Where did I say it was a transport category aircraft?

It was a Meridian, for crying out loud.

No, that's not how I was taught in the 3 days I spent in a Pitts. If the roll is strong enough, push and roll in the direction of the induced roll.

Not what your mom said!

And that's my point. Even on the 320, quite a few think this thing will roll inverted and smash into the ground behind a 767 and want to fly high. If you want to fly a half dot high, that's your prerogative. A large category aircraft like the 320 family has enough mass, inertia, wingspan, and aileron authority that it will not violently roll over and cause you to lose control.

This was actually one of the factors cited in the AA 587 crash. The NTSB came down harshly on the AAMP training curriculum, in which one scenario in the sim flying behind a 747, and they would roll the MD80/A300 a full 90 degrees due to wake and then have the pilot recover. It was all BS, and grossly exaggerated the expectancy of a wake disturbance on a large, transport category aircraft. No doubt this was in the back of the mind of the AA 587 FO as he violently overcontrolled the aircraft. No large transport category aircraft has flipped over and crashed behind a 757/767 or other heavy aircraft while on approach from 500ft-3000+ft AGL.

The one exception was the Delta DC9-10 (almost RJ type) in the traffic pattern with a DC10 also doing touch n goes in Texas, and they caught the wake below a 100 feet, corrected in one direction, overcorrected in another direction, and with not enough altitude they rolled upside on the runway and crashed. But this was on short final, in a non-normal operation of a heavy doing touch n goes.

It's just an eye rolling moment when some think a large transport category aircraft like an Airbus will behave like a small business jet for wake and lose control and crash :rolleyes:

If you took her pegging you, than you are tougher than I thought. You are still a lousy acrobatic pilot.

Cheers!

Shy,

Apples vs. oranges. We're talking about ILS approaches. AA 587 was a departure issue where the descending wake vortices ARE an issue. Your other example is low level where the vortices have no ability to descend.

Fly your ILS however you want, just be aware if you do it above the glideslope you're setting the guy behind you up for a "bumpy ride" at a minimum.

Enough said.

First off, I appreciate the ride to work this morning.... but the SWA captain that made all of his announcements in a pirate voice starting at 0530 this morning and the flight attendant who followed the whole flight. It got old after the first sentence at the gate and was completely obnoxious by initial descent. Seriously, a whole safety demo in a lame pirate voice... Really? I thought talk like a pirate day was a kid's thing.

It's national pirate day...duh everyone knows that.

We used to do it all the time at SKW...in the sim.

I seriously doubt it happened in the real world at SKW, I would have heard about it.

The way you quoted me with the rolleyes is out of context from what I wrote. Not sure if that was a formatting error on your part or on purpose. I certainly didn't put a rolleyes right after the DC9 crashing below 100 feet.

AA 587 had descending vortices at almost 250 knots from the 747. At worse, it was a light roll rate of the A300 (a widebody!) that would have been a complete non-event if it wasn't for the immediate and severe over-controlling reaction by the PF.