goaround2000

Once again my brother, it's not an issue of intent, but the 5 mile separation is there for a reason. It takes care of all variables, so that we don't have to raise the element of risk to accommodate flow. I'm all about helping you guys out, but not at the expense of safety. You and I both know that there are more slots in EWR between 1800Z and 2300Z than the airport can handle, yet you and I are forced to mask the problem by trying to make it work.

So honest question for you: If you guys are ok with "safety first", why is it that any time we use the words "unable" on approach we get a great deal of grief by the controllers? Again in the spirit of working together I'm more than happy to try things so long as it doesn't compromise the safety of my passengers, if/when pilots say the word "unable", there is a reason, and during the approach I may not have time to elaborate, nor is it in the regulations that I should.

Please understand this is not an assault on you folks, but rather talking about the 800lb gorilla that no one wants to talk about. It's time to put the pressure on the folks that are really causing the problem, needless to say it isn't you or me. The best thing the FAA can do at this point is de-peak EWR. Would that make your job safer? Absolutely, would it anger your main client in EWR something awful? Yes, no doubt you guys might get a few calls, but if you were putting your family in the back of my plane, which one would you rather have?

shfo

The problem with the wake separation is that is not an exact science but the FAA makes it seem like it is. IE a heavy behind a heavy needs 4, a small behind a 757 needs 5, etc. There are much more factors involved, but to simplify things the FAA set these numbers in stone.

Some of the other factors include:

1 winds. If there is a 30 knot crosswind I'm not too worried about the guy I'm following, I might however be a little concerned for the guy on the upwind parallel that is a couple hundred feet higher than I am due to his threshold being farther down from where mine is.

If there is a strong headwind the wake should be no factor.

If there is a direct tailwind you are going to need extra distance or stay above which produces the problems already listed.

2 weight/acutal weight vs MGTOW
My MGTOW is around 45,000 lbs, a 737-900's MGTOW is more than 174,000 but we are both "large". Also a 747-400 on a ferry flight could be 200,000 to 300,000 lbs less than gross weight. Also a 747 needs 5 miles behind a 757 and that 757 needs 5 miles behind the heavy. Who do you think will be affected more by the wake? The 255,000 plane hitting the 800,000 lbs plane's wake or the 800,000 plane hitting the 255,000 lbs plane's wake?

3 performance. This really only deals with departing/go around aircraft. Some planes are just pigs. I have no problem departing behind an A340-200 because I am usually above him a couple of miles after departure. On the other end you have a 757 or a lightly loaded heavy. His departure path will be much higher than mine posing a problem. Like I pointed out above I am 1/4th the weight of aircraft that are in my category. I can get assigned "maintain visual with the A320/737 cleared for takeoff 24L" when the other plane is still rolling down the runway. You don't assign a 737 to maintain visual with a 747 and clear them for immediate takeoff while the heavy is still rolling down the runway but the ratio of weights is about the same.

The worst wake I have encountered was from an A319 that was very lightly loaded. He climbed like a rocket we got an immediate takeoff behind him and hit his wake at a couple of hundred feet putting us in a 60 degree bank. If I hit that wake at rotation it could have been deadly.

This really isn't inteded for you guys in the Northeast this is a Socal issue. The guys in NY and ORD are some of the best controllers in the world.

Ajax

I agree with you 100%. Safety first, and nothing else matters. We're on the same page on that. I was just trying to give you an insight into how we view visual approaches here at N90. Its a tool to allow the final to compress to a point where doing it IFR would not be possible.

I agree that the solution is to spread out the slots to other times. There are many time slots that are not being used, and we could probably land another 200 flights per 24 hour period if you moved arrivals evenly to cover each time slot, but....that depends on your companies.

As for the last part... I don't get angry if I get an unable. I may get frustrated about the prospect of having to send you around, or take you out for resequence, because that means extra work. but I would never get angry because a pilot chooses to be safe and not accept a visual. I am probably one of the controllers in my area that uses visual on final the least, because I rarely nitiate asking for it, but if a pilot tells me "we got the DH8 over TEB in sight", I'll give them the clearance.

The controllers that depend on visuals all the time to make it work are "weak" in my book. Its usually supervisors that like to push visuals when they're getting "proficiency" time, and some of the younger, less experienced ones, as well as a couple of the old, near retirement age with "burn out" syndrome that are losing their touch.

TonyWilliams

And by inference, the SoCal dudes... not so great?

goaround2000

Well, I appreciate you taking a stand, I truly wish some guys would take into account that it could be their own families riding in the back. That being said, could that separation, that extra 1/2 mile or mile that you need be attained elsewhere via vectors? It's an honest question as most of us pilots have a very narrow view of the airspace. I would gladly take a few turns after "SWEET" if it meant having the proper separation on the approach.

Dashdog

Excellent post. Wake separation needs to be reviewed, and your explanation details exactly why. However, it most certainly is a problem in the northeast as well as socal.
The A-321 in particular has scared me a few times.
Also, many pilots are not aware, but if a controller asks you to maintain visual separation behind a 757 and you agree, then the responsibility for wake separation falls on you. They will not do that for a departure (unless you request it), but they can and do ask for it on an arrival. This has happened to me twice in LGA.

Ajax

oh trust me, most of us have no qualms about vectoring for extra space.

I'll give you a hint...if on initial contact you get a "depart sweet heading 140", chances are you're going to get vectored quite a few times to build space, or to allow traffic coming on the PHLBO arrival to mix in. On the other hand, if you get a 90 heading out of sweet, chances are you're going to have less delaying/sequencing vectors. We adjust those headings out of Sweet quite a bit depending on where we're fitting you in.

shfo

I know you used to work down there. There are some good guys there but the majority I have issues with.

Socal approach relies too much on visual approaches and gets way too irritated when they hear the words unable. They like to issue visual approaches to put the separation on the pilots and then micro-manage you all the way to the ground. "Bugsmasher 123 you have 80 knot overtake on traffic infront of you slow to final immediately" I've heard that while over the marker with the guy in front of me over the threshold. If you want to tell me what to do, give me an ILSs. I've also been vectored to 2000 feet still in the clouds with the controller asking over and over do you have traffic or the field in sight. There was a layer from the Harbor freeway east, she told us to turn left to 250 about a mile south of final we finally broke out on a 4 mile final for HHR and told her field in sight. She said follow the 757 at your 3 o'clock on final for 25L caution wake turbulence cleared viusal 25L. She had vectored us parallel to the 757 traffic we were supposed to follow and waited till we had the field in sight to let us know her plan she also never assigned any speed to us or them. We had assumed that the guy we saw on the TCAS was on the north side.

They also get irritated when coming in behind a heavy over SMO and given an expedite to 2500 and I say unable. I'm not expediting, I will ride the heavy's wake all the way down if I do that. Then once I get to 2500 I continue downwind until outside the Bravo airspace before being turned to final 4000 feet below the guy in front of me on the RIIVR or SEAVU.

I've also never figured out why they can't get people coming in from the east on the runway which is closest to that flight's terminal. I understand not crossing a final when coming in over SMO or SLI but when you are on a 200+ mile final there is no reason a UAL plane from IAD should land on the northside and a WN plane from PHX should land on the southside.

As far as tower, I think of US1493 and SKY5569 anytime I get cleared onto a runway. They are way too quick to get people off the ground. I've seen 3 airplanes depart from the southside in less than a minute all with different climb profiles (speeds). This overloads departure requiring them to stop the climb at a lower altitude, give a new heading, or give a speed instruction or a combination to each aircraft.

Ajax

I wish I knew a little about the operation there. Hopefully we can get a Socal controller to post here, because I'd like to hear their reasoning for always trying to get visuals.

Nevets

I always was under the impression that FARs require you to comply with an RA? I know my company does regardless of if you think you have the traffic in sight. I had a situation like that on arrival to ONT. I was cleared for the visual to 8R and then given a traffic advisory for a BE58. I saw it, so I thought, and was told to maintain visual separation. Well I got an RA climb and adviced the controller. She was really upset and asked me why I was climbing. I repeated to her that I was complying with an RA. She then said, don't you have the Baron in sight. And I told her that I thought I did but the aircraft she had pointed out was not even a Baron, it was a P-51. She was really irritated and then just shipped me over to tower.

As for telling a controller unable, Ive only had an issue with that in socal as far as the controller getting mad. But that's another long story.