Listening to Live Atc of the Jfk tower the other day the controler was correcting any 757 pilot that used Heavy saying that as of last week they got a memo that all 757's were the same.
Printable View
Listening to Live Atc of the Jfk tower the other day the controler was correcting any 757 pilot that used Heavy saying that as of last week they got a memo that all 757's were the same.
From what I understand, 757s are not consider Heavies as some people believe..
I always thought the definition of heavy per the FAA was any aircraft capable of operating in excess of 255,000 lbs.
As far as I know only certain model 757s are capable of this.
Under the ICAO's definition though I don't think any 757s would fall under the "heavy" category (I believe it's something like 300,000lbs)...
Kind of makes sense - when I think 757 I don't really think of a heavy... I guess it's all relative...
I thought the -300's at least were always defined as heavy?
According to Boeing.com the 757-300 can achieve a max takeoff weight of 272,500 lbs which per the FAA qualifies as a heavy. Per ICAO standards though, it would not qualify as a heavy.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkLawrence
It looks like the FAA is just simplifying the whole airframe to ICAO standards and considering all 757s "non-heavies". At 272,000lbs it's just slightly greater the FAA's definition of a heavy that it really doesn't make much of a difference....
Perfect explanation Clark! Thanks!
the way i was taught is that the 757 is considered a heavy for wake turbulence purposes only, not for it's takeoff weight capabilities. it was given the same separation as heavy airplanes. not sure if that's changed though.
Correct, it is for the pilot trailing the 757 to know that the a/c is capable of producing wake turbulence, but the classification of "heavy" to a pilot is relative. A 757 may not be "heavy" to a 747 but a Citation is a "heavy" to a Cessna 172.Quote:
Originally Posted by cancidas
The ATA 752s, at least, were capable of operating over the heavy threshold weight, and were called heavy on the radio.
Correct. Really the most noteworthy outcome regarding this heavy vs. non-heavy designation of the B757 will be the reduction in separation ATC will have to give behind a 757. If the FAA is going to consider all 757s large aircraft (rather than a mix of large and heavy) then the separation between any 757 and the aircraft behind it on final can be reduced.Quote:
Originally Posted by N221UA
Also, regarding visual approaches, depending on each individual carrier's airframe and respective operating manuals, timing behind a 757 that was once considered heavy but is now considered large could also be reduced. Granted, the prudent thing to do would be to still treat the 757 (especially if you're cleared to follow it visually) as a heavy, but again depending on the each individual's operating manual "legally" one may not have to...
Here's some clarification, the FAA has changed the weights for heavies. It was 255k or more but is now 300k or more. The 752's(most of them) were just under the old threshold but the 300's were all heavies. Now all 757's are considered large but still get the extra mile of sep for a total of 4 for large or heavies behind them and 5 for smalls. Large get 5 behind heavies and smalls 6. Hope this helps
Here's the notice
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/medi ... 10.525.pdf
Thanks Bill; that makes sense. Glad to read the separations are still in order.Quote:
Originally Posted by njgtr82
Tom
Good to hear they will still maintain separation. Sounds like it's just a semantic issue then...
To build on what Matthew said.
I also remember hearing ATA 757-200/300s always being referred to as heavy. The only other airlines I recall using the term heavy was also Mexicana 757-200s and also Condor 757-300.
I spoke up a 757 pilot once and he stated that the 757 has a horrendous wake even worse than some planes larger than it.
Senga
Intresting. I was wondering why a Delta 753 was not checking in as heavy earlier this week in the Atlanta area.