that at no time is there ever a frown on taking more fuel when you give a reason to do so.


Fair enough @Bogusheadbox - just my idle and uneducated speculation and I defer to your experience on this. Was trying to figure out why that Tui operator was so keen to get down when in the UK it is hard to see the ground from all the runways nearby :slight_smile:

Well, it depends on who you are flying for, and where in the world you happen to be when you screw up :slight_smile:

As for Low cost operators, I can only agree.
I have friends in both Easy and Ryan. They don’t skimp on operational safety.
If you feel you need more fuel than the flightplan says, you are welcome to do so. But you may have to offer a reason. The operational fuel requirements already have margins. However, some days it is prudent with larger margins, and those days you take extra. But it doesn’t make sense to take 500kg extra every day, just because you feel like it. Now, pilots being pilots, there have been base captains with more or less good ideas about healthy competition, where the top three fuel savers were posted on the wall, for instance. Tell a pilot there’s a competition going on, and…you know. :wink:

1- Go 757!
2- Long lenses really distort angles.
3- Wet runways are a big help in a crosswind.

It was a good landing for sure and a nice demonstration of the kick-out (no slip) crosswind technique. But it was probably the 200th such landing in the UK that day.

1 Like

Its all good mate.

I am not sure, why he continued. Maybe everything was within the pilots and companies limits? its all speculative from the video.

At the end of the day, safe outcome and thats all we really want.

1 Like

THAT is the sort of idea from which disasters a born. (Not you Troll). Can you imagine a brand-spanking new FO who’s already intimidated by the job? Now he has to face the decision-making of a Captain who has his name in lights. It just makes that FO a tiny bit less likely to voice his discomfort. Not only that, but dispatchers punch out a dozen flights in a busy hour. They don’t have time to consider the details the way the operating crew do. I am not dissing dispatchers but this is the simple truth. I don’t often add fuel, but not once in my career have I been asked to explain why I wanted more. I guess I am just grateful to be working where I do.