Flying the North Atlantic Tracks
 

I went to Madrid last year and hopped on a DAL 767 departing Atlanta.

My experience flying TO Madrid was great. I thought "wow, this is the smoothest ride!". The flight was during the night.

But on the way back, I have to say, I was unnerved a bit. We went through several patches of what felt like pretty tough (or what you would call moderate chop). The folks sitting around me were pretty scared and probably thought it was a very rough ride. Of course, the flight back was during the day time.

Is this the case in your experience? The ride back to America seemed to have been so much more bumpy and actually, for some, pretty hard.

I am not a pilot but really appreciate the profession. And being fairly inexperienced (only ten hours on a Cessna 152), I just wondered how much punishment the 767 could take.

Of course I thanked the pilots on the way out and made a comment to them "kind of bumpy, huh?". I was surprised when they said "I'm sorry about that, yes, it was a bit choppy". I was surprised first because they apologized, and second, because they seemed like it was nothing!

My favorite planes are the 757 and of course the 767, but appreciate all kinds.

Im not a 767 pilot, but I think I can say with confidence that the 767 can handle turbulence with no problem. All transport category aircraft are designed and tested for such things.

A buddy of mine has done a bit of flying over the north atlantic and explained to me that turbulence over the pond, and getting away from it to find smoother air is a different ball game than when you are in radar coverage. Over the ocean, there is no radar. Pilots instead make position reports and controllers use non-radar procedures to keep aircraft separated. Very often this means requests for altitude changes cannot be granted, even if the ride is really bad like the one you described. There are ALOT of aircraft crossing the atlantic on a daily basis.

Finally, the guys may have seemed like it was nothing, because to them, maybe it was. Turbulence is just a given in what we do...comes with the territory. Personally, I don't always find it enjoyable, particularly when it gets really rough. But up front, we can see the big picture and can control the airplane. So long as its able to maintain its altitude and speed and stay right side up, there really isn't much to be worried about...stay seated with your seat belt fastened like the F/A's tell you and you'll be fine.

It can take a beating, I've seen it. But I bet guys who fly the 767 domestic see a lot worse rides more often and could give you better feed back. Seems to me most international flying is smoother than domestic. But turbulence in a 767 has a different feel then an RJ hitting turbulence. I'm not going to say its better or worse, its just different.

But according to the Captains its 3 times worse in the back, say way back of the plane, then it is in the cockpit. I always wanted to say, okay hold on, and run to the back to see if thats true. The logistics of that stunt never worked out, so I just took their word for it. :p

As to the east vs west bound rides, I've had bad rides at night and smooth in the day and vice versa. It really depends on whats out there on the track. I used to see a good bit of turbulence around the equator going to South Ameirca, it did fine.

The biggest issue with flying the North Atlantic is that your options for changing altitudes and tracks are limited by the lack of positive radar control. It doesn't matter if your going east or west. Time of day is a factor because the available altitudes and tracks vary with time of day. There are more westbound in the morning and eastbound at night.

In my long carrer on the ER (1 yesr before being booted to the 88) I can tell you that turbulence is gonna happen. The planes can take a huge pounding. Those of you who have flown both can back me up when I say, if your gonna hit some good chop, you would rather be in the 767 and enjoy the soft cushion of a flexible wing. That 757, although my favorite, will chatter your teeth. At least that what I experienced.

You get turbulence due to cool and warm air fighting to find equilibrium. This typically occurs more during daylight hrs, but jetstreams and strong fronts can also keep things stirred up for days on end. The North Atlantic is unique because of the Arctic currents and Tropical currents meet around that area.

The airplane can take a lot more than you can. While you'd be discharging your stomach into a bag, the airplane would be taking it in stride.

Hey Beer I agree,surprisingly the 757-300 chatters less teeth.Still not as great as the 76.I would venture to say with 2000 hrs under my belt.I'll take a Tristar across the Atlantic anyday....

Its not the 767 but this is a interesting video anyway.
YouTube - Boeing 777 Wing Load Test

I assume the 787 will be an extremely smooth ride, because of the flexibility of the wings?

The 787 gives a very smooth ride both in the first class and economy cabin - Why? Because it's sitting on the ramp and hasn't flown! :D

Folks, I'm here all week!

In my experience, day/night is not so much a factor on the NAT tracks. It is more an east/west thing. The eastbound tracks try to take advantage of the jetstreams by flying in/close to them to reduce flight times. For the same reasons westbound flights try to minimise flight times by avoiding the mainly westerly jets. Generally more turbulence is associated with the jetstream than outside of it, hence more turbulence likely eastbound than westbound.

Doesn't the captain retain captains authority to deviate when required? I recall seeing reports of how on occasion, captains will exercise their authority to move off the track to go around bad weather on the NATs. I think some amount of paperwork is required afterwards to justify the action.

Its not as bumpy in biz or first class....must be all the booze!

The Captain can use his emergency authority to deviate. He will have to explain that action after the flight. Ride comfort would never be a reason to exercise emergency authority unless the turbulance threatened the safety of the aircraft. It would be highly unlikely to encounter that type of turbulance on the tracks. Most pilots would never see it in a 20 year career of flying the North Atlantic.

Thanks for the feedback.

Well, I mentioned I was surprised the pilots apologized. But how can weather be their fault? The folks over at DAL are just a class act.

I rode a 757 back from Atlanta to Los Angeles the same day of this trip. I tend to agree (only from a passenger's perspective) that the 757 felt stiffer (we had rough weather coming back and the pilots announced a deviation to avoid weather).

I love the 757/767, of course only from an aesthetics view point. I know these were one of the first planes designed entirely with computers (if not the very first). Being a high-tech major and working in the software/hardware industry, I appreciate that. :)

(Secretly, I envy the pilots who fly them...) ;)