Heavy Suffix

[Hotel Mode]

having just changed fleets to heavy, i see its in CAP 413 to add it on first contact in the UK now. I haven't heard many people do it indeed BA only teach it for Canada, seems they should read CAP 413 again.

Is it a new requirement?

[hangten]

hmm, never heard of any requirement for the 'heavy' suffix, in my experience it's only the americans and canadians that do this. where abouts in cap413?

[catchup]

To my (limited) knowledge, yes it's required (RVSM?) on INITIAL contact, in europe (maybe worldwide?)

regards

[Bol Zup]

Can anyone explain to me the need for the "heavy" suffix?

The aircraft's type and vortex category are on the flight progress strip (FPS).
If it is to remind the controller of the vortex spacing then why don't we have for example ABC123 "medium" or GABCD "light"?

[DFC]

The indication of "Heavy" wake turbulence category is an ICAO requirement and has been for a long time. It is specified in DOC 4444

The idea is base on a number of safety issues.

From a pilot's point of view there are many airspaces where we get no separation from other traffic. Knowing that the ABC123 crossing our track is a heavy gives a good heads up as to possible wake encounter.

Good to see that the UK CAP has finally caught up with international safety measures.

Regards,

DFC

[PPRuNe Radar]

Good to see that the UK CAP has finally caught up with international safety measures.

Oldest CAP 413 I have is from 1996. It was in there then, but can't say when it first appeared as phraseology. Seldom used by anyone though in my en route experience, except North Americans and Lufthansa.

[Bol Zup]

DFC, I'm a UK based airfield ATCO. We are required to provide the appropriate vortex spacing between aircraft. I do not need to be told on contact that an aircraft is "heavy" or whatever, it says so on my FPS. The rules are simple, A followed by B= stated spacing.

[letMfly]

The requirement to use ther word "heavy" has been around since the late 70s, but ignored by most.

It's still in CAP 413 (Chapter 2, Page 8, 1.8.5) "Aircraft in the heavy wake vortex category shall include the word "HEAVY" immediately after the aircraft callsign in the initial call to each ATSU."

Times have moved on though and I agree with Bol Zup that it is unnecessary now that the wake category is displayed on the FPS.

letMfly

[catchup]

and I agree with Bol Zup that it is unnecessary now that the wake category is displayed on the FPS.

Sorry, English isn't my native language. To my understanding your statement above is totally opposite to Bol Zup's.

Best regards

[Bern Oulli]

However, 'cos it is in the book, that is what we teach at that centre of excellence on the south coast of Blighty. The pseudo-pilots all use the suffix "Heavy" when first calling on frequency as a heavy. Is it necessary nowadays? Good question. I might suggest that just because it is on your FPS, it might not be on someone else's if they have a different system.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<I do not need to be told on contact that an aircraft is "heavy" or whatever, it says so on my FPS>>

And when the airline changes the type at the last minute - as only happens about 10 times a day...???

[055166k]

Area Control separation standards are not affected to anything like the same degree as Terminal/Approach Control, where Radar separation standards can be less than "Area", and runway utilisation demands critical spacing.
If the air at high level is fairly still. I am always aware of possible in-trail turbulence behind a "heavy" and will control accordingly with consideration ....but that is a result of experience rather than teaching.
Before "Heavy", the suffix was "Vortex".
When the early wide-bodies were introduced it was evident that wake vortex category defined purely in weight terms was not always prudent. This lead to certain grey-area types being re-classified as a result of their individual characteristics....in some cases different States use their own unique categories.

[Bol Zup]

HD wrote: "And when the airline changes the type at the last minute - as only happens about 10 times a day...???"

The operator should send a change message. By the same token what if the operator changed aircraft from a small to a light? Which comes back to my point, if you stuff a light up the a**e of a 757, are the consequences any less dire for it's occupants than if the leading aircraft was a 747?

[DFC]

BolZup,

I have not found a cockpit with a FPS display containing the wake turb cat of all the aircraft that may affect my flight.

Thus the only way that I can becaome aware of a heavy in my vicinity is to hear it on the initial call.

Isn't the heavy followed by light the one category that requires more than 5nm radar separation in trail?

Packing in aircraft on final approach is only a very small part of the operation.............what about VFR zone transits, class G operation etc etc.

Overall the requirements are that it is used and for all the R/T time and effort it takes I considder it a good safety measure.

Remember also that the UK treatment of VFR flights and the ICAO system are different.............UK takes a more proactive approach with VFR flights.

Perhaps you would prefer that the requirements was to make the "Heavy" call in class E, F and G airspace and then there are VFR flights known to be in B,C,D airspace and etc etc............no actually lets keep the current requirement which is both simple and safe.

Regards,

DFC

[Bol Zup]

DFC, en-route is not my area, if you pardon the pun. I'll leave that to others better qualified to explain how vortex spacing is applied then.
In an airfield approach situation in the UK the IFR minimum spacing is three miles. This means the vortex spacing for not only heavy aircraft, but medium* followed by a lighter aircraft or even a small followed by a light is greater than the IFR minima, therefore the vortex minima is applied.
* between two medium aircraft "When the leading aircraft is a B757, DC8, B707, IL62 or VC10, the minimum distance shall be increased to 4 miles"

Back to your point about the "heavy" suffix on initial contact being beneficial to you, if you join a frequency after the heavy has made initial contact, you won't then know it's category surely?

[DirtyPierre]

Heavy suffix not commonly used in our aviation backwater, even by North American pilots.

Heavies tend to fly in A, B or C airspaces, and occassionally in E airspace. So is there really a need for the suffix heavy while in A, B or C airspace? I think not, otherwise all those 737s and A320s would be announcing Medium to alert the lighties they are a medium.

It might still be in CARs, but so is the 20 minute longitudinal separation standard, which hasn't been used in Oz for over 10 years.

[Jerricho]

The operator should send a change message

Yes, the operator should, but I lost count the number of times Heathrow Int Directors first knew of type changes when the flight checked in with the required aircraft type on initial contact. Personally, I don't think it's a bad thing.

[Del Prado]

Don't confuse final approach vortex minima with en route requirements. In the cruise and at intermediate levels before final approach all aircraft smaller than a heavy must pass no closer than 5 behind that heavy.
I guess that why only a heavy is required to be identified in this way and not 757's etc.

[catchup]

Did a little research. To my limited knowledge "heavy" on initial contact is a legal reqirement in following european states

Denmark
Belgium
Germany
Sweden
Switzerland

some of the above require it only with appch / twr. But let's keep it simple.

regards

[Baron buzz]

Having recently completed the atpl exams, the need for prefixing the callsign with 'heavy' is only required on aircraft weighing in excess of (i think) 136,000kgs. I could be mistaken here! Its in the Operational Procedures exam i think.

Please, try not to throw too many insults at me if i am wrong!

[catchup]

Yes 136t, that's what I've found as well.

regards

[West Coast]

From my perspective as a pilot, I like it. It helps with my situational awareness of what's ahead, and of what's leaving a calling card for me to find. As an example, at KORD they are so busy that you are usually not told what your following till you check in with the tower. I would like to know earlier to sit the F/A's down, bring the continuous ignition on, go a 1/2 dot high on the slope, etc, in case of a wake encounter. By listening we pilots do develop an idea for who is ahead of us by headings given, altitudes issued, etc. If I can deduce the plane ahead is a heavy by ATC addressing it as such, I can get the above items done earlier. As it is now, if I see someone more 2.5 ahead on final I assume its a heavy.

[Scott Voigt]

West Coast;

I've heard this argument in ATPAC and smiled at it... I gave the senario of what most of our sectors run like and then threw out some verbage that you would normally hear on the radio and then asked the pilots in the room what was going on. Each gave their thoughts on it and not a single one of them were correct. Now, if you know that you are working a final controller who is only working one runway, then you probably will know what is going on to an extent, but in most departure, arrival freqs as well as enroute freqs, most pilots have no real idea of what the true picture is...

regards

Scott

[West Coast]

Scott

I know you get all antsy when a pilot intimates anything to do with the big picture. Relax, I'm not, I sometimes have moments of clarity and figure out the lone guy ahead of me that I am following is a heavy by you calling it a heavy and receiving turns/headings that I see correlated on the TCAS and appropriate to the overlay of the approach on the MFD. Let me repeat, I don't have the big picture, that's what you get paid for. By the same measure we don't simply sit in the cockpit and not get some small amount of SA by listening to what's going on around us.


"most pilots have no real idea of what the true picture is"

I don't care what the true picture is, simply whom I'm following down the final. From your many posts here I see a pattern of shut up and I'll tell you what you need to know. Sorry, but I'm an active participant in the safe operation of the aircraft. My ass and my passengers, not yours. I don't want to do your job for you, but I also don't apologize for trying to glean as much info as I can. What of the times I have figured out I was behind a heavy, and seated the F/A's and encountered wake? Its little things like this I speak of, not whether I have appropriate separation, not what the guy on the parallel final is doing, etc that's your job. I'm not challenging your authority by what I describe above so quit acting like it.

[Maurice Chavez]

Bol Zup:

If a 757 is leading traffic, why is the seperation 4 miles? A 757 is not H but M. I believe for an airplane to have the H in the FPS it has to have a MTOW of 335,000Lbs.....Correct me if I'm wrong...

[S76Heavy]

I think I read that the wake turbulence of a 757 is similar to that of a "real" heavy.

[Cartman's Twin]

Morning

By ICAO definition (based on weight alone) a 757 is a medium vortex a/c and hence from a minimum of 3 miles (terminal control) and 5 miles (en route) would be needed.

However the actual vortex created by a 757 (and DC8, 707, VC10 and IL62s) is higher than the a/c weight would normally produce. Therefore, for approach spacing it is classed as an 'upper-medium', generally giving an extra mile over standard medium requirements.

Hope this helps.

PS. This only applies to the UK as I understand it


Regarding the other points, as a TC controller you have to be aware of vorex requirements although the only legal requirement that increases our 3 mile minimum is when an a/c other than a heavy is passing behind or in trail of a heavy. Then we need 5. Personally I always er on the side of caution and if a light is passing 4 or 5 miles behind anything bigger (and I get a spare moment), I'll warn the pilot that he might get a little nudge!).


And finally! It isn't a legal requirement to use the 'Heavy' suffix in the UK but I never object to it. The Yanks love it and the DLH too! Doesn't to any harm. I'd rather every heavy reported being heavy than a single oik who doesn't report their passing altitude and their INITIAL cleared altitude. That really annoys everyone!

[Maurice Chavez]

Why DC-8 and 70's between brackets? Both aircraft are heavy jets. Considering a 757 being heavy must be a joke, as the MTOW of the 757 is lower then the MLW of a DC-8....

[Jagbag]

A large number of incidents and accidents are attributed to the unusually high degree of wake turbulence associated with the 757. If you are behind one be extra cautious!

[Jerricho]

Considering a 757 being heavy must be a joke, as the MTOW of the 757 is lower then the MLW of a DC-8....

I believe that it has something to do with the design of the wing that causes wake turbulence of a higher degree.

[West Coast]

Jerrico is correct.

[PW2040]

So what is the actually weightlimit to call "heavy" , 136.000 kgs or 335.000 lbs ??

And yes a B757 is considered heavy wake-turbulence wise.

Greetings,
PW2040

[sedburgh]

The UK position on this is described in AIC 17/1999, thre are a number of differences from ICAO including increasing the spacing to 4 nm on final approach behind B757, VC10, B707, DC8 and IL62 aircraft when followed by an aircraft of Medium or smaller catagory.

You can read the AIC at http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/pdf/aic/4P188.PDF

[fly bhoy]

Its strange why the B757 is considered heavy for arrival spacing, but for departure purposes it can be considered a normal medium and the following aircraft cleared for takeoff 1 min behind. Why is this?

However, what was even more strange was doing departures on saturday when I get a call from a KLM 737 who said he was happy to accept 1 minute departure separation behind a B777!!! I wasn't happy so he got the full two mins!!

FB:ok:

[Pegasus77]

Heya Fly Bhoy,

You handled well; when I flew the A320 I wouldn't think of accepting less than 2 mins behind a B777.

I have seen a Beechcraft Baron pilot taxiing out with a pack of snow on his wings, which everybody saw (including the tower and the followme's) "but it is the responsibility of the pilot".
I think that way of reasoning is b******t.

Also I saw a Dash-8 accepting less than a minute behind a 767, and he was cleared for TO by the tower. My opinion is that the tower controller could have easily prevented a very dangerous situation there, which he for some reason did not, too bad really!!

IMHO the controller would have shared at least some of the responsibility when something went wrong there.

P77

Back on topic:

I think that in the US the \'heavy\'-call is a little bit overdone. Even a rampfrequency insists on \'heavy\' being used. I see no problem at all telling the controller that we are a heavy, often (in the US) if I forget, the controller will readback \'heavy\' anyway.

But then I work for LH and apparently, reading this topic, we are the only ones in Europe :-)

P77

[bekolblockage]

Fortunately nobody bothers here - 75% of our traffic is Heavy.