![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 HankPilot2002 wrote: I was level at 1500' MSL and ATC announced a Gulfstream bizjet crossing from my right to left, 3000' MSL less than a mile lateral distance. I had my instrument student do a 360 for wake turbulence separation and dissipation. ATC questioned my actions and told me the 360 wasn't necessary. BTW: I was in Class Echo airspace in southern Maine. I havent been instructing all that long but this did seem to me to be a classic wake turb encounter in the making. I am interested in hearing from other pilots and CFII's on this subject. Was I over cautious ? Or prudent..... Hank I'll take a crack at it... Let's say the Gulfstream was IFR, and was level. Judging by your level altitude, you were VFR. Either way, you still have the 1000ft vertical separation, regardless of lateral separation, so doing a 360 wouldn't have mattered for separation. As long as you had him in sight, and being (assumed) VFR, you could maintain visual separation. In that instance, the 360 wouldn't have been needed. Let's now say that the Gulfstream was climbing. He was going to be crossing your path above you, which may mean that you would catch the underside of his wake before the tail end of it after his climb. In that instance, you could have done a 360 to avoid the wake altogether, then continue. But once again, It wouldn't have been needed, as you had vertical separation of over 1000ft. Overcautious? yes. But better to be over than under. You would have been fine, but as CFII, you would have been in the best position to make the call. Judging that this post happened after your flight, you walked away from the flight. Which means you lived. ![]() your call was a good one. BL. - -- Brad Littlejohn | Email: Unix Systems Administrator, | Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! ![]() PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFA8ztMyBkZmuMZ8L8RAtNYAKCWM7okfijLEHOwKLoSky QwZ0M8SACdEowi YtNXYif1EpxMEY8eXAsmnNI= =+OlY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
VOR/DME Approach Question | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 47 | August 29th 04 05:03 AM |
caution - wake turbulence | John Harlow | Piloting | 1 | June 4th 04 04:40 PM |
My First Time In Severe Turbulence (Long) | David B. Cole | Instrument Flight Rules | 6 | March 10th 04 10:21 PM |
Wake turbulence avoidance and ATC | Peter R. | Piloting | 24 | December 20th 03 11:40 AM |
How much turbulence is too much? | Marty Ross | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | August 21st 03 05:30 PM |