Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

RVSM and wake

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

inthegoo

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2003
Posts
308
Cruzin at 350 the other day in my little RJ and a heavy 747-400 went by 1000 above the other direction on the airway, a minute or so later it got a little interesting, not too bad but it felt like if we had hit it a little better it could have been a crazy ride, and somethin about linear airflow through the engines, and it being alot more critical up there comes to mind,

did they consider this when they thought up RVSM?

-Goo (almost goo'ed in my underoos)
 
I'd say yes but not sure why the FAA isn't more proactive about it in the states. when flying on the north atlantic tracks you can deviate either 1 or 2 nm off course (left I think but it's been a while) w/o asking or telling the controlling agency for the wake turbulence. of course, pretty much everyone is going same direction on NAT tracks.

I suspect that eventually they'll come up with some kind of 'randomizer' for high altitude flying that puts you within 2 miles of centerline (1 left or right) but biases to zero as you descend. I mean, in some ways we were safer on VORs and NDBs since even co-altitude nose to nose, the chance of hitting were slim. these days, if one of you has a bad transponder or TCAS, you're going beak to beak with catastophic results (look at business jet and GOL 737 in Brazil)

The wake situation and the 'everybody is exactly on the airways 99.9% of the time' situation are unintended consequences of our improving navigation with 1960s air traffic control. I mean, do we really all have to fly over EMI or BVT to get out of a major metro area. Or south florida "sorry the route is closed." the route, we only have one way to get all the planes from Florida to the NE? not their fault, but the equipment and paradigms that ATC is using can make for a real mess with a little weather on the standard routes.

I suspect if you ever see that again you could ask ATC to offset upwind of the heavy and the might approve it, haven't tried it myself. I'm sure someone with more knowledge will enlighten us.
 
Last edited:
Wake is greatest when the airplane is heavy, dirty, and slow. Up at cruise its probably only heavy.
 
Wake is greatest when the airplane is heavy, dirty, and slow. Up at cruise its probably only heavy.

It's been a while, but I think you mean heavy clean and slow.

I know in the EMB-145 you can select to parallel the course with the SXtrack (or something like that, it's my day off) on the FMS. I've used that a few times in that situation.
 
Last edited:
For what it's worth

Here is a scenario worth keeping in mind.



Numbers to remember: 1,000 feet, 500 fpm, 16 miles, 2:40 minutes


Operating with RVSM in the North Atlantic has greatly increased the usable airspace for the swarm of aircraft that cross the Atlantic twice each day. But, it also exposes you to the very real hazard of encountering the wake turbulence of the aircraft that is 1,000 feet above you on the same track. It is inevitable that as
the number of crossings you encounter increase, sooner or later you will experience this phenomenon.

Wake turbulence comprises two components, engine exhaust and wing tip vortex. The engine exhaust is not significant for this discussion since it does not descend as fast as the vortex and is weaker and dissipates rapidly.

The wing tip vortex, however is powerful and does not dissipate quickly, and descends at approximately 500 feet per minute. In smooth air, not necessarily still air, but uniformly moving air, wing tip vortex remains intact and for the two minutes it takes to descend to your altitude, it is still violent enough to knock a person of their feet in the back of the aircraft.

When will you encounter it?
It takes two minutes for the wing tip vortex to fall the 1,000 feet to your altitude, but deceivingly, you will not encounter it until approximately 2:40 minutes after the offending aircraft has passed overhead.

The math involved (1,000 feet, 16 miles, 2:40 minutes) can be a little confusing, but need not be. A B747, or other similar aircraft cruising at FL340 is doing M.84,
or approximately 495 KTAS. Your Bizjet is at FL330 and assigned M.83, or 489KTAS. His 6 knot speed advantage will put him 16 miles ahead of you in 2:40
minutes after he passes overhead. You can watch him on the TCAS. At that moment he generates a wing tip vortex that begins falling at 500 fpm. In the two minutes that it takes you to cover that 16 miles, (approx. 8 miles per minute) the vortex has descended to your altitude. If there is no crosswind, or if you are downwind of his track just the right amount you will be in his vortex.

What’s the effect of the wind?
Wind obviously has a great effect on these encounters. In short a headwind or tail wind will have no effect, but a crosswind has a major effect on the outcome.

A headwind or tail wind component has no effect because we all are flying the Mach Number Technique prescribed for MNPS airspace. The vortex moves fore or aft with the air mass just as we do.
Our speed relative to wing tip vortex does not change. Therefore the approximate times and distances discussed here remain valid, regardless of a headwind or tailwind component.

A crosswind component is different because we fly a prescribed track over the ground. We allow our aircraft to crab into a crosswind component in order to maintain the desired track over the ground. So, while the vortex will blow the offending aircraft’s wing tip vortex two miles downwind from his track during the two minutes it takes to descend to your altitude, clearly, if your tracks are identical you will not encounter his vortex but, if your track differs from his by two miles down wind, you will may be in for a large jolt.

On the westbound North Atlantic crossings in good weather, and contrailing conditions, you can visualize the vortices coming, in other conditions you must be aware of where the airplanes are above you. Listen on Air to Air and watch the TCAS, watch the crosswind components for signs of impending wake turbulence.

Guidance:
The Jeppesen AT (H/L) 1 & 2 chart has guidance. The guidance begins with “Notify ATC and request a revised clearance. If a revised clearance is not practical....” You can safely interpret that to mean that you should request a new clearance only if you want a clearance on a different track. It does not mean that you should request a new clearance to fly an offset from your cleared track. You may offset up to 2 miles without a clearance. Although you are required to advise ATC of your offset, they will not normally issue a clearance, nor will they normally respond to you through the radio facility. If and when your aircraft becomes ADS
equipped, ATC will be able to see your offset just as if they were using radar, so
any failure to acknowledge your actions will be handled as if you had deviated without the proper clearance or communications.
 
The big question here is: Did you report the encounter to ATC? IIRC they are suppossed to documents those reports.
 
Spooky, since you put a lot of time into your argument, I hate to tell you that if you are going the same direction there are 2000 feet between the two of you. The even and odd alt's are still in effect just 2 not 4 thousand apart.

Dave
 
Spooky, since you put a lot of time into your argument, I hate to tell you that if you are going the same direction there are 2000 feet between the two of you. The even and odd alt's are still in effect just 2 not 4 thousand apart.

Dave

Dave not sure where you are flying but RVSM allows for for a 1000' interval vertical seperation in both domestic, and in my example MNPS airspace. Same direction flights with 1000' between are the norm in many parts of the world, thus my example stands on it's own merits.
 
Last edited:
Spooky, since you put a lot of time into your argument, I hate to tell you that if you are going the same direction there are 2000 feet between the two of you. The even and odd alt's are still in effect just 2 not 4 thousand apart.

Dave


They weren't going the same direction. Re-read his first post.
 
I'm not sure who did the math here, but with a 6 kt overtake, you're NOT gonna gain 16 miles in 2min40sec. Sorry!

I never made it through addition/subtraction in 3rd Grade, but i still know the math on that is wrong. 2:40 will be more like 1/4 mile! To get 16 miles with a 6 kt speed delta you'll need 2h40min!
 
It's really going to surprise you but one night on the NAT Tracks I got slowed down to a dismal M 0.81 by some fracking Airbii light twin and that POS's wake was kicking the ol Classic around!

The solution was a simple offset 1/2 mile. After several hours the miserable offending eurotrashjet was able to stagger out of our way to a higher altitude and we were allowed to resume a more reasonable mach speed for transatlantic crossings.

I wouldn't mind getting out of the way for something like Concord, but to be held low and slowed down by a new, high tech airplane like Airbus Industries claims to produce...well, I would try to embreairass them more but they went ahead with that buttugly 380 thing and they are doing a fine job by themselves!
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure who did the math here, but with a 6 kt overtake, you're NOT gonna gain 16 miles in 2min40sec. Sorry!



I never made it through addition/subtraction in 3rd Grade, but i still know the math on that is wrong. 2:40 will be more like 1/4 mile! To get 16 miles with a 6 kt speed delta you'll need 2h40min!

Good catch. I never learned to type either!
 
It's been a while, but I think you mean heavy clean and slow.

I know in the EMB-145 you can select to parallel the course with the SXtrack (or something like that, it's my day off) on the FMS. I've used that a few times in that situation.


Been a while for me too... Guess thats what I meant.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top