Narrative:

Cleared to land on runway 01R, perfect landing 3 point, ATIS reported wind 320 degrees at 07 KTS. On rollout, plane received severe wind at about 260 degrees at 25 KTS. Plane was dramatically pushed to right. Experienced poor braking action on left and right brakes. All power was reduced, ailerons into the wind, still no positive result. With runway edge coming up rapidly I decided to let the aircraft roll off the runway in a controled rollout. If I attempted an aggressive action to keep airplane on the runway, more extensive damage would have resulted, including the possibility of airplane up- ending. In a smooth grassy area, with speed bleeding off, airplane struck small electric box. In aftermath, I would have not done anything different. My action resulted in no damage to anybody else or the airport. In speaking to pilots on the field after the accident, they feel that ATIS was incorrect. Winds were not 320 degrees at 07 KTS. More like 260 degrees at 20 KTS, with peak gusts to 30 KTS. ATIS at that airport was not correct and should have warned pilots about peak gusts. Immediately after my landing, they began using runway 31, not because they closed my runway for they still had ILS runway 01L, but because winds favored runway 31. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that he was operating a cessna 210T which received wing damage after the wing strut hit an electrical box on the side of the runway causing the wing to fall, or droop, to the ground. He realizes now that the ATIS report is often not what the present or actual wind condition might be during landing.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PVT PLT OF AN SMA SEL LOST CTL OF THE ACFT DURING LNDG AND WENT OFF SIDE OF RWY RESULTING IN WING DAMAGE TO THE ACFT AND NO INJURIES TO PERSONS OR PROPERTY.

Narrative: CLRED TO LAND ON RWY 01R, PERFECT LNDG 3 POINT, ATIS RPTED WIND 320 DEGS AT 07 KTS. ON ROLLOUT, PLANE RECEIVED SEVERE WIND AT ABOUT 260 DEGS AT 25 KTS. PLANE WAS DRAMATICALLY PUSHED TO R. EXPERIENCED POOR BRAKING ACTION ON L AND R BRAKES. ALL PWR WAS REDUCED, AILERONS INTO THE WIND, STILL NO POSITIVE RESULT. WITH RWY EDGE COMING UP RAPIDLY I DECIDED TO LET THE ACFT ROLL OFF THE RWY IN A CTLED ROLLOUT. IF I ATTEMPTED AN AGGRESSIVE ACTION TO KEEP AIRPLANE ON THE RWY, MORE EXTENSIVE DAMAGE WOULD HAVE RESULTED, INCLUDING THE POSSIBILITY OF AIRPLANE UP- ENDING. IN A SMOOTH GRASSY AREA, WITH SPD BLEEDING OFF, AIRPLANE STRUCK SMALL ELECTRIC BOX. IN AFTERMATH, I WOULD HAVE NOT DONE ANYTHING DIFFERENT. MY ACTION RESULTED IN NO DAMAGE TO ANYBODY ELSE OR THE ARPT. IN SPEAKING TO PLTS ON THE FIELD AFTER THE ACCIDENT, THEY FEEL THAT ATIS WAS INCORRECT. WINDS WERE NOT 320 DEGS AT 07 KTS. MORE LIKE 260 DEGS AT 20 KTS, WITH PEAK GUSTS TO 30 KTS. ATIS AT THAT ARPT WAS NOT CORRECT AND SHOULD HAVE WARNED PLTS ABOUT PEAK GUSTS. IMMEDIATELY AFTER MY LNDG, THEY BEGAN USING RWY 31, NOT BECAUSE THEY CLOSED MY RWY FOR THEY STILL HAD ILS RWY 01L, BUT BECAUSE WINDS FAVORED RWY 31. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT HE WAS OPERATING A CESSNA 210T WHICH RECEIVED WING DAMAGE AFTER THE WING STRUT HIT AN ELECTRICAL BOX ON THE SIDE OF THE RWY CAUSING THE WING TO FALL, OR DROOP, TO THE GND. HE REALIZES NOW THAT THE ATIS RPT IS OFTEN NOT WHAT THE PRESENT OR ACTUAL WIND CONDITION MIGHT BE DURING LNDG.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.