Narrative:

Student and CFI were practicing student's landings on runway xxr at ZZZ. Prior to the flight; CFI obtained a weather briefing that indicated manageable wind conditions were forecast for the flight. Student was preparing for his first progress check (pre-solo) and working on demonstrating control of the airplane in the traffic pattern; during approach to land; and during the stages of landing. During the first three touch-and-go landings; wind was calm and student made successful and stabilized approaches and landings. CFI allowed student to fly the airplane with minimal assistance throughout the flight. During the downwind leg prior to the incident; wind was reported by tower as a direct crosswind (040 @ 9 kts). CFI allowed student to continue to fly the airplane in order to evaluate the student's crosswind landing skills. Student had trouble with centerline control on final and CFI took control of the airplane; guiding the airplane back toward centerline before giving control back to the student. Student entered ground effect off centerline; regained centerline in the flare; but touched down just off centerline. Student did not continue to use crosswind correction during ground roll and both CFI and student observed an unexpected gust of wind; causing a wing to rise during the ground roll. CFI did not correct in-time and the airplane continued to veer from centerline further until it left the runway and rolled into the grass and down a shallow embankment. Both CFI and student were uninjured and the plane rolled to a stop in the grass. Following this; CFI shut the engine down and both occupants exited the aircraft safely. Maintenance personnel from the flight school inspected the aircraft and runway 10 minutes later and observed no damage to the aircraft or runway environment.in the future; this could be corrected by stopping the chain of events that lead to the incident. CFI should have recognized the danger of allowing his pre-solo student (no matter how advanced) to deal with strong crosswinds. The CFI also should have taken control from the student earlier in the flare as it became clear the airplane would touchdown off centerline. Alternatively; the CFI could have called for or initiated a go-around when the flare appeared to be unstable. The CFI also should have recognized the student's lack of understanding of wind correction and initiated the wind correction sooner during the ground roll.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C172 flight instructor reported encountering crosswind during landing rollout causing aircraft to depart runway.

Narrative: Student and CFI were practicing student's landings on Runway XXR at ZZZ. Prior to the flight; CFI obtained a weather briefing that indicated manageable wind conditions were forecast for the flight. Student was preparing for his first progress check (pre-solo) and working on demonstrating control of the airplane in the traffic pattern; during approach to land; and during the stages of landing. During the first three touch-and-go landings; wind was calm and student made successful and stabilized approaches and landings. CFI allowed student to fly the airplane with minimal assistance throughout the flight. During the downwind leg prior to the incident; wind was reported by Tower as a direct crosswind (040 @ 9 kts). CFI allowed student to continue to fly the airplane in order to evaluate the student's crosswind landing skills. Student had trouble with centerline control on final and CFI took control of the airplane; guiding the airplane back toward centerline before giving control back to the student. Student entered ground effect off centerline; regained centerline in the flare; but touched down just off centerline. Student did not continue to use crosswind correction during ground roll and both CFI and student observed an unexpected gust of wind; causing a wing to rise during the ground roll. CFI did not correct in-time and the airplane continued to veer from centerline further until it left the runway and rolled into the grass and down a shallow embankment. Both CFI and student were uninjured and the plane rolled to a stop in the grass. Following this; CFI shut the engine down and both occupants exited the aircraft safely. Maintenance personnel from the flight school inspected the aircraft and runway 10 minutes later and observed no damage to the aircraft or runway environment.In the future; this could be corrected by stopping the chain of events that lead to the incident. CFI should have recognized the danger of allowing his pre-solo student (no matter how advanced) to deal with strong crosswinds. The CFI also should have taken control from the student earlier in the flare as it became clear the airplane would touchdown off centerline. Alternatively; the CFI could have called for or initiated a go-around when the flare appeared to be unstable. The CFI also should have recognized the student's lack of understanding of wind correction and initiated the wind correction sooner during the ground roll.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.