When landing, crosswinds can be very expensive. They cause go-arounds, diversions to other airfields and even crashes.
Currently pilots crab in the air to counteract crosswinds and, at the last moment, throw the aircraft around to face directly along the runway. This is a challenging and risky manoeuvre - it can cause asymmetrical stalls and worse.
The nose wheel can already be rotated. If the main gear could also rotate, the plane could land in a crabbed attitude and continue that way along the runway until speed had dropped to taxiing speed.
How come aircraft don't have this feature?
It has been flagged that this question is similar to a previous one, Is the main landing gear of a large airplane designed for sideways (crabbed) touchdowns?
My question is different. In those cases the landing gear does not actively turn to face in the direction of travel relative to the ground, it is merely designed to cope with the extra stress of hitting the runway obliquely. The allowed angle may be quite small. A swivelling undercarriage would allow for a large angle of crab with no attendant stress to the gear because the wheels would be aligned with the runway.
As pointed out on that other question, this design feature was adopted for the B-52. I am asking what factors persuaded designers to abandon this idea.
Videos (2) of B-52 landing in this manner http://www.skilledpilots.com/video-this-is-how-a-b-52h-lands-in-a-crosswind-and-stays-completely-sideways-while-deploying-a-parachute-and-slowing-down-on-the-runway/