Wake turbulence avoidance and what is up with B757

[FenderManDan]

What is your opinion or if you have a real world experience on the wake turbulence avoidance?
What is the deal with the B757 and it's wake?

Where I will be flying there are no big ones in the air other than Dash-8 on the YTZ sometimes, however with D. Trump's new B757 you never know if he will go to muskoka

Thanks

Dan

[Panama Jack]

What is your opinion or if you have a real world experience on the wake turbulence avoidance?

Not sure what you mean by this-- Wake Turbulence Avoidance is a part of my daily routine.

Wake Turbulence can really ruin your day. Because of the separation requirements imposed by ATC at big airports we rarely encounter it but I did hit encounter the remnants of some in an Embraer 190 a few months ago after waiting 2 minutes before beginning takeoff following an A330. It was such that initially I thought it was Moderate Turbulence.

Most encounters with Wake Turbulence seem to be at the RVSM cruise levels when passing underneath another jet by 1000 feet. If the winds and other atmospheric conditions are just right, the sensation is a sudden strong jolt not unlike hitting a wall.

As far as the Boeing 757-- I am not an engineer but wake turbulence is a result of lift being produced. Have you ever noticed the breathtaking climb rate on a Boeing 757?

I am not sure what the wake turbulence characteristics of the A380 are but I noticed that pilots are apending the wake category "Super" rather than "Heavy" to this aircraft, suggesting the opening of a whole new category. Or perhaps it is just aeronautical marketing hype.

[cgzro]

Its real and dangerous. I've had two experiences.

One very bad, a C-150 doing a night precision approach into YVR while working on my commercial many years ago. I was under the hood and we flew over the numbers and hit the wake of the preceeding aircraft. This was 30 years ago but I still clearly remember seeing the runway numbers about where the air vent tubes are on the 150 wing root...

Second was not very bad but could have been in a different aicraft. I crossed the wake of a big twin turbine chopper. it was unusual because the aircraft didn't suddenly roll, it started to progressively roll one way and so I naturally compensated with aileron. I had the aileron to the stop and was still going a little bit the opposite way. Now the plane I was in has nearly a 300 degree per second roll rate .. so in something else this could have been very different. Also was at about 300' on final when it happened.

Yes yes, real/dangerous .. stay away , definitely ruin your day. Think Kayaking next to a super tanker.

[LAX]

I once hit 777 wake in a DHC-6 - it had departed from an intersecting runway slightly earlier, with the wake's tendency to descend and move outward and the headwind/crosswind combined it put it on-top of us at about 400 ft on T/O. We ended up about 50-60 degrees of bank at our worst and had full control deflection until we passed through it about 3 seconds later. Tough lesson in wake turbulence.

Also I've experienced the "feels like a wall" effect of the above poster one time before, when passing under an aircraft as well. However this onset was very smooth, hardly shook us up and lasted a few seconds. My guess is that this was because we were pointing nearly the same direction as the wake, rather than crossing it.

[AEROBAT]

I have had wake turbulance several times and it was joining up flying formation and with a lot smaller aircraft than what you are talking about. After a while you instinctively learn where to expect it. If you are at any kind of altitude it isn't a big deal as long as you remember to roll to the nearest level horizon.

[kevenv]

I am not sure what the wake turbulence characteristics of the A380 are but I noticed that pilots are appending the wake category "Super" rather than "Heavy" to this aircraft, suggesting the opening of a whole new category. Or perhaps it is just aeronautical marketing hype.

No marketing hype. For ATC it is a new category of a/c where wake turbulence is concerned and comes with increased separation requirements. The use of the term "super" is a requirement on initial contact, same as heavy.

[dcabrown]

Dan, assuming you are flying at YTZ in a light single, you definitely need to be aware of the wake turbulence from Dash 8's.

It can be a busy airport at times and Tower watches out for the little guys but I have to admit that I was probably becoming a bit complacent at respecting wake turbulence/separation as a result of having a tower (YTZ) consistently directing light singles to stay (2-3 minutes or so away) from the Dash 8's.

Then found myself one day on short final following a Dash 8 by a few minutes and for a brief few seconds experienced the plane progressively rolling to the right and full left aileron doing nothing about it - not pleasant, and definetly out of my comfort zone for being a few hundred feet above the water.

[FenderManDan]

Dan, assuming you are flying at YTZ in a light single, you definitely need to be aware of the wake turbulence from Dash 8's.

It can be a busy airport at times and Tower watches out for the little guys but I have to admit that I was probably becoming a bit complacent at respecting wake turbulence/separation as a result of having a tower (YTZ) consistently directing light singles to stay (2-3 minutes or so away) from the Dash 8's.

Then found myself one day on short final following a Dash 8 by a few minutes and for a brief few seconds experienced the plane progressively rolling to the right and full left aileron doing nothing about it - not pleasant, and definetly out of my comfort zone for being a few hundred feet above the water.

Yes, started with flying, was assigned p-26 warrior II from YKZ. For now we will be sticking to the north/north-east, however I requested we do a YTZ from time to time (zone crossing-radio work, beautiful views on the lake handling real commercial traffic, etc).

Thank you all for the warning, The interesting part is that this nemesis is invisible.

I did some research on the net and found that opinions state that B-757 should be treated as a "heavy" category in regards to the wake turbulence. Don't get too close 6NM folks...

[kevenv]

I did some research on the net and found that opinions state that B-757 should be treated as a "heavy" category in regards to the wake turbulence. Don't get too close 6NM folks...

For wake turbulence purposes ATC treats the 757 as a heavy when it is in front. A light a/c would be given 6 miles separation behind one.

[winds_in_flight_wtf]

Discussed on Airliners.net before . The B757 poses the greatest / most violent wake when compared to most commercial aircraft.

[ahramin]

I always thought it was because it's the same type rating as a 67 .

[justwall]

757 is treated as a Heavy by ATC when proceeding and a medium when the succeeding aircraft.

[ahramin]

757 is treated as a Heavy by ATC when proceeding and a medium when the succeeding aircraft.

I think you mean preceding and following.