In other news, wake turbulence liberates tile(s); car damaged, expert called in
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In other news, wake turbulence liberates tile(s); car damaged, expert called in
http://www.thisissouthampton.co.uk/h...EWS_NEWS0.html
This made the local paper today. I hadn't heard of wake turbulence causing problems for houses before, is this possible or is this slightly exciteable reportage?
This made the local paper today. I hadn't heard of wake turbulence causing problems for houses before, is this possible or is this slightly exciteable reportage?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It can happen and is not that rare. But Southampton doesn't get the heavy stuff- I should think the odd 757 is the biggest. Tiles do fall off roofs- a near neighbour had one dislodge and fall 3 floors to hit her soft-top Jaguar (on a not soft bit). We are near no airports. But if a heavy was on a low approach, then maybe the vortex would come to the surface.
Strange that this should come up (as the actress said to the bishop) but in 40 years in the business I've only experienced it once and that was just a couple of months ago, in the evening, at the poolside of a US airport hotel.
An aircraft had passed close to overhead and then we heard a roaring wind noise followed by trees being shaken and palm leaves blown about. We were so shaken that we had to have another beer.
I guess that the surprising thing is that it doesn't happen more often.
An aircraft had passed close to overhead and then we heard a roaring wind noise followed by trees being shaken and palm leaves blown about. We were so shaken that we had to have another beer.
I guess that the surprising thing is that it doesn't happen more often.
I live about a mile further from the airport than the site of this incident, about 100 m N of the normal approach, and I regularly hear vortices from 146s and see the effect on the trees surrounding my garden. Other types, including 737/757, do not seem to be so noticable. I heard the lady in question being interviewed on Radio Solent yesterday and she described a scheme that the airport had put together to investigate and compensate people for this sort of incident.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: London
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hadn't heard of wake turbulence causing problems for houses before, is this possible or is this slightly exciteable reportage?
HAL have paid to totally re-rrof a huge number of houses in the area with a different tile or fixing to prevent further damage...
Chips
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Warrington, UK
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As you pass along Ringway Road to the immediate Northeast of the 24R threshold at Manchester, you will see more than a dozen homes with partially or fully re-tiled roofs.
An ex-colleague of mine had a relative living there for many years and she said the worst culprits were Concorde (a rare visitor and maybe the vibration caused by re-heated engines caused the problems) and PIA 747s on what did always seem to be very long take off runs! :-)
An ex-colleague of mine had a relative living there for many years and she said the worst culprits were Concorde (a rare visitor and maybe the vibration caused by re-heated engines caused the problems) and PIA 747s on what did always seem to be very long take off runs! :-)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vortices are horizontal mini-whirlwinds trailing off the wingtips. They descend slowly (I think about 600\'/min) to hit the ground if not blown apart by a reasonable wind. Then they will obviously roll over the ground dissipating rapidly. Being a rotating phenomena, the pressure will be lower in the vortex, which when strongest is at its smallest. Hence roof tiles could be dislodged by a combination of low pressure and wind close to other areas unaffected. They stop the moment the aeroplane touches down and unloads the wing. Concorde was a powerful vortex generator because of the large, heavily loaded delta wing.
I would think a 146 might give a sparrow a shock, but roof tiles? Maybe the lady\'s roof needs replacing! I would bet the tiles were lying loose on the roof already! \'Southampton Airports fault\'? Naah!
I would think a 146 might give a sparrow a shock, but roof tiles? Maybe the lady\'s roof needs replacing! I would bet the tiles were lying loose on the roof already! \'Southampton Airports fault\'? Naah!
A few things come to mind.
I haven't much sympathy for people who decide to live near the threshold and then complain about the inconvenience so the tone of the airport rep's apology for the damage grates somewhat.
Always wondered how accurate that lunatic stunt in "Pushing Tin", lying down at the end of the runway while a 747 lands, was. And what's it like on the beach at St Maarten?
Where I live I get a good view of 737s and 319s landing at SDU from the Sugarloaf end. On a calm day and if the aircraft is slightly low it will leave a distinct ruffle on the water, which I've always attributed to the blast from the engines. On one occasion I thought a 737 was going to wet its feet half a mile from the threshold; the blast as he powered out of that raised two small roostertails.
I haven't much sympathy for people who decide to live near the threshold and then complain about the inconvenience so the tone of the airport rep's apology for the damage grates somewhat.
Always wondered how accurate that lunatic stunt in "Pushing Tin", lying down at the end of the runway while a 747 lands, was. And what's it like on the beach at St Maarten?
Where I live I get a good view of 737s and 319s landing at SDU from the Sugarloaf end. On a calm day and if the aircraft is slightly low it will leave a distinct ruffle on the water, which I've always attributed to the blast from the engines. On one occasion I thought a 737 was going to wet its feet half a mile from the threshold; the blast as he powered out of that raised two small roostertails.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: London
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Broadreach what point are you trying to make?
Accident happened, attributable to aircraft, airport apologised. There is no slagging of the airport in the article, just an annoyance that this could have caused more serious injury, which is true. I have been around when this kind of thing happens and it is very frightening. You have no idea how long these people have lived near the airport, how big/busy it was whan they moved in etc...
eal401 said
I agree!
Notso fantastic
Trust me - they can be dislodged by vortices, and are. Ask anyone in Hounslow, anyone at Heathrow Airport Ltd or anyone at Richardson Roofing who have spent the last three or more years on this project...
Chips
Accident happened, attributable to aircraft, airport apologised. There is no slagging of the airport in the article, just an annoyance that this could have caused more serious injury, which is true. I have been around when this kind of thing happens and it is very frightening. You have no idea how long these people have lived near the airport, how big/busy it was whan they moved in etc...
eal401 said
Bit of a non-story to me.
Notso fantastic
Hence roof tiles could be dislodged by a combination of low pressure and wind close to other areas unaffected.
Chips
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Always wondered how accurate that lunatic stunt in "Pushing Tin", lying down at the end of the runway while a 747 lands, was. And what's it like on the beach at St Maarten?
The figure of 600fpm for a vortex's decent seems about right. The worst ones always seem to stream from the outboard edge of the trailing edge flaps. If it's really humid and you can see the condensation in the low pressure region, you can watch them strike the ground. They don't seem to spread out (span-wise) much at all, but grow into fairly large "cones".
You certainly know when one touches down near you - a tearing sound followed by severe buffeting - make sure you stand with your legs apart, or you will fall over.
Iconoclast
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The home of Dudley Dooright-Where the lead dog is the only one that gets a change of scenery.
Posts: 2,132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many moons ago...that's Indian talk.
An Air Force B-36 landed and was in the process of shutting down on the hard stand when an Air Force PBY landed (some fifteen minutes after the B-36 touched down). The wake turbulence was still quite pronounced and it flipped the PBY on its' back killing the entire crew in the process.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lu. Approach vortices are of very short duration. If that was the case, no light aircraft could follow a heavy into anywhere for long periods. When the vortex rolls down, it dissipates quite rapidly. Cruise vortices can last for a minute or two. Following one about 10 miles ahead and 1000' above, we kept running into its vortex, but 15 minutes? Too long.
Chips,
I wasn't trying to make a point at all. The newspaper article's factual, no problem with that. Non-story. And I take your point re how frightening it can be. But I think I did say the little sympathy was for people who decide to live near the threshold but I do also understand there were a few there before the threshold existed.
What niggles me a bit, really, is the apologetic tone the airport reps have to take. Ok, call it conciliatory. But contacting the aircraft manufacturer, a promise attributed to the rep in the article? Come on, please. Just seems a bit groveling.
Let's not let this thread descend into a pro/con airport noise/annoyance issue. The main subject, i.e. effect of vortices close to the ground, is interesting in itself.
So I have a question. NSF, assuming still air, at how low an altitude would a heavy aircraft have to pass over a house to dislodge rooftiles? And am I right in assuming that as the cone diameter increases, the speed of the vortex decreases?
I wasn't trying to make a point at all. The newspaper article's factual, no problem with that. Non-story. And I take your point re how frightening it can be. But I think I did say the little sympathy was for people who decide to live near the threshold but I do also understand there were a few there before the threshold existed.
What niggles me a bit, really, is the apologetic tone the airport reps have to take. Ok, call it conciliatory. But contacting the aircraft manufacturer, a promise attributed to the rep in the article? Come on, please. Just seems a bit groveling.
Let's not let this thread descend into a pro/con airport noise/annoyance issue. The main subject, i.e. effect of vortices close to the ground, is interesting in itself.
So I have a question. NSF, assuming still air, at how low an altitude would a heavy aircraft have to pass over a house to dislodge rooftiles? And am I right in assuming that as the cone diameter increases, the speed of the vortex decreases?
