Narrative:

I was coming into my home base at 3000 ft from the east and the wind at that altitude was about a 35 KT headwind. There was mild turbulence and the ATIS gave the surface wind as 220 degrees at 16 KTS. I called the tower and was cleared to a right base to runway 2L behind a learjet landing on runway 2R. I did a quick mental estimate and decided the crosswind component was ok; but the tailwind component would be considerable. The learjet ahead of me complained to the tower about the windshear and tailwind landing after he was on the ground. Runway 2R is 6000 ft and he had thrust reversal. I configured for expected turbulence on final and was not disappointed. The approach and landing required full concentration. It felt like a lot more crosswind; probably because of the tailwind. In a lightly loaded C172; I used over 3000 ft of a 3700 ft runway. In a heavier; faster aircraft; I would have gone around and requested the longer runway. Later calculation gave a 6 KT crosswind component and a 14 KT tailwind. The tower is often reluctant to change runways to match the prevailing wind. I can understand this because traffic is very heavy and the change is disruptive. However; sometimes it is a bit much to deal with; and this time it was probably beyond the capabilities of some. Control towers do not have any provision for reporting crosswind and downwind component. I have an E6B on board; but the computation takes time and during an approach there is little time and a busy airport is not the place to have your head in the cockpit. It would help with critical decision making to have this information from the tower if requested. A required warning from the tower when the tailwind component exceeds 5 or 10 KTS its not a bad idea. It would serve to alert both pilots and the tower crew.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C172 PLT HAS A 14 KT TAILWIND DURING LNDG.

Narrative: I WAS COMING INTO MY HOME BASE AT 3000 FT FROM THE E AND THE WIND AT THAT ALT WAS ABOUT A 35 KT HEADWIND. THERE WAS MILD TURB AND THE ATIS GAVE THE SURFACE WIND AS 220 DEGS AT 16 KTS. I CALLED THE TWR AND WAS CLRED TO A R BASE TO RWY 2L BEHIND A LEARJET LNDG ON RWY 2R. I DID A QUICK MENTAL ESTIMATE AND DECIDED THE XWIND COMPONENT WAS OK; BUT THE TAILWIND COMPONENT WOULD BE CONSIDERABLE. THE LEARJET AHEAD OF ME COMPLAINED TO THE TWR ABOUT THE WINDSHEAR AND TAILWIND LNDG AFTER HE WAS ON THE GND. RWY 2R IS 6000 FT AND HE HAD THRUST REVERSAL. I CONFIGURED FOR EXPECTED TURB ON FINAL AND WAS NOT DISAPPOINTED. THE APCH AND LNDG REQUIRED FULL CONCENTRATION. IT FELT LIKE A LOT MORE XWIND; PROBABLY BECAUSE OF THE TAILWIND. IN A LIGHTLY LOADED C172; I USED OVER 3000 FT OF A 3700 FT RWY. IN A HEAVIER; FASTER ACFT; I WOULD HAVE GONE AROUND AND REQUESTED THE LONGER RWY. LATER CALCULATION GAVE A 6 KT XWIND COMPONENT AND A 14 KT TAILWIND. THE TWR IS OFTEN RELUCTANT TO CHANGE RWYS TO MATCH THE PREVAILING WIND. I CAN UNDERSTAND THIS BECAUSE TFC IS VERY HVY AND THE CHANGE IS DISRUPTIVE. HOWEVER; SOMETIMES IT IS A BIT MUCH TO DEAL WITH; AND THIS TIME IT WAS PROBABLY BEYOND THE CAPABILITIES OF SOME. CTL TWRS DO NOT HAVE ANY PROVISION FOR RPTING XWIND AND DOWNWIND COMPONENT. I HAVE AN E6B ON BOARD; BUT THE COMPUTATION TAKES TIME AND DURING AN APCH THERE IS LITTLE TIME AND A BUSY ARPT IS NOT THE PLACE TO HAVE YOUR HEAD IN THE COCKPIT. IT WOULD HELP WITH CRITICAL DECISION MAKING TO HAVE THIS INFO FROM THE TWR IF REQUESTED. A REQUIRED WARNING FROM THE TWR WHEN THE TAILWIND COMPONENT EXCEEDS 5 OR 10 KTS ITS NOT A BAD IDEA. IT WOULD SERVE TO ALERT BOTH PLTS AND THE TWR CREW.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.