Hi Lee,

I'm hoping what was learned here, and what should be evident to all, is that one SHOULD NOT play "test pilot" and takeoff/land in such direct crosswinds...it's risky and dangerous for oneself, the plane, and those with you or on the ground when pilots push or exceed safety limits. This applies to both RC and GA. I'm not sure about 35 years ago, but today there are MANY airports with services/fuel within 1 hour reserves of Hays (KHYS)...several with intersecting runways with different heading options. ([link=http://skyvector.com/#45-19-3-3806-1247]See www.SkyVector.com[/link]) I wouldn't be surprised if there were better options at the time. Proper flight and weather planning would have probably helped avoid this scenario with the tools available today, but I assume METAR's/TAF's and FSS were available back then too.

I live in So. Cal and deal with the infamous Santa Ana winds. Most pilots out here set personal limits of when they should/should not fly. While I for one have not been to Hays, I have been to Independence KS (KIDP) and the area South and East of Hays on a long X-Country. At Hays, Runway 16/34 is 6500 x 100 ft while Runway 4/22 is 4500 x 75 ft...either plenty wide and long for a 182 to land in any configuration. The direct crosswind would have been coming at you from around 257T if landing on 16/34 (167T/347T). Using Runway 22 (228T) would have been much better giving you a 29 degree crosswind either direction (instead of 90 degrees)...yielding you 31 knots or so to work with within the maximum demonstrated crosswind component of 15 knots. Even then, a landing on 22 wouldn't be safe if the wind was gusting higher than that. Yes, Cessna POH charts reflect maximum "demonstrated" crosswind velocity while noting that 15 knots is "not a limitation", but it is there as a guideline for your and others safety. Yes, you landed without injury to yourself or others around you, but that should not condone such attempts. Just because one person pulled it off does not mean everybody else should be encouraged to attempt it too...high speeds and crosswinds are how people get killed or injured. I'm certain the NTSB would blame and find fault with any pilot for flying in the scenario described if one hurt/killed themselves or others attempting a takeoff/landing in unsafe conditions...simple fact. "Lady Luck" should only be called upon as a copilot during in-flight emergency situations. With 1-hour reserves and 120-150nm range, one would be hard pressed to justify not making a diversion elsewhere...even 35 years ago...to a airport that had no fuel if need be! Of all the Pilots, CFI, CFII, and Master Flight Instructors I know, they would never condone, support, or encourage such flying practices. I understand how your crosswind flying approaches work, but the risk factor goes up exponentially when pilots ignore or push beyond Operating Limitations and POH specs for your particular aircraft. Those limits are put in place to account for the unseen (ie. wind shear, structural integrity, etc). Beyond an emergency situation, there is no excuse to attempt such a landing...and not having "been there and done it" doesn't make one less of a pilot. In fact, I'd say it makes that pilot smarter and safer.

Lee, it may be easy for some of us to chide you over your example with 20/20 hindsight, so in that sense it may not be fair as we were not there at the time to see/experience existing conditions. Perhaps we lost something in communication and things sound worse than they actually were, but we're just going off what you said. What I think some of us are reacting to is that you 'seem' to encourage and support what many of us would consider reckless piloting and decision making. What you did is not safe, nor should it be promoted. Fair enough? Agree/disagree? You say you learned from the incident, but what exactly did you learn? Did you learn you can push the envelope and make unsafe situations work, thus reinforcing your approach to flying (ie. you would do it again), or did you learn from what happened and gained a new/healthy respect for wind and weather (ie. you would make changes in your preflighting and flying to ensure that situation never happened again)? GA/RC pilots alike, I think the latter is how we should all approach flying to keep people safe and incidents/accidents low. Otherwise, we risk forfeiting the existing freedoms we currently have in these industries. It just takes one careless person's mistake to have an industry regulated up the yingyang through the public at large. The F-18 crash over here at Miramar the other month is a good example of a situation where a pilots decision making and carelessness caused multiple deaths, the loss of a plane, and public outrage...all while the pilot survived. That situation shows us how we all need to be vigilant to make competent decisions, follow checklists and procedures, etc...instead of "pushing it".

I hope you get where I'm coming from. I'm not saying all this to badger you with criticism or judgment, but rather, I want to ensure this discussion is instructional in keeping operations and people safe...RC and GA. Thanks for your understanding!

Peter