Narrative:

I was training a developmental on the tracking position of R15/16. The developmental was already certified on the position as an right side but we were completing the tracker requirement. There was a D side controller and an right side controller. We were not very busy. The [A320] at FL330 was southeast bound in level flight with about a 40 or 50 knot direct tail wind. No chop or turbulence reports had been received. A B747-400 aircraft was at FL340 southwest bound. The A320 passed approximately 17 miles behind the B747. We did not issue merging target procedures; as they were not even close to merging. The [A320] pilot shortly after passing the path of the B747 asked if they had passed under another aircraft and what type it was. He stated that 'we just crossed someone's wake turbulence and got a pretty good jolt there. A heads up would have been nice if you guys are going to do that sort of stuff.' we responded with roger. I have been regularly filing atsap reports on this issue with very little acknowledgement from the FAA that this is a problem. This problem has occurred numerous times; just on my one sector; out of 'hundreds throughout the NAS.' I suspect it is happening with greater frequency then the controllers are willing to report due to a 'don't care' attitude. As I have reported earlier; a pilot complained due to 2000 feet separation from an A380. Another pilot complained because they went 3 miles away from an A380. These pilots all have complained of serious jolts or turbulence each time and they are blaming us as the controller for the incidences. There is a bigger issue the FAA is unable or unwilling to recognize with heavy to super aircraft. This latest issue was not even an A380. A B747-400 can gross weight at takeoff at 900;000 pounds. That makes it nearly a super category. I am not certain that anyone in the FAA decision tree understands this issue. In order to enhance safety with these aircraft it should become mandatory that B747-400 and A380 and the one antonov 225 in existence be given a greater degree of separation or at least warnings every time. I do not believe the FAA or atsap is taking this issue as seriously as it should. This has been an issue since the introduction of these extra heavy aircraft.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZLC ARTCC Controller reported receiving a wake vortex encounter report from an A320 that passed 17 miles behind a B747-400. Controller stated he is concerned about the number of reports he gets from aircraft encountering wake from 'heavy' and 'super' aircraft. He recommended more separation for these aircraft.

Narrative: I was training a developmental on the TRACKING position of R15/16. The developmental was already certified on the position as an R side but we were completing the TRACKER requirement. There was a D Side controller and an R side controller. We were not very busy. The [A320] at FL330 was southeast bound in level flight with about a 40 or 50 knot direct tail wind. No chop or turbulence reports had been received. A B747-400 aircraft was at FL340 southwest bound. The A320 passed approximately 17 miles behind the B747. We did not issue merging target procedures; as they were not even close to merging. The [A320] pilot shortly after passing the path of the B747 asked if they had passed under another aircraft and what type it was. He stated that 'We just crossed someone's wake turbulence and got a pretty good jolt there. A heads up would have been nice if you guys are going to do that sort of stuff.' We responded with roger. I have been regularly filing ATSAP reports on this issue with very little acknowledgement from the FAA that this is a problem. This problem has occurred numerous times; just on my one sector; out of 'hundreds throughout the NAS.' I suspect it is happening with greater frequency then the controllers are willing to report due to a 'don't care' attitude. As I have reported earlier; a pilot complained due to 2000 feet separation from an A380. Another pilot complained because they went 3 miles away from an A380. These pilots all have complained of serious jolts or turbulence each time and they are blaming us as the controller for the incidences. There is a bigger issue the FAA is unable or unwilling to recognize with heavy to super aircraft. This latest issue was not even an A380. A B747-400 can gross weight at takeoff at 900;000 pounds. That makes it nearly a super category. I am not certain that anyone in the FAA decision tree understands this issue. In order to enhance safety with these aircraft it should become mandatory that B747-400 and A380 and the one Antonov 225 in existence be given a greater degree of separation or at least warnings every time. I do not believe the FAA or ATSAP is taking this issue as seriously as it should. This has been an issue since the introduction of these extra heavy aircraft.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.