37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1121081 |
Time | |
Date | 201310 |
Local Time Of Day | 0601-1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | MEM.Airport |
State Reference | TN |
Environment | |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | A319 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Descent |
Aircraft 2 | |
Make Model Name | MD-11 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
Person 1 | |
Function | First Officer Pilot Not Flying |
Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Events | |
Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types |
Narrative:
Upon arrival at mem; ATIS included the notation that 'recat wake turbulence separation standards in effect.' unsure of what that meant; crew queried ATC and received an explanation. ATC planned to sequence our flight for arrival 3.5 NM behind a heavy md-11. ATC complied with our request for additional spacing but informed us that had they been busy; our request would not have been accommodated and we would have been placed on the approach 3.5 miles behind the heavy aircraft. Cause; the FAA has apparently decided that current spacing is too conservative and that more aircraft can be handled with reduced spacing. Suggestions; while 3.5 NM behind a heavy aircraft might seem like a good idea from a desk in washington; in the real world; that appears to compromise safety. It also appears problematic that ATC would reject a pilot request for additional spacing based on these arbitrary standards.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: MEM air carrier arrival expressed concern regarding the RECAT Wake Turbulence Separation being utilized.
Narrative: Upon arrival at MEM; ATIS included the notation that 'RECAT Wake Turbulence Separation Standards In Effect.' Unsure of what that meant; crew queried ATC and received an explanation. ATC planned to sequence our flight for arrival 3.5 NM behind a Heavy MD-11. ATC complied with our request for additional spacing but informed us that had they been busy; our request would not have been accommodated and we would have been placed on the approach 3.5 miles behind the heavy aircraft. Cause; The FAA has apparently decided that current spacing is too conservative and that more aircraft can be handled with reduced spacing. Suggestions; while 3.5 NM behind a Heavy aircraft might seem like a good idea from a desk in Washington; in the real world; that appears to compromise safety. It also appears problematic that ATC would reject a pilot request for additional spacing based on these arbitrary standards.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.