37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 299321 |
Time | |
Date | 199503 |
Day | Fri |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : lax |
State Reference | CA |
Altitude | agl bound lower : 500 agl bound upper : 500 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tracon : lax |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Jetstream 32 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 135 |
Flight Phase | descent : approach |
Flight Plan | VFR |
Aircraft 2 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Navigation In Use | Other Other |
Flight Phase | descent : approach |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : cfi pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 6000 flight time type : 1000 |
ASRS Report | 299321 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : instrument pilot : commercial |
Events | |
Anomaly | inflight encounter other non adherence : far |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | none taken : unable |
Consequence | Other |
Supplementary | |
Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
Any time landing at lax or sfo with heavy jet traffic. Sfo is worse because using runways 28L/right usually has a 5-10 KT tailwind. ATC routinely puts commuter aircraft behind jet traffic on approach, and pairs commuter aircraft up with parallel landing heavy traffic. Air carrier company a airline's 737's always fly their ILS GS 2 dots high, so following aircraft always fly through their wake on approach. I do not understand this type of operation, but have seen and followed air carrier a many times and always hit their wake. Wake turbulence is a big problem in ca. We have to routinely fly a higher approach to remain above the wake. We also have to request a long landing to touchdown beyond the point where the preceding aircraft landed. If turboprop aircraft continue to be put behind heavy aircraft, this problem will continue. Sequencing when able should always put turboprops in front of jet traffic to avoid their wake. I personally do not understand why jet equipment are given priority over turboprops. They cannot go any faster than the turboprops. Why should jets be sequenced ahead of turboprops? However, I have flown my approachs non standard to stay out of their way. This places my aircraft in poor shape for landing and is not the safest answer to avoiding wake turbulence. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states that he has flown mostly the midwest. When he upgraded to captain he was shifted to the west coast. He claims to not have had such difficulties prior to flying in the west. Analyst tried to explain that traffic is sequenced by center is usually positioned when handed off to approach, that there is no deliberate sequencing of turbos behind jets. He does not believe this and indicates that he has been treated differently. He feels that procedures in aim should be followed of first come, first served. When questioned about whether he has contacted ATC to get their version of procedures, he indicated they have said the same thing. Company pilots have just voted to be in a pilot's union and this is an issue they will bring up. Aircraft is a jetstream 3200.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: COMMUTER ACFT COMPLAINS OF WAKE TURB FOLLOWING JET ACFT.
Narrative: ANY TIME LNDG AT LAX OR SFO WITH HVY JET TFC. SFO IS WORSE BECAUSE USING RWYS 28L/R USUALLY HAS A 5-10 KT TAILWIND. ATC ROUTINELY PUTS COMMUTER ACFT BEHIND JET TFC ON APCH, AND PAIRS COMMUTER ACFT UP WITH PARALLEL LNDG HVY TFC. ACR COMPANY A AIRLINE'S 737'S ALWAYS FLY THEIR ILS GS 2 DOTS HIGH, SO FOLLOWING ACFT ALWAYS FLY THROUGH THEIR WAKE ON APCH. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS TYPE OF OP, BUT HAVE SEEN AND FOLLOWED ACR A MANY TIMES AND ALWAYS HIT THEIR WAKE. WAKE TURB IS A BIG PROB IN CA. WE HAVE TO ROUTINELY FLY A HIGHER APCH TO REMAIN ABOVE THE WAKE. WE ALSO HAVE TO REQUEST A LONG LNDG TO TOUCHDOWN BEYOND THE POINT WHERE THE PRECEDING ACFT LANDED. IF TURBOPROP ACFT CONTINUE TO BE PUT BEHIND HVY ACFT, THIS PROB WILL CONTINUE. SEQUENCING WHEN ABLE SHOULD ALWAYS PUT TURBOPROPS IN FRONT OF JET TFC TO AVOID THEIR WAKE. I PERSONALLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY JET EQUIP ARE GIVEN PRIORITY OVER TURBOPROPS. THEY CANNOT GO ANY FASTER THAN THE TURBOPROPS. WHY SHOULD JETS BE SEQUENCED AHEAD OF TURBOPROPS? HOWEVER, I HAVE FLOWN MY APCHS NON STANDARD TO STAY OUT OF THEIR WAY. THIS PLACES MY ACFT IN POOR SHAPE FOR LNDG AND IS NOT THE SAFEST ANSWER TO AVOIDING WAKE TURB. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THAT HE HAS FLOWN MOSTLY THE MIDWEST. WHEN HE UPGRADED TO CAPT HE WAS SHIFTED TO THE WEST COAST. HE CLAIMS TO NOT HAVE HAD SUCH DIFFICULTIES PRIOR TO FLYING IN THE W. ANALYST TRIED TO EXPLAIN THAT TFC IS SEQUENCED BY CTR IS USUALLY POSITIONED WHEN HANDED OFF TO APCH, THAT THERE IS NO DELIBERATE SEQUENCING OF TURBOS BEHIND JETS. HE DOES NOT BELIEVE THIS AND INDICATES THAT HE HAS BEEN TREATED DIFFERENTLY. HE FEELS THAT PROCS IN AIM SHOULD BE FOLLOWED OF FIRST COME, FIRST SERVED. WHEN QUESTIONED ABOUT WHETHER HE HAS CONTACTED ATC TO GET THEIR VERSION OF PROCS, HE INDICATED THEY HAVE SAID THE SAME THING. COMPANY PLTS HAVE JUST VOTED TO BE IN A PLT'S UNION AND THIS IS AN ISSUE THEY WILL BRING UP. ACFT IS A JETSTREAM 3200.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.