A380 Wake Turbulence worries

[Pass-A-Frozo]

ABC Newsradio (http://www.abc.net.au/newsradio) had on tonight a report that US authorities have worries about the amount of wake turbulence from the A380 and may have to make "new guidelines for the aircraft" <Wake turbulence cat "Very Heavy" ??>

[gaunty]

They should simply put it in the same category as the B757.

The games they play:}

[pakeha-boy]

gaunty....I was a witness to an Aircraft,Lear Jet,that crashed behind a 757,that did not take wake turbulence procedures seriously enough.The NTSB saftey review concluded it was wake turb and that the pilot failed to adhere to such practices.When called as a witness,as I was 2 behind him in the sequence,I explained what I had actualy seen,ie he was low,slow,"dirty"and way to close.
Mate,these are not games they play!!!!! sort of have to wonder what "game" you are in..takaro

[Jerricho]

Given the right (or wrong if you will) atmospheric conditions, wake turb can hang around for quite a while. As Air Traffic, we have our wake turbulence separation standards, but I remember very well the day I had MD80 nearly 8 miles same altitude (standard is 5 miles) in trail of an A340-600 and the pilots exact words after turning himself was "we were nearly rolled".

Good game.

[gaunty]

I can see I was a bit too cryptic for a kiwi.:}

The US and Airbus are having a sales war so they put heaps on the A380, and rightly so, but they will make political mileage ( the game to which I refer) out of it you can be sure, in the same way they killed the Concorde on routes other than the Atlantic and even then they tried hard. Why, because they didn't have one of their own.

So they apply a higher category to the opposition aircraft = financial penalty for someone.

It may or may not be justified, I guess we'll find out sooner or later.

They are busy suing each other in the courts on who is getting crosssubsidised by who and therefore who should and should not get access to which market blah blah blah..

The B757 has a deserved reputation for having a wake turbulence profile that punches way above the actual weight category of the aircraft.

Who knows it might even be the same as the A380, which has a really interesting wing.

So to decrypt my comment?

Why don't the Euros put the B757 in the same category as the A380 and see what sorta squawk they get out of the murricans.

What game am I in ?? wonder away.

[pakeha-boy]

gaunty...your choice of words mate,not mine.
Your comments on the last post,I agree with entirely.Like you(correct me if I,m wrong,god forbid)I have been involved in several wake turb situations that have got me "pecker" to stand on end.I have undergone all the training,read the info,watched the movies blah blah blah blah,but when you see one for real it takes a whole new meaning.The crash involved a Lear jet and a 757 (UPS)that was very"heavy".The lear being low got caught,crashed into the fuel tank farm,not much to clean up as the resulting fire did that.I have personally noticed that at many International airports,wake separation on departure and Ldg is getting very relaxed,I have on several occasions,after being in position an hold,have requested more time,not always but on several occassions this has pissed the controller off.
Greater in-trail spacing(IMC)and half a dot above glide on approach(VMC) usually does the trick.Only takes one or two hard bumps to get your attention
gaunty mate,as long as you play the game of drinking cold piss,supporting the Allblacks and any Team that plays the aussies ...YOUR THE BRO!!!!...ngati porirua ;)