Why do I have to say "heavy"??
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Germany
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do I have to say "heavy"??
Hello Community!
Returning from my San Francisco flight with my 744 following thought: Why do I have to tell the Americans that i am heavy every single transmission, while the Canadians are interested in that fact only on initial contact, and then, on the Europeans Side of the Atlantic the controlers aren't really keen on conferming that fact with me.... Well, i guess they just look at their atc-Stripe lying in front of them?
Ok, lets just take my arrival into US Airspace the other day: i had to say "heavy" (otherwise it's "against the LAW!!")... Well... i am not that heavy anymore!! We weighed around 260 t, and with that, we can easely climb out a lot of heavely loaded twin engines in that airspace.
From my A320 years i can remember taking a lot of time climbing from FL 340 to FL 350 with an A321 fully loaded. In comparison the 747 happily jumps from one level to the higher one! Even when we just departed for a long haul flight.
Let's take sequencing upon departure & arrival:
that would actualy make sence, but only in this portion of flight! To inform the controller (who probably already knows) and everybody else around you that you are "heavy".
I believe, we can abolish that call out!
Returning from my San Francisco flight with my 744 following thought: Why do I have to tell the Americans that i am heavy every single transmission, while the Canadians are interested in that fact only on initial contact, and then, on the Europeans Side of the Atlantic the controlers aren't really keen on conferming that fact with me.... Well, i guess they just look at their atc-Stripe lying in front of them?
Ok, lets just take my arrival into US Airspace the other day: i had to say "heavy" (otherwise it's "against the LAW!!")... Well... i am not that heavy anymore!! We weighed around 260 t, and with that, we can easely climb out a lot of heavely loaded twin engines in that airspace.
From my A320 years i can remember taking a lot of time climbing from FL 340 to FL 350 with an A321 fully loaded. In comparison the 747 happily jumps from one level to the higher one! Even when we just departed for a long haul flight.
Let's take sequencing upon departure & arrival:
that would actualy make sence, but only in this portion of flight! To inform the controller (who probably already knows) and everybody else around you that you are "heavy".
I believe, we can abolish that call out!
Last edited by Charly; 27th Apr 2006 at 00:11.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: A little world of my own - Planet Spandit
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the "heavy" term relates to wake turbulence - more important in the circuit, I'd argue. I recall that it applies to aircraft over 90 tonnes (or thereabouts) so on the B757 you can start off heavy and then not be anymore... 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Rules
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP413.pdf The UK Bible...all 182 pages of it. (Stop drooling all you Air trafficers)
Chapter 2 1.8.5
"Aircraft in the Heavy wake vortex category shall include the word "HEAVY" immediately after the aircraft callsign in the intial call to each ATSU."
That's what your meant to do but it just doesn't happy on the sunny side of the pond! I wonder why.........
Chapter 2 1.8.5
"Aircraft in the Heavy wake vortex category shall include the word "HEAVY" immediately after the aircraft callsign in the intial call to each ATSU."
That's what your meant to do but it just doesn't happy on the sunny side of the pond! I wonder why.........
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Europe
Age: 46
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why use heavy?
Hi Charly,
as said before, the term "heavy" is related to your wake turbulence, not your performance. The US saw a few accidents with Citations and similar planes being flipped over and crashing on the ILS, so they came up with using "heavy" in the callsign. It's actually not just for the controller, but also for the guy behind you. If you were sitting in a Citation, you might want to know who is 2 miles in front... One of these accidents involved a 757 and a CJ, and actually triggered that the 757 now qualifies as "heavy", even though it is below the weight for the "heavy" category. This also explains why a canadian area controller up north could not care less, since you don't fly around slow and dirty just before going oceanic...
as said before, the term "heavy" is related to your wake turbulence, not your performance. The US saw a few accidents with Citations and similar planes being flipped over and crashing on the ILS, so they came up with using "heavy" in the callsign. It's actually not just for the controller, but also for the guy behind you. If you were sitting in a Citation, you might want to know who is 2 miles in front... One of these accidents involved a 757 and a CJ, and actually triggered that the 757 now qualifies as "heavy", even though it is below the weight for the "heavy" category. This also explains why a canadian area controller up north could not care less, since you don't fly around slow and dirty just before going oceanic...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Germany
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by KingAir77
Hi Charly,
as said before, the term "heavy" is related to your wake turbulence, not your performance. The US saw a few accidents with Citations and similar planes being flipped over and crashing on the ILS, so they came up with using "heavy" in the callsign. It's actually not just for the controller, but also for the guy behind you. If you were sitting in a Citation, you might want to know who is 2 miles in front... One of these accidents involved a 757 and a CJ, and actually triggered that the 757 now qualifies as "heavy", even though it is below the weight for the "heavy" category. This also explains why a canadian area controller up north could not care less, since you don't fly around slow and dirty just before going oceanic...
as said before, the term "heavy" is related to your wake turbulence, not your performance. The US saw a few accidents with Citations and similar planes being flipped over and crashing on the ILS, so they came up with using "heavy" in the callsign. It's actually not just for the controller, but also for the guy behind you. If you were sitting in a Citation, you might want to know who is 2 miles in front... One of these accidents involved a 757 and a CJ, and actually triggered that the 757 now qualifies as "heavy", even though it is below the weight for the "heavy" category. This also explains why a canadian area controller up north could not care less, since you don't fly around slow and dirty just before going oceanic...
it absolutly makes sence in the Approach phase of a flight. Often you hear the Tower controller advising you that the "preceeding is a heavy one", and it helps!
But why do I have to tell for example Salt Lake Centre (Upper airspace) every single transmission in cruise flght(!) that i'm heavy?
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: in the mire
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe, and sit to be corrected, that the "problem" 757 was to do with ultra quick certification using 73 data in the process.
Certainly that`s what l was told after rolling through sixty degrees against full control deflection in a SF340, with 4 mile spacing on approach. Local conditions were a calm summer evening in otherwise still air and vis that went forever.
The term "heavy" for the 75 came in soon after, possibly the timing of this was coincidental.
If l remember correctly prior to 1993 it was certificated as medium.
I know some had big fuel tanks and plainly the induced drag between models varied.
Wing tip vortices is the problem on take off but with a "heavy" it can be one on landing too despite relatively low fuel weight.
`spose it`s best to know what`s in front regardless.
Having to keep saying "heavy" between atc units? Sounds good to me.
Certainly that`s what l was told after rolling through sixty degrees against full control deflection in a SF340, with 4 mile spacing on approach. Local conditions were a calm summer evening in otherwise still air and vis that went forever.
The term "heavy" for the 75 came in soon after, possibly the timing of this was coincidental.
If l remember correctly prior to 1993 it was certificated as medium.
I know some had big fuel tanks and plainly the induced drag between models varied.
Wing tip vortices is the problem on take off but with a "heavy" it can be one on landing too despite relatively low fuel weight.
`spose it`s best to know what`s in front regardless.
Having to keep saying "heavy" between atc units? Sounds good to me.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: in the mire
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chewy
If this sounds patronising please forgive me, but it`s not just a case of size more scale.
If a fly went passed your face two feet away you wouldn`t feel the draft, but if a swan did it?
If a fly went passed your face two feet away you wouldn`t feel the draft, but if a swan did it?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: A Marriott somewhere
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heavy
Take it as a compliment that you are flying one of the finest airplanes ever built. And if you should forget to say it don't worry about it, US controllers are very nice to work with. They realize they work with you, they do not try to work against you like they do over here on a regular basis.
The "Heavy" is for wake turbulence reasons. The 757 is required to be classified as heavy because it flipped a Westwinf inverted on approach out in the mountains of the US somewhere. They determined the wake from the 757 was a lot stronger than the weight (I mean mass...or do I?) should indicate.
The "Heavy" is for wake turbulence reasons. The 757 is required to be classified as heavy because it flipped a Westwinf inverted on approach out in the mountains of the US somewhere. They determined the wake from the 757 was a lot stronger than the weight (I mean mass...or do I?) should indicate.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chewy... In the UK aircraft types are categorised for wake vortex purposes and ATC will provide the requisite separation.
On first contact with most UK ATC units pilots are required to state their aircraft type to confirm the flight plan information held by ATC. For this reason it is not mandatory to keep saying "heavy" as the controller is well aware of the type of aircraft he is dealing with. Requiring pilots to state the type of aircraft is because airlines are renowned for changing aircraft at a late stage and not informing ATC!
On first contact with most UK ATC units pilots are required to state their aircraft type to confirm the flight plan information held by ATC. For this reason it is not mandatory to keep saying "heavy" as the controller is well aware of the type of aircraft he is dealing with. Requiring pilots to state the type of aircraft is because airlines are renowned for changing aircraft at a late stage and not informing ATC!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Germany
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by HEATHROW DIRECTOR
Requiring pilots to state the type of aircraft is because airlines are renowned for changing aircraft at a late stage and not informing ATC!
Ok, that is a good explanation. Thank you Heathrow Diretor.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While we're at it, why do we have to report "localizer established" before we get a clearance to descend on the glidepath in the UK? (Lots of fun when the frequency is congested and you are about to fly through the GP!)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
prim2... Your question has been dealt with on here many, many times. It's a peculiar UK procedure to ensure saftey. There are a lot of movements going on underneath ILS tracks into major airports and several serious incidents have occurred due to pilots descending to low altitude when "cleared for the ILS". This has resulted in large aircraft flying at low level over London - I kid you not!. I understand that discussions are taking place to change the procedure......
I doubt if the R/T is often so busy that pilots cannot get descent - I did the Heathrow Final Director task for 31 years and don't recall that happening too often.
I doubt if the R/T is often so busy that pilots cannot get descent - I did the Heathrow Final Director task for 31 years and don't recall that happening too often.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They do get a bit keen on the word "heavy" in the US. In fact to the detriment of other things. I have been told to "taxi behind the heavy" before - now I'm sure wake isn't a problem on the taxiway and which "heavy" did she mean?
Bonkers.
Putting it in your callsign in times of close separation and on intial contact is a good idea I think, but for area control it is a waste of time I reckon.
Bonkers.
Putting it in your callsign in times of close separation and on intial contact is a good idea I think, but for area control it is a waste of time I reckon.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I stand to be corrected here - but while in the UK, and Europe generally I think, ATC normally provide wake votex spacing between aircraft (I'm talking about IFR aircraft under positive control - I know there are exceptions) but in the US it is more commonly a pilot responsibility and so knowing that the aircraft that you are following is a heavy becomes more important.
"But why do I have to tell for example Salt Lake Centre (Upper airspace) every single transmission in cruise flght(!) that i'm heavy?"
Very relevant in the RVSM world if your flying something smaller than the whale. I don't care what documents say what, 1000 ft below a heavy and you stand a chance of a wake encounter. I know from recent experience.
Very relevant in the RVSM world if your flying something smaller than the whale. I don't care what documents say what, 1000 ft below a heavy and you stand a chance of a wake encounter. I know from recent experience.