Heavy Suffix
 

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?

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?

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

regards

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"?

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

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.

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.

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

@letMfly
 

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

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.

<<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...???

Environment issue/ Wake Vortex Relevance
 

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.

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?

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

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?

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.

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.

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.

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

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!