Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

An open discussion of aviation safety related issues.

Moderators: el, FrankM, Dmmoore

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4248
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby 3WE » Mon Jan 09, 2017 3:41 pm

I hereby proclaim that it is bologna for 747's to worry about wake separation distances from other 747's (within common sense and normal operations, of course)

For littler planes following bigger planes, yeah sure. But most of the rest of the time:

-172's don't worry about wake turbulence from 172's
-737's don't worry about wake turbulence from 737's
-and numerous other examples of different models with similar weight and performance

The behavior of aircraft wakes means that similar aircraft flying similar approach courses will generally never encounter each other's wake, except for light quartering tail winds: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publica ... -03-14.pdf Fig 7-3-3, 4, 5, 6, 7.

Yes, this is a blatant double post, but I hope for genius airmanship discussion here, not procedure-lovers and photographers.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 1659
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby Gabriel » Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:13 am

Here is proof that you are wrong :twisted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i50-FUjs_Dc

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4248
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby 3WE » Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:44 am

I see no evidence that the trailing 747 encountered the wake of the proceeding one.

The first plane makes as many, if not more control deflections.

Plus, one other person has a somewhat similar opinion that the hard looking landing may not be due to the wake...AND this gives me great pride.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 1659
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby Gabriel » Tue Jan 10, 2017 4:03 am

I see no wake of the proceeding one.
Of course not. The wake is invisible (most of the times anyway).

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4248
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby 3WE » Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:41 pm

I see no wake of the proceeding one.
Of course not. The wake is invisible (most of the times anyway).
Nice try, and yes, I acknowledge humourous intent.

The aggie scientist used the word 'evidence'.

The aggie again challenges the hell better aeroengineer...the sort of sudden, fairly straight down planting of the final few feet of the landing could indeed theoretically be some help from a wake...

BUT

It could be a whole lot of other things, including "a garden-variety pranger".

The overall aircraft motion and control surface movements show no evidence of a significant roll (something you might expect from a wake). The vertical movement of the plane shows evidence of numerous potential causes that are not_wake related.

Now, shall we debate good ole stick shift tractor transmissions versus the more automated, modern hydroshift and whether that affects soil compaction?
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Not_Karl
Posts: 2093
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 6:12 pm
Location: Buenos Aires

Re: Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby Not_Karl » Tue Jan 10, 2017 4:01 pm

It could be a whole lot of other things
Are you challenging the title of a Youtube video? :o
Junior Janitor, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Environmental Poisoning Assurance department.

"I think, based on the types of aircraft listed, you're pretty much guaranteed a fiery death."
- Contemporary Poet flyboy2548m to a Foffie.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 1659
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby Gabriel » Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:59 pm

Nice try, and yes, I acknowledge humourous intent.
Do you acknowledge it for my first post too? (although I would use the word irony)

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4248
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby 3WE » Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:20 pm

It could be a whole lot of other things
Are you challenging the title of a Youtube video? :o
Indeed,

However;

it is a necessary side effect of stirring crap on obscure aviation discussion fora.

I like Gabe, the-hell-better-aeroengineer, but sometimes Calculus 5, Differential Equations, Physics 3, dynamics, statics, structures, electronics, and aeronautics, numerical methods, AND coming up with scientific, type-specific procedures AND working with cheap composites, AND enduring life-threatening, Av-Herald-worthy turbulence...

...he sometimes forgets the fundamentals that wake turbulence is generally a rotating thingie that causes uncommanded roll inputs moreso than they do an inadequate measured flare pull-up and firm landing...

...what we see in the YouTube is no_hints of roll, and more of a garden-variety pranger, according to some not-so-tall, but moustache-lacking pilot.

Fortunately Gabe (and you?) are expressing at least some interest in the topic here. There is very little apparent interest there.

I also greatly appreciate Flyboy's input in a third thread.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4248
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby 3WE » Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:47 pm

Nice try, and yes, I acknowledge humourous intent.
Do you acknowledge it for my first post too? (although I would use the word irony)
Acknowledged.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 1659
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby Gabriel » Wed Jan 11, 2017 5:25 am

What I see is that the second Jumbo is approaching at a quite faster vertical speed before the flare.

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4248
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby 3WE » Wed Jan 11, 2017 12:31 pm

What I see is that the second Jumbo is approaching at a quite faster vertical speed before the flare with no significant rolling.
Fixed.

I note that a pilot suggested that the second 747 was making a high approach and "dive" potentially to avoid wake turbulence, but that does not mean that wake turbulence caused the solid landing.
Have you checked to see if there are light quartering tailwinds?
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
flyboy2548m
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:32 am
Location: Ormond Beach, FL

Re: Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby flyboy2548m » Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:23 pm

Let it go already.
Chief Pilot/ACJ Program Manager, Vandelay Industries, Inc

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4248
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby 3WE » Sun Jan 15, 2017 2:48 pm

Apologies for belaboring things.

I was hoping for someone to say (in simple terms)

Yes, 3BS, you make a valid point.

OR

No, actually the wake from a jumbo heavy jet could dangerously disrupt another jumbo heavy jet in the case of mild cheating (like shown in the video)- even though we give much less attention to lighter airliners following each other.

However, I accept that lack of discussion here and there is the norm. Thanks.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Sickbag
Posts: 2840
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: Spine-fuhrer of Hoboken

Re: Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby Sickbag » Mon Jan 16, 2017 7:07 am

Yes
TRUMP: in-presidency structural break-up
within 18 months...

User avatar
Not_Karl
Posts: 2093
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 6:12 pm
Location: Buenos Aires

Re: Wake Turbulence [i]there[/i].

Postby Not_Karl » Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:13 am

Yes
wrong
Junior Janitor, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Environmental Poisoning Assurance department.

"I think, based on the types of aircraft listed, you're pretty much guaranteed a fiery death."
- Contemporary Poet flyboy2548m to a Foffie.


Return to “Aviation Safety Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 5 guests