What is the best thing to tell ATC after hearing - Caution Wake Turbulence

J

JasonM

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Mar 24, 2012
Messages
1,837
Location
West Virginia
Display Name
Display name:
JM
That thread on the helicopter got me thinking as well as another video of a small plane being pushed into a Bravo airport. What if I feel like being overly cautious. Whats the best way to tell them you want to wait a few minutes to land?
 
Ask to do a lap around the pattern due to wake turbulence...
 
A couple of 360s and a good way to practice slow flight or a departure to the N,S,E,W and then come back for a landing.
 
I would also think that if I was IFR, I would not be getting any heads up for Wake Turbulence until passed the IAF and on with Tower. So I guess that only leaves the FAF and that raises some flags on safety if IMC. Guess its really only go missed or take your chances with the Wake turbulence.

On the VFR side of things, can you just ask to do a 360 or for vectors for spacing or something easy. There has to be a "most common" request right?
 
While I was on downwind a Falcon 50 was short final. Tower cautioned wake turbulence. "I'd like to extend my downwind a minute". On top of that, I still touched down after his touch down point.
 
RV10flyer said:
While I was on downwind a Falcon 50 was short final. Tower cautioned wake turbulence. "I'd like to extend my downwind a minute". On top of that, I still touched down after his touch down point.
Click to expand...

Your right in that aspect. I would do that if I entered a pattern for sure. I was really thinking about being in a situation at a Class Bravo airport, where I personally have only been vectored to final rather than entering on a downwind etc.
 
I've been told to follow a particular jet to the airport, with no semblance of a pattern. Just follow along, stay above it and land long. I also check my clock when it's passing a ground point to make sure I stay at least three minutes behind.

For departure, I stop at the hold short and let the airliner go while doing my runup and checks. Also glance at the clock when it goes by, and after final checklist item, sit there and wait until three minutes pass before calling tower to report "ready to depart." Even so, tower will sometimes hold me for another minute or two. Taking off before the airliner is easy, but there's no way on God's green earth to match its climb rate, so turn on course as soon as you can.
 
JasonM said:
Have you heard of anyone doing that?
Click to expand...

No I haven't. Then again I haven't heard of someone wanting to do it because ATC already seperates IFR aircraft by 2-3 minutes depending on aircraft size. That Cirrus came into frame 25 seconds after that Blackhawk departed. You are responsible for wake turbulence avoidance when:

a. flying in VFR and not being vectored by ATC.
b. maintaining visual separation.
c. cleared for a visual approach.

Hank S said:
Just follow along, stay above it and land long. I also check my clock when it's passing a ground point to make sure I stay at least three minutes behind.
Click to expand...
I do that as well
 
Last edited:
JasonM said:
This video I recently watched had this guy vectored to final into a class B for a visual approach, while VFR and gave a Wake Turbulence warning. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgQRkd1kQpQ#t=760
Click to expand...

Yeah, he was on a visual approach. He'll get an advisory, but if he's visual, he is responsible for making sure he flies a steeper approach and lands past the other airplane. You can't really do that when you are IFR because you have no way of knowing the flight path of the plane in front of you.
 
JasonM said:
I was really thinking about being in a situation at a Class Bravo airport, where I personally have only been vectored to final rather than entering on a downwind etc.
Click to expand...

Slow down and configure early
 
This is a really strange question. Wake turbulence lasts 2 minutes or so before going away. Unless you are literally 1/2 mile away from a jet landing, by the time that hey touches down, in a typical 172esk plane you will be way further behind than 2 minutes.

Land beyond the touchdown point of the jet and you are fine. Fly above his flight path, you are fine! So literally all I would say to ATC. " Roger."

I have to say, I've been reading this forum for years now and the level of confusion surrounding wake turbulence is really high. It seems like lots of people who train in airports without jet traffic are lost when it comes to wake turbulence. I trained in a busy class c and learned to be cautious of wake turbulence but with people suggesting requests of extra laps around the pattern, 360's and the like, I can say that never did anyone respond that way to a "caution wake turbulence," advisory from the tower.
 
Hank S said:
but there's no way on God's green earth to match its climb rate, so turn on course as soon as you can.
Click to expand...

Be sure to ask tower before you depart if you can get the early turn. Learned that one the hard way, luckily is was just very bumpy with no tendency to roll us. :redface:
 
JasonM said:
This video I recently watched had this guy vectored to final into a class B for a visual approach, while VFR and gave a Wake Turbulence warning. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgQRkd1kQpQ#t=760
Click to expand...

That aircraft was IFR and not VFR. Separation for IFR and VFR in this airspace is built in until the pilot accepts visual sep. In this case you're looking at 3 miles for an EMB120. The "caution wake turbulence" was optional in this case prudent base in the type aircraft involved.

I think you're looking for a hard and fast rule to apply here and there isn't any. My advice. If you're IFR, additional sep is built in so when you're IMC I wouldn't worry about it. If you're IFR and VMC and accept visual sep with a heavier aircraft (jet / large turboprop) I'd make darn sure you either at or above their altitude on final. If you're VFR then ask to extend, stay high or do a go around. Do whatever is necessary as PIC for the safety of your aircraft.
 
Last edited:
I assess the potential for wake turbulence becoming a problem based on the weight of the other aircraft and prevailing winds and adjust accordingly.

If I feel uncomfortable I avoid the situation accordingly and make ATC aware of my intentions. This might be as simple as asking for additional separation for wake turbulence.

If I am taking off behind a departing heavy I ask for an early turnout and turn out before the point the departing aircraft rotated.

If I am taking off behind a landing heavy I lift off beyond their touch down point.

If I am landing behind a departing heavy I land before the point the heavy rotated.

If I am landing behind a landing heavy I stay above their glide slope and land beyond their touch down point.

In calm conditions with a very heavy aircraft or a large helicopter I like to wait more than two minutes before passing beneath their flight path.

I have a low fear threshold and fly a gyroplane that typically has a takeoff weight of less than 1,000 pounds.

I fly for fun and a few extra minutes of wait for takeoff or flight time is not a problem for me.

I often fly at airports with regional jets and large helicopters.
 
Velocity173 said:
That aircraft was IFR and not VFR. Separation for IFR is built in until the pilot accepts visual sep.
Click to expand...

...or if he accepts and is cleared for a visual approach. Then wake turbulence responsibility lies with the pilot.
 
JasonM said:
You should read the title of the video or watch more of it. ;)
Click to expand...

At 11:38 the pilot was cleared for a visual approach. He either got an IFR clearance that wasn't recorded or the controller mistakenly cleared him. Either way:

Visual Approach

5-4-23. Visual Approach
a. A visual approach is conducted on an IFR flight plan and authorizes a pilot to proceed visually and clear of clouds to the airport. The pilot must have either the airport or the preceding identified aircraft in sight. This approach must be authorized and controlled by the appropriate air traffic control facility. Reported weather at the airport must have a ceiling at or above 1,000 feet and visibility 3 miles or greater. ATC may authorize this type approach when it will be operationally beneficial. Visual approaches are an IFR procedure conducted under IFR in visual meteorological conditions. Cloud clearance requirements of 14 CFR Section 91.155 are not applicable, unless required by operation specifications.
 
JasonM said:
I like that.
Click to expand...

That's great and all but that only applies if there's increased wake turbulence separation for that particular situation.

For instance take your Cirrus example. We'll disregard the VA approach clearance and call him VFR. There is no wake turbulence separation because the Brasila isn't a large or a heavy. There is however standard VFR vs VFR/IFR separation in a Class B. The Brasila is a small (+) weighing greater than 19,000 lbs. Therefore the controller at SFO is required to keep the Cirrus at least 1.5 miles in trail of the Brasilia if less than 500 ft vertical. The controller in this case "pointed out" traffic on the Brasila for the Cirrus to follow. After seeing the traffic, the Cirrus was directed to maintain visual separation from the traffic and to follow it. Now, if the Cirrus pilot said "unable, request wake turbulence separation" it would be a useless transmission. The pilot has already been afforded standard Class B separation before hand. Whether or not they want to maintain that separation that ATC provided, is entirely up to the Cirrus pilot. That's the whole point of using visual. Maintain standard sep until the pilot reports the preceding traffic in sight, then put the responsibility on the trailing pilot's shoulders.
 
JasonM said:
That thread on the helicopter got me thinking as well as another video of a small plane being pushed into a Bravo airport. What if I feel like being overly cautious. Whats the best way to tell them you want to wait a few minutes to land?
Click to expand...

JasonM said:
Just to complicate it some.. What if you were IFR?
Click to expand...

How does being IFR complicate it? How are you being "pushed" into a Bravo airport?
 
Velocity173 said:
That's great and all but that only applies if there's increased wake turbulence separation for that particular situation.

For instance take your Cirrus example. We'll disregard the VA approach clearance and call him VFR. There is no wake turbulence separation because the Brasila isn't a large or a heavy. There is however standard VFR vs VFR/IFR separation in a Class B. The Brasila is a small (+) weighing greater than 19,000 lbs. Therefore the controller at SFO is required to keep the Cirrus at least 1.5 miles in trail of the Brasilia if less than 500 ft vertical. The controller in this case "pointed out" traffic on the Brasila for the Cirrus to follow. After seeing the traffic, the Cirrus was directed to maintain visual separation from the traffic and to follow it. Now, if the Cirrus pilot said "unable, request wake turbulence separation" it would be a useless transmission. The pilot has already been afforded standard Class B separation before hand. Whether or not they want to maintain that separation that ATC provided, is entirely up to the Cirrus pilot. That's the whole point of using visual. Maintain standard sep until the pilot reports the preceding traffic in sight, then put the responsibility on the trailing pilot's shoulders.
Click to expand...

That pilot is not IFR rated.
 
roncachamp said:
How does being IFR complicate it? How are you being "pushed" into a Bravo airport?
Click to expand...

I think knowing more now, IFR makes things easier. Being pushed as this guy was told to keep his speeds up etc, then told Wake Turbulence.
 
JasonM said:
I think knowing more now, IFR makes things easier. Being pushed as this guy was told to keep his speeds up etc, then told Wake Turbulence.
Click to expand...

So you've got faster traffic behind you and the wake turbulence advisory is for traffic in front of you? You said this was a Class B airport, so it's unlikely that's all the traffic there is. Some of the suggestions offered are just not feasible. A lap in holding at the FAF won't work with a string of traffic behind you. A lap around the pattern probably isn't an option where traffic patterns aren't commonly used.
 
roncachamp said:
Some of the suggestions offered are just not feasible. A lap in holding at the FAF won't work with a string of traffic behind you. A lap around the pattern probably isn't an option where traffic patterns aren't commonly used.
Click to expand...

I said he could ask. Do I think he is gonna get that request granted? Absolutely not. They will try to separate you and you have techniques which should have been taught to you during your training. But when you start asking for more room to "ease your comfort"...they are probably gonna tell you to go somewhere else or wait for a large enough gap to fit you in. They aren't gonna make a 747 full of cargo or an MD-80 full of passengers go around because of a Cirrus. Mr. Cirrus will be lowest on the priority totem pole.
 
"Please copy the following phone number for my next of kin."

How about, "Cherokee, that jet at the terminal you're taxing behind, is about to start engines."
 
We have big jets and military helicopters at my home base. When I get the Caution Wake Turbulence, I've been known to ask where the departure point was on the runway for the previous aircraft.
 
DANG you guys make something much harder than it is.

Remain above glideslope (100 feet is plenty) and land long. If wake turbulence really is an issue, you have much more runway than you need.

If the wake turbulence is due to a departing 757, land short.
 
Fly at KVNY where we get warnings maybe 1/2 the time. Don't mess with wake turbulence. I was in a 767 with 200+ people and we were almost turned upside down, after which the pilot apologized (British Airways, Amsterdam to Heathrow).

Take off: "N371CD would like to wait for 2 minutes for wake turbulence." "Roger N371CD, take off clearance cancelled. Advise when ready." Do this all the time.

Landing: "N371CD requesting extended downwind due to wake turbulence." or "N371CD requesting left 360 for wake turbulence."

Works every time. 3 minutes wait...possibly more with larger aircraft.
 
Wake turbulence from landing aircraft = good opportunity to come in high and practice a good slip.

Wake turbulence from departing aircraft = good opportunity to do a short field landing
 
MAKG1 said:
DANG you guys make something much harder than it is.

Remain above glideslope (100 feet is plenty) and land long. If wake turbulence really is an issue, you have much more runway than you need.

If the wake turbulence is due to a departing 757, land short.
Click to expand...

+1

Too many wake turbulence questions here...really a no brainer.

If you have to post a question about WT....you shouldn't be flying anywhere near these areas.

This is kindergarten stuff folks...you should know what to do....and if kindergarten is below you....keep flying and plan your routes where heavys don't fly.
 
Last edited:
TEFLONSEAN said:
+1

Too many wake turbulence questions here...really a no brainer.

If you have to post a question about WT....you shouldn't be flying anywhere near these areas.

This is kindergarten stuff folks...you should know what to do....and if kindergarten is below you....keep flying and plan your routes where heavys don't fly.
Click to expand...


I thought this was the "Pilot Training" Forum?

For those of us thinking of getting into flying, reading various discussions and differing ideas is much more helpful than reading your condescending post.
 
JayhawkCurtis said:
I thought this was the "Pilot Training" Forum?

For those of us thinking of getting into flying, reading various discussions and differing ideas is much more helpful than reading your condescending post.
Click to expand...

Welcome to Pilots of America. Good to hear from another lurker. Glad that we can add to your learning on this forum.:yes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top