ASRS Database Report Set - Wake Turbulence Encounters

ASRS Database Report Set

Wake Turbulence Encounters

Report Set Description .........................................A sampling of reports from flight crews encountering, or affected by, turbojet wake turbulence.

Update Number ....................................................18.0

Date of Update .....................................................May 31, 2017

Number of Records in Report Set ........................50

Number of New Records in Report Set ...............50

Type of Records in Report Set .............................For each update, new records received at ASRS will displace a like number of the oldest records in the Report Set, with the objective of providing the fifty most recent relevant ASRS Database records. Records within this Report Set have been screened to assure their relevance to the topic.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000

TH: 262-7

MEMORANDUM FOR: Recipients of Aviation Safety Reporting System Data

SUBJECT: Data Derived from ASRS Reports

The attached material is furnished pursuant to a request for data from the NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). Recipients of this material are reminded when evaluating these data of the following points.

ASRS reports are submitted voluntarily. The existence in the ASRS database of reports concerning a specific topic cannot, therefore, be used to infer the prevalence of that problem within the National Airspace System.

Information contained in reports submitted to ASRS may be amplified by further contact with the individual who submitted them, but the information provided by the reporter is not investigated further. Such information represents the perspective of the specific individual who is describing their experience and perception of a safety related event.

After preliminary processing, all ASRS reports are de-identified and the identity of the individual who submitted the report is permanently eliminated. All ASRS report processing systems are designed to protect identifying information submitted by reporters; including names, company affiliations, and specific times of incident occurrence. After a report has been de-identified, any verification of information submitted to ASRS would be limited.

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration and its ASRS current contractor, Booz Allen Hamilton, specifically disclaim any responsibility for any interpretation which may be made by others of any material or data furnished by NASA in response to queries of the ASRS database and related materials.

Linda J. Connell, Director NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System

CAVEAT REGARDING USE OF ASRS DATA

Certain caveats apply to the use of ASRS data. All ASRS reports are voluntarily submitted, and thus cannot be considered a measured random sample of the full population of like events. For example, we receive several thousand altitude deviation reports each year. This number may comprise over half of all the altitude deviations that occur, or it may be just a small fraction of total occurrences.

Moreover, not all pilots, controllers, mechanics, flight attendants, dispatchers or other participants in the aviation system are equally aware of the ASRS or may be equally willing to report. Thus, the data can reflect reporting biases. These biases, which are not fully known or measurable, may influence ASRS information. A safety problem such as near midair collisions (NMACs) may appear to be more highly concentrated in area “A” than area “B” simply because the airmen who operate in area “A” are more aware of the ASRS program and more inclined to report should an NMAC occur. Any type of subjective, voluntary reporting will have these limitations related to quantitative statistical analysis.

One thing that can be known from ASRS data is that the number of reports received concerning specific event types represents the lower measure of the true number of such events that are occurring. For example, if ASRS receives 881 reports of track deviations in 2010 (this number is purely hypothetical), then it can be known with some certainty that at least 881 such events have occurred in 2010. With these statistical limitations in mind, we believe that the real power of ASRS data is the qualitative information contained in report narratives. The pilots, controllers, and others who report tell us about aviation safety incidents and situations in detail – explaining what happened, and more importantly, why it happened. Using report narratives effectively requires an extra measure of study, but the knowledge derived is well worth the added effort.

Report Synopses

ACN: 1438755 (1 of 50)

Synopsis A319 flight crew reported an "aggressive" roll resulted after encountering wake turbulence

at FL320 from a crossing A300. A Flight Attendant hit her head during the encounter.

ACN: 1437089 (2 of 50)

Synopsis B737-700 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence in cruise flight at FL360 that

resulted in an abrupt bank to the right.

ACN: 1435930 (3 of 50)

Synopsis A320 pilot reported executing a go-around on final to EWR when they encountered wake

turbulence in trail of a B757.

ACN: 1434941 (4 of 50)

Synopsis EMB-170 First Officer reported executing a go-around after encountering wake turbulence

from a C-17.

ACN: 1434840 (5 of 50)

Synopsis B737-800 Captain reported the flying FO had directional control difficulties that led to a

rejected takeoff on Runway 22L at ORD, wake turbulence from landing traffic traffic on

Runway 28C was cited as a possible factor.

ACN: 1432706 (6 of 50)

Synopsis B737 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence from the preceding air carrier

departing LAS when the preceding flight slowed to make a climb restriction.

ACN: 1432421 (7 of 50)

Synopsis B767 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence from a preceding B747 on arrival

into EHAM.

ACN: 1432107 (8 of 50)

Synopsis

C182 pilot reported his aircraft violently rolled approximately 120 degrees to the right

after encountering wake turbulence from a preceding B737 in the DEN airport area.

ACN: 1431659 (9 of 50)

Synopsis B747 flight crew reported a wake turbulence encounter during final approach to SFO

Runway 28L from an aircraft landing on 28R.

ACN: 1431083 (10 of 50)

Synopsis CRJ-700 flight crew and an Enroute Controller reported a crew member injury resulted

from a wake vortex encounter with an A380 in cruise flight.

ACN: 1428045 (11 of 50)

Synopsis The pilot of a Diamond DV20 reported that while attempting to takeoff the aircraft

suddenly sped up, the pilot lost control of the aircraft and it departed the runway.

ACN: 1426390 (12 of 50)

Synopsis EMB-145 Captain reported getting a stick shaker departing EWR after encountering wake

from the preceding aircraft.

ACN: 1424372 (13 of 50)

Synopsis B767 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence on departure from EGLL in trail

of a B747.

ACN: 1422831 (14 of 50)

Synopsis CRJ-200 Captain reported the aircraft "snap-rolled violently" when they encountered wake

turbulence inbound to LGA.

ACN: 1421813 (15 of 50)

Synopsis Air carrier flight crew reported a track deviation occurred when the First Officer had

difficulty interpreting the new flight director's guidance.

ACN: 1421106 (16 of 50)

Synopsis CRJ-700 First Officer reported executing a go-around on final approach after encountering

wake turbulence in trail of a heavy B767 that had executed a go-around as well.

ACN: 1420716 (17 of 50)

Synopsis Glasair III pilot reported a wake turbulence encounter departing LNC with a B737 inbound

to another airport. Reporter expressed concern that his NavWorx TIS-B unit did not alert

him to the traffic.

ACN: 1420247 (18 of 50)

Synopsis CRJ-200 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence while on approach to ATL

airport behind a B717 inbound to a parallel runway.

ACN: 1417236 (19 of 50)

Synopsis EMB-145 flight crew reported flying through the localizer on approach to ORD when he was

distracted by wake turbulence.

ACN: 1416878 (20 of 50)

Synopsis B737-700 Captain reported executing a go-around after encountering wake turbulence

from a B747 landing on the parallel runway at SFO.

ACN: 1415197 (21 of 50)

Synopsis A321 pilot reported encountering wake vortices as he was taking off full length on JFK

Runway 31L from an A380 that had just landed on that runway.

ACN: 1414784 (22 of 50)

Synopsis I90 TRACON Controller's trainee did not use proper procedures to ensure wake turbulence

separation between successive arrivals.

ACN: 1414474 (23 of 50)

Synopsis

CRJ-200 flight crew reported encountering wake turbulence on approach to ATL about 10

miles in trail of a B747-8. Flight crew stated they were pressured by ATC to fly a path they

were not comfortable with.

ACN: 1414151 (24 of 50)

Synopsis EMB-175 flight crew reported executing a go-around after encountering wake turbulence in

trail of an Airbus on final approach to IAH.

ACN: 1414131 (25 of 50)

Synopsis EMB-175 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence in trail of a B777 on short

final to LAX.

ACN: 1413522 (26 of 50)

Synopsis CL30 pilot reported the aircraft rolled suddenly left and right exceeding 30 degrees of bank

after encountering wake turbulence on approach to MEM.

ACN: 1412801 (27 of 50)

Synopsis B737-800 First Officer reported executing a go-around after receiving a GPWS warning

triggered by an improper flap setting. Reporter cited distraction following a wake

turbulence encounter in trail of a B787.

ACN: 1412402 (28 of 50)

Synopsis A320 Captain reported a flap overspeed on approach to EWR due to either turbulence or

wake vortices.

ACN: 1411582 (29 of 50)

Synopsis IAH Tower Controller reported a B767 was improperly coded as a B737 and thus proper

wake procedures were not followed on the arrival.

ACN: 1411542 (30 of 50)

Synopsis

Burbank Tower Controller reported of a wake turbulence separation loss due to re-

categorization of separation rules. Controller departed an aircraft into the wake of an

opposite direction arrival aircraft and did not have the correct separation.

ACN: 1411438 (31 of 50)

Synopsis B737 flight crew reported a "severe" wake turbulence encounter on arrival into LAX 15

miles in trail of an A380.

ACN: 1411058 (32 of 50)

Synopsis CRJ-200 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence on approach to ATL five miles

in trail of a B757 that resulted in a "sharp" left roll.

ACN: 1409924 (33 of 50)

Synopsis A320 flight crew reported a flap overspeed shortly after takeoff when they encountered a

rapidly increasing headwind and wake turbulence from the preceding B757.

ACN: 1409296 (34 of 50)

Synopsis B737-700 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence at FL310 from an opposite

direction B747 at FL320. Reporter stated he would like to see the separation standards

increased.

ACN: 1408242 (35 of 50)

Synopsis G550 First Officer reported a wake turbulence encounter at 17,000 feet while ten miles in

trail of an A380 that resulted in a 20 to 30 degree roll and a loss of 200 feet.

ACN: 1407339 (36 of 50)

Synopsis Regional jet pilot reported wake turbulence concerns related to departing behind and

following aircraft into and out of airports. Pilot stated ATC appears to be in a rush.

ACN: 1407328 (37 of 50)

Synopsis B737-800 Captain reported encountering "extreme" wake turbulence at approximately

1,200 feet AGL departing DFW in trail of an A321.

ACN: 1407147 (38 of 50)

Synopsis Single engine aircraft pilot reported the aircraft incurred minor damage during a wake

turbulence encounter with an MD11.

ACN: 1406756 (39 of 50)

Synopsis EMB-175 flight crew reported encountering wake turbulence from a preceding B777 on

arrival into LAX.

ACN: 1406143 (40 of 50)

Synopsis B737-800 Captain reported a track deviation occurred departing DCA when they were

distracted by a wake turbulence encounter.

ACN: 1405673 (41 of 50)

Synopsis Medium size regional jet First Officer reported overshooting a crossing restriction climbing

out of OAK as they were dealing with a wake turbulence encounter from the preceding

MD-11.

ACN: 1404436 (42 of 50)

Synopsis B737 flight crew reported missing a crossing restriction after encountering wake

turbulence during descent into ORD.

ACN: 1403281 (43 of 50)

Synopsis EMB-145 flight crew reported a loss of control and aircraft upset following a wake

turbulence encounter on approach to BWI in trail of a B737 which caused a 90 degree

bank.

ACN: 1402975 (44 of 50)

Synopsis CRJ-200 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence departing ATL ten miles in trail of

an A321.

ACN: 1402692 (45 of 50)

Synopsis CRJ-200 Captain reported they experienced a brief stick shaker shortly after takeoff

associated with pitch rate, turbulence, and a possible wake vortex encounter.

ACN: 1402000 (46 of 50)

Synopsis PC-12 Captain reported they experienced a 30-40 degree bank and 5-10 degree pitch

down when they encountered wake turbulence on arrival into ATL in trail of a "small

Airbus".

ACN: 1401976 (47 of 50)

Synopsis ERJ-190 Captain reported the nose swung 20 to 30 degrees left on the takeoff roll in

response to a wind gust or wake from the previous takeoff.

ACN: 1401464 (48 of 50)

Synopsis CRJ-200 First Officer reported a track deviation occurred when they delayed their turn on

the SID departing ATL because of a wake turbulence encounter.

ACN: 1400248 (49 of 50)

Synopsis M20J pilot reported having difficulty with complying with ATC headings when the workload

of a night IFR flight became more than he could comfortably handle.

ACN: 1399829 (50 of 50)

Synopsis EMB-175 Captain reported receiving several EICAS messages on system anomalies that

were determined to be a result of a wake turbulence encounter during approach. All items

were successfully cleared after landing.

Report Narratives

ACN: 1438755 (1 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201704

Local Time Of Day : 1801-2400

Place

Locale Reference.ATC Facility : ZLC.ARTCC

State Reference : UT

Altitude.MSL.Single Value : 32000

Environment

Light : Night

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Center : ZLC

Aircraft Operator : Air Carrier

Make Model Name : A319

Crew Size.Number Of Crew : 2

Operating Under FAR Part : Part 121

Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger

Flight Phase : Cruise

Airspace.Class A : ZLC

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Center : ZLC




Flight Plan : IFR


Airspace.Class A : ZLC

Person : 1

Reference : 1

Location Of Person.Aircraft : X

Location In Aircraft : Flight Deck

Reporter Organization : Air Carrier

Function.Flight Crew : Captain

Function.Flight Crew : Pilot Not Flying

Qualification.Flight Crew : Air Transport Pilot (ATP)

Experience.Flight Crew.Last 90 Days : 160

Experience.Flight Crew.Type : 4185

ASRS Report Number.Accession Number : 1438755

Analyst Callback : Attempted

Person : 2

Reference : 2




Function.Flight Crew : Pilot Flying

Function.Flight Crew : First Officer





Events

Anomaly.ATC Issue : All Types

Anomaly.Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event : Illness

Anomaly.Inflight Event / Encounter : Wake Vortex Encounter

Detector.Person : Flight Crew

When Detected : In-flight

Result.General : Physical Injury / Incapacitation

Result.Flight Crew : Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification

Result.Air Traffic Control : Issued Advisory / Alert

Assessments

Contributing Factors / Situations : Environment - Non Weather Related

Contributing Factors / Situations : Procedure

Primary Problem : Ambiguous

Narrative: 1

While at FL320 in completely smooth air we encountered a jolt of moderate turbulence

lasting approximately 2 seconds. This was followed by another jolt of turbulence lasting 2-

3 seconds that was moderate to more than moderate, but not fitting of the definition of

severe in intensity (FOM), and about 3-5 seconds after the first encounter. In our vicinity

an airplane had just passed in front and above us and was abeam our aircraft when the

turbulence was encountered. I immediately suspected a wake encounter. This occurred

about 100 miles south-southeast of BIL. We asked ATC what kind of aircraft it was and he

said his designation was a Heavy Airbus A300. A flight attendant in the rear of the aircraft

reported bumping her head. No other injuries to passengers and crew.

Narrative: 2

At FL320, prior to top of descent, we flew underneath a heavy Airbus 300, with no warning

from ATC and the airplane dropped and rolled aggressively. We immediately put the fasten

seatbelt sign on and checked in with the flight attendants. One flight attendant said she hit

her head on the bathroom door.

Synopsis

A319 flight crew reported an "aggressive" roll resulted after encountering wake turbulence

at FL320 from a crossing A300. A Flight Attendant hit her head during the encounter.

ACN: 1437089 (2 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201703


Place

Locale Reference.ATC Facility : ZTL.ARTCC

State Reference : GA


Environment

Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Center : ZTL


Make Model Name : B737-700



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Airspace.Class A : ZTL

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y


Make Model Name : Commercial Fixed Wing


Flight Plan : IFR



Person

Reference : 1










Analyst Callback : Completed

Events




Result.Flight Crew : Took Evasive Action

Result.Air Traffic Control : Issued New Clearance

Assessments




Narrative: 1

While at cruise at FL360, FO was PF, the aircraft abruptly banked to the right. Autopilot

could not counter rate of roll and FO intervened manually. Return to wings level flight

accomplished. Descent and turn off course was requested to avoid additional wake

turbulence. I checked with the Flight Attendants to verify they and the passengers were

ok. After the flight, we debriefed as a crew. Dispatch and Chief Pilot were notified after the

flight.

Callback: 1

Reporter had no additional information to add to the report.

Synopsis

B737-700 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence in cruise flight at FL360 that

resulted in an abrupt bank to the right.

ACN: 1435930 (3 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201703


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : EWR.Airport

State Reference : NJ

Altitude.AGL.Single Value : 200

Environment

Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : EWR





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger

Flight Phase : Final Approach

Airspace.Class B : NYC

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Ground : EWR


Make Model Name : B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model



Flight Plan : IFR

Flight Phase : Taxi

Person

Reference : 1








Events

Anomaly.Conflict : Airborne Conflict




Result.Flight Crew : Executed Go Around / Missed Approach

Assessments




Narrative: 1

On approach, we [were] spaced close behind a B757. At approximately 200 feet AGL, we

started to encounter some wake. Elected to go-around because the approach had become

unstable.

Synopsis

A320 pilot reported executing a go-around on final to EWR when they encountered wake

turbulence in trail of a B757.

ACN: 1434941 (4 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201703


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : PHX.Airport

State Reference : AZ

Environment

Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : P50


Make Model Name : EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger

Flight Phase : Initial Approach

Airspace.Class B : PHX

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : P50

Aircraft Operator : Military

Make Model Name : Globemaster (C-17)



Mission : Cargo / Freight

Airspace.Class B : PHX

Component

Aircraft Component : Autopilot

Aircraft Reference : X

Problem : Failed

Person

Reference : 1








Events

Anomaly.Aircraft Equipment Problem : Less Severe



Detector.Automation : Aircraft RA




Result.Flight Crew : FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory

Assessments

Contributing Factors / Situations : Aircraft




Narrative: 1

During cruise the AP failed and was unable to be reset inflight so the rest of the flight was

hand flown. During the approach we encountered wake turbulence from a C-17 and

executed a go around. ATC assigned runway heading to 4000 and reaching 3500 feet we

received a traffic alert and an RA which we complied with. We were then vectored back for

another approach without incident.

Synopsis

EMB-170 First Officer reported executing a go-around after encountering wake turbulence

from a C-17.

ACN: 1434840 (5 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201703


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : ORD.Airport

State Reference : IL


Aircraft

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : ORD





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger

Flight Phase : Takeoff

Person

Reference : 1








Human Factors : Training / Qualification


Events

Anomaly.Ground Event / Encounter : Loss Of Aircraft Control




Result.Flight Crew : Returned To Gate

Result.Flight Crew : Rejected Takeoff

Assessments


Contributing Factors / Situations : Human Factors


Narrative: 1

ORD Runway 22L, ATIS wind 180@4. First Officer takeoff. Shortly after takeoff power was

set with N1's matched, airplane yawed abruptly left. FO attempted to correct with right

rudder. Aircraft didn't seem to respond at first and then yawed abruptly to the right.

Captain took control and rejected takeoff at about 75 kts. We were able to taxi back to the

gate without any other control issues. To me it felt like brakes were being applied on one

rudder pedal at a time. I debriefed the FO and asked if he might have been applying

brakes while attempting to steer the aircraft during takeoff and he said absolutely not. He

said his feet were low on the pedals.

I was contacted by the FOQA Gate Keeper as the lateral yaw triggered a FOQA event. I

explained to the Gate Keeper the facts of the event as stated above. I asked him to look at

any technical data that he had available to see if there was any unusual brake applications

during the takeoff roll. He said he could see none.

Coincidently, after telling the story of my rejected takeoff to my current First Officer, He

informed me that he has had the exact same thing happen to him on at least two separate

occasions while departing runway 22L at ORD. His events occurred following aircraft

landing on 28C and suggested that what we may have felt was wake turbulence from the

landing aircraft. In my event, I don't recall if an aircraft had just landed on 28C but it

might be worth looking into and passing on to ATC at ORD and other pilots.

Synopsis

B737-800 Captain reported the flying FO had directional control difficulties that led to a

rejected takeoff on Runway 22L at ORD, wake turbulence from landing traffic traffic on

Runway 28C was cited as a possible factor.

ACN: 1432706 (6 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201703


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : LAS.Airport

State Reference : NV


Environment

Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : L30





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger

Nav In Use : FMS Or FMC

Flight Phase : Climb

Route In Use.SID : TRALR 7

Airspace.Class B : LAS

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : L30


Make Model Name : Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Route In Use.SID : TRALR 7

Airspace.Class B : LAS

Person

Reference : 1









Human Factors : Situational Awareness


Events


Anomaly.Deviation - Track / Heading : All Types


Detector.Automation : Aircraft RA





Assessments


Primary Problem : Human Factors

Narrative: 1

We departed LAS climbing LNAV/VNAV on the TRALR 7 Departure behind another carrier's

aircraft. We were in compliance with the SID speed and altitudes. We encountered wake

turbulence at 8000 ft. We noticed then that we were just under five miles in trail with a

rapid closure rate. We were visually closing faster than I was comfortable so I told the

Captain I was commencing a right turn off course for traffic avoidance and to advise

Departure Control. Just after beginning the turn we received a TCAS RA and I

disconnected the autopilot to comply. ATC told us to turn left but in our judgment that

would have put us in jeopardy of collision with [the other] aircraft so I continued a right

hand turn. After we, and ATC, regained separation, I reengaged the autopilot. We were

then given vectors on course.

After separation and resuming on course, ATC asked [the preceding flight] why they were

at such a slow speed. They replied that they had slowed to make an altitude restriction.

Also, no TCAS TA preceded the RA.

Synopsis

B737 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence from the preceding air carrier

departing LAS when the preceding flight slowed to make a climb restriction.

ACN: 1432421 (7 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201702


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : EHAM.Airport

State Reference : FO


Environment

Flight Conditions : IMC

Weather Elements / Visibility : Cloudy

Weather Elements / Visibility.Visibility : 1

Light : Dawn

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Center : EHAA





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger

Flight Phase : Descent

Route In Use : Direct

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Center : EHAA





Flight Plan : IFR



Person

Reference : 1




Function.Flight Crew : Relief Pilot


Experience.Flight Crew.Total : 13000





Human Factors : Communication Breakdown

Communication Breakdown.Party1 : Flight Crew

Communication Breakdown.Party2 : ATC


Events





Result.Flight Crew : Became Reoriented

Assessments




Narrative: 1

Approximately 9 miles behind a B747-400 both going to EHAM. ATC asked us to expedite

descent (cleared to FL70) on our direct SPL. Aircraft on autopilot in Flight Level change.

Speed 250 KIAS. We were not made aware of traffic category or type, but we had heard

an aircraft told to speed up as we were told to slow down earlier and surmised that the

target on TCAS was that traffic. I later figured out that it was a 747. We got a wake

encounter at about FL94. Aircraft banked right about 15 degrees while control column was

to left about 1/2 deflection. The roll was very uncoordinated (slip). I later saw on Flight

Aware that our track changed by 3 degrees. The duration was about 10 seconds. The

speed did vary but I did not see how much (aircraft was at flight idle).

ATC didn't give us any "caution wake" prior and we couldn't discern the word "heavy" in

any radio calls (either from ATC or the traffic). Language/accent may have been a factor.

The native Dutch to Dutch transmissions, in English, are difficult to understand the call

signs (might be radios).

Probably was a minor wake upset, but could have been more severe if passengers hadn't

been down earlier. Flight attendants did complain later, but no one was injured.

Synopsis

B767 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence from a preceding B747 on arrival

into EHAM.

ACN: 1432107 (8 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201610


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : DEN.Airport

State Reference : CO

Relative Position.Distance.Nautical Miles : 10


Environment

Flight Conditions : VMC

Weather Elements / Visibility : Turbulence


Light : Daylight

Ceiling.Single Value : 10000

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : D01

Aircraft Operator : Personal

Make Model Name : Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG



Flight Plan : None

Mission : Personal


Route In Use : Visual Approach

Airspace.Class B : DEN

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Airspace.Class B : DEN

Person

Reference : 1



Reporter Organization : Personal


Function.Flight Crew : Single Pilot

Qualification.Flight Crew : Instrument

Qualification.Flight Crew : Commercial

Qualification.Flight Crew : Flight Instructor





Events


Anomaly.Inflight Event / Encounter : Loss Of Aircraft Control



Result.Flight Crew : Regained Aircraft Control

Assessments



Primary Problem : Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: 1

I was flying to Denver with one passenger aboard, a personal flight. There was a strong

wind from the northwest, and we were experiencing light to moderate turbulence. We

were slowly descending to land at Denver. At approximately 7500, ATC advised that a 737

would be passing on the right, approximately a mile away, descending and at a slightly

lower altitude than our altitude, on a visual to the north/south runway. I explained that to

my passenger. The 737 soon appeared to our right and below us, a few hundred feet

below our altitude (I'm guessing about 800 ft lower), and I pointed it out to my passenger.

A moment later, our 182 violently rolled to the right, not quite fully inverted, but

approximately 120 degrees or so. I applied full left aileron and left rudder and pushed on

the yoke, and the airplane slowly rolled to the left to level flight again. I don't now recall

whether I said anything to ATC about the event.

Over the years, I've tried to analyze the event, and I believe that the mountain wave

effect of the strong northwest winds blowing over the mountains lifted the wake

turbulence of the 737, causing us to encounter it although we were at a higher altitude

than the 737. Had I not recently completed the basic aerobatics course, I don't think I

would have responded as well. The primary thing I did that was important was to push on

the yoke rather than pull on it, in addition to applying left aileron and rudder.

Synopsis

C182 pilot reported his aircraft violently rolled approximately 120 degrees to the right

after encountering wake turbulence from a preceding B737 in the DEN airport area.

ACN: 1431659 (9 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201703


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : SFO.Airport

State Reference : CA


Environment


Light : Daylight

Aircraft

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : SFO





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger

Nav In Use.Localizer/Glideslope/ILS : Runway 28L


Airspace.Class B : SFO

Person : 1

Reference : 1










Person : 2

Reference : 2





Function.Flight Crew : Relief Pilot






Person : 3

Reference : 3











Events

Anomaly.Deviation - Speed : All Types




Result.General : None Reported / Taken

Assessments



Narrative: 1

At approximately 1000 ft we got into some wake turbulence. We were on ref speed at the

time. We got a 1 second or less stick shaker. We were still at Vref when I looked at the

airspeed.

Narrative: 2

[Report narrative contained no additional information.]

Narrative: 3

Momentary stick shaker at approximately 1000 feet on final in the flaps 25 landing

configuration with calm winds. Suspect wake encounter from narrow body landing on

Runway 28R.

Synopsis

B747 flight crew reported a wake turbulence encounter during final approach to SFO

Runway 28L from an aircraft landing on 28R.

ACN: 1431083 (10 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201703


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : ZZZ.Airport

State Reference : US


Environment

Light : Night

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Center : ZZZ


Make Model Name : Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Airspace.Class A : ZZZ

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Center : ZZZ





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Airspace.Class A : ZZZ

Person : 1

Reference : 1







Person : 2

Reference : 2







Person : 3

Reference : 3

Location Of Person.Facility : ZZZ.ARTCC

Reporter Organization : Government

Function.Air Traffic Control : Enroute

Qualification.Air Traffic Control : Fully Certified

Experience.Air Traffic Control.Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) : 2.5


Events

Anomaly.Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event : Illness




Result.General : Physical Injury / Incapacitation


Result.Flight Crew : Diverted


Assessments




Narrative: 1

Encountered wake turbulence at altitude, one of our flight attendants ended up getting

injured. [Advised ATC] and asked for 250 kts speed relief below 10,000 MSL. Coordinated

with ATC and ATC approved.

Narrative: 2

Suggest having more wake turbulence seperation.

Narrative: 3

An A388 [A380-800] was in level flight eastbound. A CRJ-700 was in level flight

westbound [in the same vicinity]. I made a traffic call for both aircraft, as [the CRJ-700]

was going to pass underneath [the A388]. I used the word "super" when referring to the

A388. Approximately 15 miles after [the CRJ-700] passed [the A388], [the CRJ-700]

reported that they got some pretty bad wake turbulence from the aircraft overhead.

Shortly after that, [the CRJ-700] asked what kind of Airbus the traffic was, to which I

replied it was a "super" A388. Approximately 10-15 miles later, [the CRJ-700] [advised of]

a medical situation, stating that a crewmember was incapacitated in the back, as a result

of the wake, and requested to get to their destination as quickly as possible. I cleared [the

CRJ-700] direct, and asked for any additional information from the pilots to pass on to the

next Center.

I'm not sure what recommendations to make in this case, as required separation was

maintained, and I believe traffic was called appropriately.

Synopsis

CRJ-700 flight crew and an Enroute Controller reported a crew member injury resulted

from a wake vortex encounter with an A380 in cruise flight.

ACN: 1428045 (11 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201702


Place




Environment



Light : Daylight

Aircraft

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : ZZZ

Aircraft Operator : FBO

Make Model Name : DA20-C1 Eclipse



Flight Plan : VFR

Mission : Training


Person

Reference : 1



Reporter Organization : FBO




Qualification.Flight Crew : Private







Events

Anomaly.Ground Excursion : Runway

Anomaly.Ground Event / Encounter : Loss Of Aircraft Control




Result.General : Maintenance Action


Result.Aircraft : Aircraft Damaged

Assessments

Contributing Factors / Situations : Airport


Contributing Factors / Situations : Weather


Narrative: 1

Frequency change from Approach Control to Tower occurred 5 miles from [the airport].

ATIS (information Alpha) reported winds 120 at 15 knots gusting 18 knots, contacted

Tower and requested touch and go. Tower cleared me for the option Runway 22, provided

wind update of 160 at 15 knots gusting 20, advised of wake turbulence from a jet aircraft

taking off ahead of me. Approach was conducted visually and straight in for 22 for a touch

and go.

Landing was normal; I moved flaps to takeoff position and applied power for takeoff. When

power was applied the speed of the aircraft suddenly increased and it pointed to the left in

an extreme manner. I made the decision to abort the takeoff, moved power to idle and

applied full right rudder. The aircraft rolled to the right despite full left aileron which was

set for cross wind correction. I avoided the runway lights and departed the runway into

the grass area adjacent. I used light braking to bring the aircraft to a stop in the grass and

contacted the Tower.

The Tower instructed me to hold my position which I did and was met by a flight

operations employee. I secured the engine and got out of the aircraft to inspect with the

flight operations employee. We also inspected the runway for damage, no damage was

found on the runway or aircraft. An FBO helped to move the aircraft to their ramp where it

was subsequently sent to [maintenance] for inspection.

Synopsis

The pilot of a Diamond DV20 reported that while attempting to takeoff the aircraft

suddenly sped up, the pilot lost control of the aircraft and it departed the runway.

ACN: 1426390 (12 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place



Environment


Light : Night

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : N90


Make Model Name : EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger




Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y





Flight Plan : IFR



Person

Reference : 1










Events



Detector.Automation : Aircraft Other Automation




Assessments





Narrative: 1

During climbout from EWR the stick shaker went off due to wake from the preceding

aircraft. Be more vigilant when taking off behind heavier aircraft.

Synopsis

EMB-145 Captain reported getting a stick shaker departing EWR after encountering wake

from the preceding aircraft.

ACN: 1424372 (13 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201702


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : EGLL.Airport

State Reference : FO


Environment


Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : EGLL





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger

Flight Phase : Initial Climb

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Tower : EGLL





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Person

Reference : 1











Events

Anomaly.Deviation - Procedural : Published Material / Policy





Assessments




Narrative: 1

Two and a half minutes after a B747 was cleared for takeoff, we were cleared for takeoff

on 9R at EGLL. We were cleared to LON 2.0 DME, then right heading 220 to climb and

maintain 6000 ft. After takeoff, we were cleared to continue right turn to 250. At 2100 ft

MSL, we encountered the wake of the preceding B747-400. It was "moderate" by the

coffee spill criteria and short-lived (3 seconds). It was only one encounter. It was while we

were in 25 degree right bank and we probably got additional 10 degree right/left/right with

associated yawing and some pitch (+/-5 degree?), airspeed probably +/- 10 KIAS (from

200 KIAS and accelerating during flap retraction). Nevertheless, it was a "little wake, huh"

type of encounter that was mitigated by everyone being in seat belts and down (flight

attendants). Winds on surface were east at 10-15 knots. My guess is that the B747 flew a

wider turn. It was definitely smooth until the encounter and smooth afterwards (not much,

if any, ambient turbulence). I am not sure what winds were at 2000 ft. We reported the

wake encounter to tower controller before we were handed off to next frequency (about

2700 ft MSL).

Synopsis

B767 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence on departure from EGLL in trail

of a B747.

ACN: 1422831 (14 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201702


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : LGA.Airport

State Reference : NY


Environment



Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Center : ZNY





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Airspace.Class A : ZNY

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Center : ZNY




Flight Plan : IFR


Person

Reference : 1









Events






Assessments




Narrative: 1

We were inbound to LGA, level at 18,000 ft in smooth air, no clouds at 300 knots indicated

with the autopilot on. No traffic was observed visually, on TCAS or on frequency. Suddenly

we hit what I'm convinced was wake turbulence. We snap-rolled violently and in a second

or two were out of the wake turbulence. Thankfully we had the seat belt sign on, and the

flight attendant was ok, I'm not sure how they didn't get hurt. If a passenger had been up

and or an overhead bin open, I think someone would have been hurt. I've been flying here

for going on six years, and I've only experienced this once before. That incident was

almost identical to this one except we were at about 11,000 ft and nearly the same

geographic location.

From now on flying into NYC I think I'm going to have the seatbelt sign on and flight

attendant seated when we are 30 minutes out.

Synopsis

CRJ-200 Captain reported the aircraft "snap-rolled violently" when they encountered wake

turbulence inbound to LGA.

ACN: 1421813 (15 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201701


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : MDW.Airport



Environment

Light : Night

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : MDW





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Airspace.Class C : MDW

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : C90





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Airspace.Class B : ORD

Person : 1

Reference : 1









Human Factors : Distraction

Person : 2

Reference : 2









Human Factors : Confusion


Human Factors : Human-Machine Interface


Events



Anomaly.Deviation - Procedural : Clearance




Result.Flight Crew : Returned To Clearance


Assessments




Narrative: 1

On departure we were assigned runway heading off 31C. We received several encounters

with the wake of the proceeding Company aircraft; nothing major but noticeable. The

Company aircraft was assigned a different heading than runway heading, can't remember

what it was. I started looking out the window to try and figure out why we kept running

into his wake, when we should be diverging. At that time we got a chime for 2000 to 3000

ft level alert. I looked back at the instruments to find the FO had passed through the

assigned heading, by almost 70 degrees and was still in a left hand bank and about to

miss the level off at 3000 ft.

I told him to roll out and level off. He did not respond. I took the aircraft, leveled off and

rolled into a right hand bank to get us where we needed to be. I then gave the aircraft

back to FO, and we continued without further incident. The FO said he did not understand

what the flight director was telling him. I got distracted looking for the preceding aircraft.

Not a good combination. We ended up passing thru our assigned heading by 70 degrees.

I mentioned the new flight director at gate. FO did not mention he was not familiar, or

uncomfortable. So, I didn't think anything of it. FO lost situational awareness due to new

flight director.

Narrative: 2

This aircraft had the new flight director that no longer uses the EASY TO UNDERSTAND

chevron to guide the flight course, but now uses the cross hairs FD. It was confusing to

figure out if I'm trying to pull the little white box to the cross hairs or bring the cross hairs

to the box. So I overshot the heading by 70 degrees while trying to figure this out. ATC

didn't say anything and may not have noticed my heading deviation before clearing me on

course to the first fix.

In a nutshell, I'm flabbergasted the aviation community had taken such a HUGE LEAP

BACKWARDS in automation user friendliness and allowed this change. With the old

chevron a child could look and see which direction to turn and it also gave the pilot a

sense of bank angle. This new system makes us LESS SAFE!

As you can see I'm frustrated that company has allowed someone to sell us this inferior

product and it WILL cause more mishaps in the future. I will get accustomed to it

eventually but at what cost? We had a fabulous FD that worked immensely better than this

new update.

Synopsis

Air carrier flight crew reported a track deviation occurred when the First Officer had

difficulty interpreting the new flight director's guidance.

ACN: 1421106 (16 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201701


Place




Environment

Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Airspace.Class C : ZZZ

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y



Make Model Name : B767-300 and 300 ER



Flight Plan : IFR



Airspace.Class C : ZZZ

Person

Reference : 1








Events







Assessments



Narrative: 1

During our approach we were conducting an ILS approach. We were following a heavy

767. The weather was reporting light snow, calm winds, and a visibility of 3 SM. The

aircraft preceding the 767 had to use the entire runway to stop and taxi off, which caused

tower to send the heavy 767 around. We were about 5 NM behind the heavy 767. When I

heard the heavy 767 go around I went ahead and briefed the go around procedure with

the CA since I expected there to be a possibility of hitting its wake. The entire approach

was stable, and the 1000 ft call was made, to which I responded "stable." At about 900 ft

AGL we hit the wake from the heavy 767, which caused us to [rock] back and forth, and

have wide airspeed variations. I called for a go around since I did not know how much

worse it may get. Going around allowed us to power out of the wake and leave it before

the situation got any worse. There were no other significant events after the go around.

Synopsis

CRJ-700 First Officer reported executing a go-around on final approach after encountering

wake turbulence in trail of a heavy B767 that had executed a go-around as well.

ACN: 1420716 (17 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201701


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : LNC.Airport

State Reference : TX

Relative Position.Angle.Radial : 100



Environment


Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X



Make Model Name : Amateur/Home Built/Experimental



Flight Plan : None

Mission : Personal


Route In Use : Direct

Airspace.Class E : D10

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Airspace.Class E : D10

Person

Reference : 1







Qualification.Flight Crew : Multiengine








Events





Miss Distance.Horizontal : 3000

Miss Distance.Vertical : 500



Assessments




Narrative: 1

After takeoff I performed a climbing right turn (right traffic for 31) to turn on course

(south) to my destination. My plane climbs in excess of 2,500 fpm. I was in the

"downwind" approximately abeam the numbers for 31 during the right turn to on course

and climbing through 3,000 ft MSL. As I rolled out on my southern course I saw a B737

coming right at me about 3,000 ft away and maybe 500ft above. I checked my altimeter

thinking I must have busted into the Class B airspace floor of 4,000 MSL. I had not. I was

at 3,100 MSL. I disengaged the autopilot and took evasive action. I dived for 3,000 MSL.

The jet didn't appear to take any action. About 1 sec after my action the 737 was flying

directly over top me in the opposite direction. Moments later I got in his jet wash and

nearly lost control. I ended up at 3,800 MSL because I had to go full power and pitch the

nose up since the jet wash dropped my wing and nose to an unusual attitude. I typically

stay 500 ft below the Class B floor as a buffer, therefore I didn't like being at 3,800 MSL.

My NavWorx ADS-B TIS-B never showed the traffic or alerted to it. Since I was in a

climbing turn and performing a checklist I didn't see the 737 approaching until I was

rolling out on course.

Two problems I see:

1) Why was the 737 at what appeared to be 3,500 MSL under the Class B? If the jet was

in fact in the Class B, but on the floor of it at 4,000 MSL, I contest that it is not a safe

buffer from the GA traffic that fly underneath the Class B. If they fly at 4,500 MSL and GA

traffic at 3,500 MSL then you have your 1,000 ft buffer. TRACON altitude assignments

need to be reviewed.

2) Why did my TIS-B fail to alert me? It has a built in test that I check on the ground prior

to takeoff and all was passed. It has alerted me in the past on traffic that wasn't nearly as

close.

Synopsis

Glasair III pilot reported a wake turbulence encounter departing LNC with a B737 inbound

to another airport. Reporter expressed concern that his NavWorx TIS-B unit did not alert

him to the traffic.

ACN: 1420247 (18 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201701


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : ATL.Airport



Environment


Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : A80





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Airspace.Class B : ATL

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y



Make Model Name : B717 (Formerly MD-95)



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger




Person

Reference : 1









Events







Assessments




Narrative: 1

We were on the downwind abeam the approach end of Runway 28 descending through

7000 at 210 kts with thrust levers at idle and spoilers out. The Captain was looking out the

window trying to locate the traffic we were following. At this time we experienced an

unexpected pocket of wake turbulence that caused a momentary stick shaker, autopilot

disconnect and approximately 15 degree bank to the right. I immediately recovered the

aircraft to wings leveled and the total event, from start to finish was a few seconds. The

event was resolved so quickly that the Captain was unaware of what transpired until I told

him (He thought I disconnected the autopilot due to the wake turbulence). The Captain

then queried ATC on what type of aircraft we were following. It was a 717 on the base leg

to the visual for Runway 27L (a parallel runway) that was approximately 10 miles away

and three thousand feet lower than us. I then reduced my descent rate and no other wake

turbulence was experienced and no other issues occurred during the duration of the flight.

The threat was the undesired aircraft state caused by the wake turbulence. The best thing

we can do as a crew is be aware that wake turbulence can occur even when you have

adequate altitude and distance separation.

Synopsis

CRJ-200 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence while on approach to ATL

airport behind a B717 inbound to a parallel runway.

ACN: 1417236 (19 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201701


Place



Environment

Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : C90





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger





Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Tower : ORD




Flight Plan : IFR



Person : 1

Reference : 1











Person : 2

Reference : 2










Events









Assessments





Narrative: 1

We were given an intercept heading of 310 to join final for a visual approach to runway

27L. We had been experiencing some wake turbulence, and at the same time my FO said

localizer alive, we got more wake turbulence. I was distracted by trying to see what type

of aircraft we were following when I realized I was about to go through final, so I turned

on final immediately and I overshot a little, just a few degrees. After the turn and centered

on localizer, I recall a traffic alert, but wasn't sure if it was on other final. The controller

did not indicate an issue and we landed safely. Concentrate on joining localizer regardless

of visual or not.

Narrative: 2

The captain was distracted by the wake turbulence event and was not paying close enough

attention as to how fast the localizer was coming into center.

While looking for traffic in busy airspace that we are following I should do a better job of

scanning outside visually and inside to verify we are staying on course while still remaining

on the lookout for other traffic.

Synopsis

EMB-145 flight crew reported flying through the localizer on approach to ORD when he was

distracted by wake turbulence.

ACN: 1416878 (20 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201701


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : SFO.Airport



Environment

Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Airspace.Class B : SFO

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger

Flight Phase : Landing

Person : 1

Reference : 1











Person : 2

Reference : 2








Events


Anomaly.Inflight Event / Encounter : Unstabilized Approach





Assessments



Primary Problem : Procedure

Narrative: 1

ATC sequenced us approximately 1.5-2 miles behind a B747 landing parallel runway; we

were landing 28L and the B747 was ahead of us landing 28R. ATC notified us to use

caution due to the possibility of wake turbulence. ATIS indicated wind was variable at five

knots. The F/O purposely deviated slightly above glideslope (no more than one dot) and

was flying an additional five knots above target speed. As we approached approximately

150-200 ft AGL, we started to encounter the wake turbulence from the B747 that had

landed ahead of us. The F/O made good corrections but the updraft and lateral

displacement put us in an unsafe position to land. We executed a go-around and were

vectored back around for an uneventful landing.

ATC sequencing us ahead of (or further behind) the B747 would have prevented this

event. Because the wind was variable at only five knots, there was a significant potential

for the wake turbulence to affect our landing on the parallel runway.

Narrative: 2

As the Pilot Flying and cleared for a visual approach to 28L we experienced wake from the

aircraft ahead which had landed on the parallel runway in front of us. We experienced the

wake at approximately 300 ft and both the PM and I came to the same coordinated

conclusion that we should discontinue the approach. A normal go-around and approach

and landing were completed. Both Tower and Departure were given the reason for the go-

around.

Synopsis

B737-700 Captain reported executing a go-around after encountering wake turbulence

from a B747 landing on the parallel runway at SFO.

ACN: 1415197 (21 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : JFK.Airport

State Reference : NY


Environment

Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : JFK





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Tower : JFK





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Person

Reference : 1




Function.Flight Crew : Other / Unknown




Events





Assessments

Contributing Factors / Situations : Airport




Narrative: 1

I am requesting a review of the new Wake Turbulence Separation Standards in [company

documents] in light of A380 Super operations at JFK. JFK Tower gave me a Line Up and

Wait clearance Runway 31L full length as an A380 Super was landing on Runway 31L.

If you look at JFK there is a long displaced threshold on Runway 31L and Runway 22R.

Because of the runway dimensions, the A380 Wake Turbulence vortices were settling on

top of me as I took off Runway 31L full length. This is my safety issue in which I do not

comprehend (within) our current verbiage. Is this scenario envisioned and accounted for

on a long displaced threshold? In my experience, this only occurs at JFK on Runways 31L

and 22R full length takeoffs.

Please review the science behind our separation standards and maybe have JFK Tower

execute a modified procedure for these 2 runways and then include a caution or warning in

our [aircraft chart] notes.

Synopsis

A321 pilot reported encountering wake vortices as he was taking off full length on JFK

Runway 31L from an A380 that had just landed on that runway.

ACN: 1414784 (22 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201701


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : IAH.Airport



Environment


Light : Night

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : I90


Make Model Name : Medium Large Transport



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger




Airspace.Class B : IAH

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : I90


Make Model Name : Large Transport


Flight Plan : IFR





Person

Reference : 1

Location Of Person.Facility : I90.TRACON


Function.Air Traffic Control : Instructor

Function.Air Traffic Control : Approach


Experience.Air Traffic Control.Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) : 3




Events






Detector.Person : Air Traffic Control


Assessments

Contributing Factors / Situations : Manuals



Narrative: 1

A heavy jet was on Visual Approach to Runway 8R straight in on about 10 mile final. This

aircraft was being worked by Final Center sector. Aircraft X was on the downwind for

Runway 8L. I was conducting training on Final North as he turned Aircraft X south bound

for the Visual Approach, [trainee] told Aircraft X that there was traffic on the south

runway. When Aircraft X said field in sight [trainee] cleared him for the Visual Approach

without giving him the 30 degree turn to final and the pilot flew past the final and got in

the wake remnant of Aircraft Y.

Next time I will ensure that my trainee understands the importance of the 30 degree turn

to final to prevent this situation from happing again.

Synopsis

I90 TRACON Controller's trainee did not use proper procedures to ensure wake turbulence

separation between successive arrivals.

ACN: 1414474 (23 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201701


Place



Environment


Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Route In Use.STAR : RAGGZ1


Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y



Make Model Name : B747-800 Advanced



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Route In Use.STAR : RAGGZ1


Person : 1

Reference : 1








Person : 2

Reference : 2








Events







Assessments




Narrative: 1

We were assigned the RAGGZ1 arrival into ATL, approaching from the southwest. We had

been told to expect a south runway for our approach to ATL. Well into the arrival, ATC

assigned us the transition for Runway 26R, on the north side of the field. After making the

turn to the north to join the track for the arrival, and upon turning onto the north

downwind, we began to experience wake turbulence from the preceding aircraft. The

winds were exactly parallel to our ground track, causing the wake from the preceding

aircraft to remain on our track. Radio traffic identified the preceding aircraft as a 747-8,

approximately 10 miles ahead of our aircraft. I directed the First Officer to shallow the rate

of descent to avoid further encounters with the wake from the 747. It was at this time that

the ATC Controller began to ask us to increase our rate of descent. I stated that we were

in the wake of the preceding aircraft and that our current rate of descent was the

maximum we could do. The Controller again directed us to increase our rate of descent. At

this time, I asked for a vector off of the arrival. The Controller refused to give us a vector

off of the arrival. The Controller again directed us to increase our rate of descent. I replied

'unable', and, we continued our approach and landed normally.

The threat in this event was ATC attempting to direct us to do unsafe things with our

aircraft. Even after I had made it clear that we were in the wake of the 747 ahead of us,

ATC replied that it shouldn't be a problem because we had ten miles separation, and, the

aircraft ahead of us wasn't a 'Super'.

Narrative: 2

The Controller handed us off to the Tower and stated in a somewhat condescending tone

that "you are MORE THAN 8 miles in trail of a heavy 747."

Synopsis

CRJ-200 flight crew reported encountering wake turbulence on approach to ATL about 10

miles in trail of a B747-8. Flight crew stated they were pressured by ATC to fly a path they

were not comfortable with.

ACN: 1414151 (24 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201701


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : IAH.Airport


Environment


Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : IAH





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger




Route In Use : Vectors


Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y



Make Model Name : Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model


Flight Plan : IFR



Person : 1

Reference : 1










Person : 2

Reference : 2









Events









Assessments





Narrative: 1

Being vectored on a NON STAR arrival into IAH we were assigned runway 27. ATC was

calling out speeds, headings and altitudes, our last speed assigned was 170 to REDOC,

cleared for visual approach 27, contact Tower 135.15. When we contacted Tower he

informed us to slow because we were overtaking preceding (2.5 miles ahead) aircraft by

20 kts. We configured and slowed to final approach speed flaps 5, approximately 140 kts.

On glideslope at that point we were instructed to S-turn south, but before I could do that

the aircraft rolled left violently startling myself and the FO. I immediately took action to

recover wings level and the autopilot was sounding "Auto Pilot, Auto Pilot". I'm not sure if

it kicked off or disengaged by my upset recovery inputs. I called out "TOGA, flaps 2" and

we got the aircraft climbing. Cleaned up to flaps 1, stabilized and re-automated.

Our only explanation is we believe we encountered wake turbulence from the bigger Airbus

ahead. We calmed ourselves and ATC brought us around for a normal approach and

landing on runway 27. I would like to add that it was a very hectic day with ATC doing

their best to bring all of thunderstorm delayed aircraft [in], some with minimum fuel.

[Suggest] slowing on our own if needed for safety.

Narrative: 2


Synopsis

EMB-175 flight crew reported executing a go-around after encountering wake turbulence in

trail of an Airbus on final approach to IAH.

ACN: 1414131 (25 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201701


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : LAX.Airport



Environment


Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : LAX





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Airspace.Class B : LAX

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Ground : LAX




Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger

Flight Phase : Taxi

Person

Reference : 1












Events





Assessments





Narrative: 1

We were on final approach for runway 24R at LAX following a "Heavy" Boeing 777 with a

light quarterly tailwind. The approach was stable until approximately 50ft when we believe

we encountered the preceding 777's wake turbulence. The wake turbulence caused the left

wing to suddenly raise, banking us to the right. At this time the EGPWS warning for "Bank

Angle" sounded. Captain called for the controls and I relinquished them. He corrected and

landed in the touchdown zone.

A suggestion that could have prevented this situation would be to touchdown beyond the

preceding aircraft's touchdown point. In the future I will take caution whenever following a

large aircraft with a tailwind and I will make a more immediate action to correct the

situation or initiate an immediate go-around.

Synopsis

EMB-175 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence in trail of a B777 on short

final to LAX.

ACN: 1413522 (26 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : MEM.Airport

State Reference : TN


Environment


Weather Elements / Visibility : Rain


Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : M03

Make Model Name : Challenger 300


Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Airspace.Class B : MEM

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : M03



Flight Plan : IFR


Airspace.Class B : MEM

Person

Reference : 1



Reporter Organization : Corporate






Events




Were Passengers Involved In Event : Y




Assessments





Narrative: 1

We were on the Runway 18L localizer north of REISE intersection at 3000 ft and cleared

for the ILS RW 18L approach. We were configured with flaps 10, gear up, and flying

approximately 180 KIAS in IMC with rain and light to moderate turbulence. Wind was out

of the southwest at 50-60 knots at 3000 ft. Autopilot was engaged. The airplane suddenly

rolled right, then left exceeding 30 degrees of bank each way. The autopilot remained

engaged, and came back to wings level. About 3 seconds later, it happened again with

high roll rates and bank angles nearing 45 deg. I disconnected the autopilot and initiated a

climb out of wake turbulence. We were able to re-establish and fly the approach to landing

without further incident. We reported it to ATC and asked ATC what type of plane we were

following. They said we were #1 for 18L, but there was traffic for the parallel runways.

ATC was busy, so we didn't query any further. Our 2 passengers were pretty shaken up

about it, but we calmed them the best we could. I contacted MEM Approach Control by

telephone and reported it to him. He said they would review the tapes.

Synopsis

CL30 pilot reported the aircraft rolled suddenly left and right exceeding 30 degrees of bank

after encountering wake turbulence on approach to MEM.

ACN: 1412801 (27 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : SEA.Airport

State Reference : WA

Environment

Flight Conditions : Mixed

Weather Elements / Visibility : Cloudy

Light : Daylight


Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : SEA





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger

Nav In Use.Localizer/Glideslope/ILS : Runway 16R


Airspace.Class B : SEA

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Tower : SEA


Make Model Name : B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Person

Reference : 1











Events

Anomaly.Inflight Event / Encounter : Unstabilized Approach

Anomaly.Inflight Event / Encounter : Weather / Turbulence





Assessments




Narrative: 1

A go-around was performed due to final landing flaps not being selected below 500 feet.

ATIS was reporting 3200 overcast with a few clouds at 300 feet and a temp/dew point of

2/2. We discussed the possibility of the 300 foot clouds being an issue and briefed the ILS

and set minimums. We were on approach to 16R behind a heavy 787. We heard the

controller give 2 separate speed restrictions to the 787 crew which they incorrectly read

back, causing us to question what speed they were flying. We were assigned 170 knots to

FINKA after intercepting the localizer. We slowed, but were subsequently told to slow to

160 knots to FINKA. We extended the gear and flaps 15. We were descending on the

glideslope on autopilot and when we got to FINKA, we encountered a significant wake

turbulence event that caused the aircraft to roll left 20 degrees and caused us to go left of

the localizer by close to one dot. We were guarding the controls, but the autopilot stayed

connected and corrected back to course. We were noticing the swirling wake of the 787 in

the clouds. We continued the ILS and broke out at 300 feet. Just after that we

encountered more wake turbulence from the preceding 787, then got a GPWS warning

because we were still at flaps 15 and 160 knots. I executed a go-around and we were

vectored around the radar pattern for an uneventful landing.

We were distracted by multiple things including weather being significantly below what

ATIS reported, and finally, the wake turbulence we encountered at FINKA causing us to

worry about aircraft control at that moment instead of configuring to final flap setting.

After FINKA we were concerned with both wake turbulence and the low weather and we

neglected to remember to configure our flaps to the final setting and run the before

landing checklist.

Synopsis

B737-800 First Officer reported executing a go-around after receiving a GPWS warning

triggered by an improper flap setting. Reporter cited distraction following a wake

turbulence encounter in trail of a B787.

ACN: 1412402 (28 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place




Environment



Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger




Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y



Make Model Name : Widebody Transport



Flight Plan : IFR



Person

Reference : 1









Events







Assessments





Narrative: 1

Momentary flap 2 overspeed while on approach [to] 4R EWR. Approximately 3000 ft, 200-

205 kts, 2-3 seconds. IMC conditions, hand flown, behind a "heavy" and trying to slow.

Turbulence (wake?) drove airspeed to flap limit momentarily. Flaps retracted, slowed and

flaps re-extended on schedule and landed normally. Maintenance write up via ACARS.

Synopsis

A320 Captain reported a flap overspeed on approach to EWR due to either turbulence or

wake vortices.

ACN: 1411582 (29 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place

Locale Reference.ATC Facility : IAH.Tower



Environment


Light : Night

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X



Make Model Name : B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Route In Use : None

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Route In Use : None

Aircraft : 3

Reference : Z






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Person

Reference : 1

Location Of Person.Facility : IAH.Tower


Function.Air Traffic Control : Local


Experience.Air Traffic Control.Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) : 9.5



Events



Anomaly.Deviation - Procedural : FAR





Assessments



Narrative: 1

I was working Local West (LW) so I was working departures on 15R/L. We are on an East

flow meaning landing from the west to the east. North departures were going to runway 9.

We had been told that we would also have 3 arrivals to runway 9. The final for runway 9

crosses both 15L and 15R. The last arrival was a B737. I continued rolling departures in

front of him until he got about 2 miles west of 15R. I may not have told all aircraft that

traffic was landing the crossing runway when I Line Up and Waited them. I don't recall.

Anyway, I put [an E170] on 15L and [the B737] on 15R and waited for the arrival to pass.

As soon as he did pass, I cleared them for takeoff. It was night time already so seeing the

type of aircraft out the window was impossible until about a 1/2 mile final or so. The

airplane looked pretty big. I looked again at the display and the ASDE as well. All

appeared normal. Something didn't look right though. The plane was huge! I said, "what

kind of plane is that?! It is not a 737." I rolled no more departures until I was sure. The

Local South (LS) guy asked the pilot and he said he was a 767, yes a heavy. So here I just

rolled two departures under his wake. The supervisor in charge at the time began to track

down what had happened. You remember a while back we had a issue with a mismarked

aircraft travel across the country. Thank goodness this was just in Houston Approach

Airspace. In the time I took between filing this report back on position the other supervisor

(not the one in charge at the time of the issue) said that someone at I90 inadvertently

deleted the type aircraft and then put him back in as a 737 instead of a 767.

Several things could have clued us in that this aircraft was a heavy. One, the ramp

monitor at Local South (LS) showed him as a heavy. I couldn't see it from where I was

working, but the LS could. I guess they just didn't look to see where the aircraft parked or

had expectation bias because it said B737 on the data tag even though the ramp monitor

said otherwise. Also, the LS guy said he asked the pilot if he had been called heavy his

entire flight and he said yes. The LS guy said he thought the pilot may have called himself

heavy when he checked in, but the expectation of the data tag, and the fact that we avoid

landing heavies over there because it shuts off departures for a considerable amount of

time probably all played into the expectation bias. I might recommend that pilots insist on

being called heavy if a controller forgets to say it in the transmission. It could have

consequences. I can only imagine these two departures less than 1500 feet apart, side by

side getting caught in a vortex at night! Scary stuff. Not landing on 9 would be great too.

Synopsis

IAH Tower Controller reported a B767 was improperly coded as a B737 and thus proper

wake procedures were not followed on the arrival.

ACN: 1411542 (30 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : BUR.Airport



Environment


Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : BUR

Aircraft Operator : Corporate

Make Model Name : Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Route In Use : None

Airspace.Class C : BUR

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Tower : BUR

Aircraft Operator : Corporate

Make Model Name : Light Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng



Flight Plan : VFR

Mission : Test Flight


Airspace.Class C : BUR

Person

Reference : 1

Location Of Person.Facility : BUR.Tower


Function.Air Traffic Control : Local


Experience.Air Traffic Control.Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) : 7






Events









Assessments

Contributing Factors / Situations : Company Policy




Narrative: 1

Aircraft X was waiting to depart IFR off of runway 15. Aircraft Y was conducting low

approaches on the opposite direction runway 33. Aircraft Y had been conducting

approaches for an hour now. I had an IFR release for Aircraft X and was motivated to get

Aircraft Y done with the approaches so we could go back to normal operations. I cleared

Aircraft X for takeoff after Aircraft Y was on departure. I forgot about wake recategory and

the new separation and it was too late to cancel the takeoff clearance. Aircraft X flew

through the wake turbulence without incident.

Wake Recategory is very complex with numerous different categories from A to F for all

types of aircraft. It is unclear in the tower what the separation is with opposite direction

wake recategory separation. We need to be trained better for wake recategory. We had

one day of class and were given a reference card for the operation. I take full

responsibility for this situation and it was my fault.

Synopsis

Burbank Tower Controller reported of a wake turbulence separation loss due to re-

categorization of separation rules. Controller departed an aircraft into the wake of an

opposite direction arrival aircraft and did not have the correct separation.

ACN: 1411438 (31 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201611


Place

Locale Reference.ATC Facility : ZLA.ARTCC



Environment


Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Center : ZLA





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Route In Use.STAR : RIIVR3

Airspace.Class A : ZLA

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Route In Use.STAR : RIIVR3

Airspace.Class E : ZLA

Person : 1

Reference : 1









Person : 2

Reference : 2









Events









Assessments




Narrative: 1

Flying into LAX on the RIIVR3 PGS Transition, we were in the mid-thirties on our arrival

into LAX and I heard an Airbus Super check in on the frequency at FL400. Shortly after

that we were vectored for spacing and I spotted the Airbus above us to the north. It was

descending on TCAS as it was heading westbound and we were heading northwest on the

vector. I asked LAX Center what our sequencing was, and he came back saying we were

being vectored behind an Airbus 380 Super and that he would be turning us back in a

couple minutes. Shortly after that he told us to turn and proceed direct to GRAMM

Intersection on the arrival. At that time I had the A380 in sight. We were being cleared to

proceed directly behind the A380 and he was still above us. Aware that it would put us at

risk of flying into his wake turbulence, I asked to stay on the northwest bound vector to

stay clear of the A380 track and worked to stay clear of his wake until he was below us on

the way into GRAMM Intersection. That request was approved and I was told when clear I

could proceed direct to GRAMM. We were also holding a slower speed assigned by Center

for spacing. Once I was ready to turn back to join the arrival, we were told to accelerate to

300 Knots plus. This was just going to bring us back closer to the A380 as we sped up and

he started slowing down for the crossing restriction over GRAMM at 280 knots.

I could see on the TCAS that we were above the A380 descent path up to the GRAMM

waypoint, but as we passed through about 18000 feet we encountered the A380 wake

anyway. Everything happened very quickly and either the auto-pilot disconnected on its

own or I disengaged it as I tried to control the pitch and rolling motion that occurred once

we connected with the wake vortex. The rolling moment was extreme and the jet seemed

to wallow as I added power and attempted to climb up and out of the wake vortex. After

several seconds we were back in clean air, and I told Center what had happened and that I

wanted a turn off of the arrival to get more spacing on the A380 Super. We turned

southwest and got separation and then were cleared back to join the arrival. I asked

where the A380 was now and if he was on the 25L transition. ATC told us it was 15 miles

ahead and was on the North Runway transition for Runway 24R. We were going to 25L.

After landing the aircraft was taken out of service for an Aircraft Vibration/Severe

turbulence encounter. I was also informed by the Flight Attendants that a couple of them

had actually gotten thrown into the laps of passengers. They described the fact that it felt

like the aircraft was going to roll upside down. No injuries were reported from the Flight

Attendants or passengers that I know about.

[Caused by] separation issues with a very large aircraft enroute to LAX. Inadequate

knowledge or heavy workload of ATC Controller leading to a clearance that would have

placed us in-trail of this A380 Super as it descended through our altitude directly in front

of us. Aircrew intervention placed us away from this Super aircraft instead of being right

behind it initially. ATC directed us to speed up to close the gap in spacing behind the

Super that put us in the zone to encounter its wake on the arrival. Wake turbulence

encounter passing approximately 18000 ft descending on the RNAV Arrival due to

proximity to the A380 Aircraft and its descent profile. This resulted in a strong to extreme

wake turbulence event.

Take away and suggestions to keep this from happening again:

ATC and Aircrew Training to ensure we are aware of the significance of not only in-trail

separation from Heavy or Super Category Aircraft, but also the factual and aerodynamic

characteristics of wake vortices, and how they manifest themselves and move through the

air. With an average descent rate of 500 ft per minute, wakes do not remain static. With

increasing changes in configuration wakes become stronger. With tailwinds and

crosswinds, the wake can linger longer in certain places which can affect an in-trail aircraft

both on the initial arrival and descent as well as final approach. Strong emphasis how to

vector other aircraft in behind Heavy or Super aircraft, especially when the Heavy or Super

Aircraft is above and will be descending through the trailing aircraft's flight path. This is

potentially very dangerous for the reasons that led up to this report.

Though I was aware and asked questions and tried to mitigate the threat before it could

create a hazard to my flight, other aircrew may not even have had a clue what was about

to happen. Vertical and lateral in-trail separation needs to be greater following these

Super aircraft especially with the constraints and crossing altitudes we experience on most

RNAV arrivals. With at or above crossings, the potential exists that the preceding Super

aircraft could be above the path of the following in-trail aircraft. Much like being a dot high

on the glide path to final, the in-trail aircraft then faces the risk of encountering the wake

of the preceding Heavy or Super during many phases of the RNAV descent profile. I

believe that is what happened to us during our encounter. ATC, both Center and Approach

Control, need to also ALWAYS inform following aircraft within a set range that they are

crossing or following the path of a Heavy or Super aircraft. Currently that only seems to

occur in the approach sector of flight into the Airports we serve.

One other take away from this event. At each recurrent, we have the requirement and

opportunity to do upset recoveries. Sometimes this is set up as though from a wake

turbulence encounter following a Heavy aircraft. I am grateful for that training and, along

with the awareness of the possibility of a wake encounter, I believe that this training

helped to contribute to the successful recovery following this wake turbulence event.

Narrative: 2

Descending on the RIIVR arrival, landing west, we were vectored off to get spacing behind

an A380. The [A380] was cleared direct GRAMM and a few miles later we were cleared

direct GRAMM. The Captain voiced his concern about being behind this aircraft as they

descended on the arrival. We asked to delay our turn to offset from the A380's flight path.

Everything was normal and ATC advised us we were 16 miles in trail of the A380. We

turned final at RUSTT and then we encountered the wake turbulence from the A380. We

were passing thru approximately 18,500 ft and our aircraft was rapidly rolled to the right

and left about 5 or 6 times. The autopilot was disconnected as [the] Captain worked to

control our airplane. The rolls were more abrupt than normal and caused our aircraft to

print out a turbulence report. We reported the upset to the Approach Controller. He

advised us that we were 16 miles in trail and promptly vectored us to the South and out

from behind the A380's path. We continued and landed on 25L, while the A380 landed on

24R.

The next time I'm vectored behind an A380 I will request to offset or increase my spacing

to 20 miles. In doing this for over 30 years I've never experienced an upset from wake

turbulence this violent.

Callback: 2

Reporter emphasized the encounter was violent and was surprised at the intensity

considering the 16 miles they were in trail.

Synopsis

B737 flight crew reported a "severe" wake turbulence encounter on arrival into LAX 15

miles in trail of an A380.

ACN: 1411058 (32 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place



Environment


Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : ATL





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Nav In Use.Localizer/Glideslope/ILS : Runway 10



Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y






Flight Plan : IFR


Nav In Use.Localizer/Glideslope/ILS : Runway 10



Person

Reference : 1









Events





Assessments




Narrative: 1

Inbound to ATL on the ILS PRM to RWY 10, we were 5 miles in trail of a B757, IMC,

descending on the glideslope and cleared to land. Even though it is not required, I have

gotten in the habit of using Continuous Ignition when I believe there is a potential for

wake turbulence. I selected Cont Ign as soon as we were informed we were 5 miles behind

the B757. Crossing the final approach fix, we experienced 2 somewhat sharp rolls to the

left. The autopilot had no issues controlling the roll and I don't believe they exceeded 10

degrees of bank. They did not seem serious enough to consider breaking off the approach.

I quickly slowed the aircraft to Vref speed to maintain our distance behind the B757.

Normally I would offset the glideslope when following a B757 but given we were still IMC I

felt it best to keep the autopilot on the glideslope. A minute or so later we experienced a

sharp, very aggressive left roll of approximately 30 degrees bank. I immediately took

control of the aircraft from the autopilot, leveled the wings and leveled our descent to fly

out of the wake turbulence. Glancing up I realized the runway had come into sight and

continued the approach, this time intentionally remaining at least 5 degrees high on the

glideslope, but stabilized, the remaining distance to the runway. We landed without further

incident.

Would it be a good idea to consider adding a procedure to select Continuous Ignition

whenever wake turbulence is a possible threat? Especially with the newly recategorized

criteria - I am experiencing far more instances of wake (granted most are minor)

encounters since ATL adapted the Recat standards.

Synopsis

CRJ-200 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence on approach to ATL five miles

in trail of a B757 that resulted in a "sharp" left roll.

ACN: 1409924 (33 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place




Environment


Weather Elements / Visibility : Windshear

Weather Elements / Visibility.Visibility : 0.25

Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X






Flight Plan : IFR



Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y






Flight Plan : IFR



Person : 1

Reference : 1











Person : 2

Reference : 2









Events







Assessments





Narrative: 1

On takeoff from Runway 22R, reported ATIS 1/4 visibility, calm winds reported by tower.

Previous departure B757. Normal takeoff roll and rotation. Pitch bars commanded extreme

nose up. Wind increased to 20 kts by 100-150 ft, 50 kts by 300 ft, 82 kts by 500 ft. Pitch

bars commanding extreme nose up, aircraft attitude was 20-25 degrees nose up and not

yet at power reduction altitude (800 ft). Hit wake turbulence somewhere around 500 ft in

turn and had a 2-3 kts momentary overspeed. Autothrottles on. Continued nose up

rotation but hesitant to over-rotate as aircraft was extremely nose up with positive wind

performance. Had second momentary exceedance in turn when encountered wake

turbulence from previous aircraft leading to second exceedance (momentary overspeed).

Just after power reduction, rapid trend arrow indicating aircraft entering negative effect of

relative wind, VLS increased to just under aircraft speed (5 kts below). Thrust applied to

accelerate above green dot speed. Aircraft given 290 heading by ATC and turned west and

departed in light to moderate turbulence conditions. Exceedance reported to

[Maintenance] at cruise. Consulted with [Maintenance who stated] no issues. Proceeded to

[destination] and landed uneventfully.

Narrative: 2


Synopsis

A320 flight crew reported a flap overspeed shortly after takeoff when they encountered a

rapidly increasing headwind and wake turbulence from the preceding B757.

ACN: 1409296 (34 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place

Locale Reference.ATC Facility : ZLA.ARTCC



Environment

Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger




Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger




Person

Reference : 1










Events





Assessments




Narrative: 1

While enroute to PHX at FL310 we encountered moderate wake turbulence for

approximately 30 seconds to one minute from an opposite direction 747 directly above us

at FL320. The winds aloft exactly paralleled our courses and after experiencing the wake

turbulence for a few moments we decided to make a 30 degree turn to the left to fly out of

the wake turbulence. We informed ATC of our turn. LA Center gave us no traffic report. I

made a PA for Flight Attendants to take their seats. One F/A was forced to brace herself on

the floor in the aisle. No injuries occurred. I made a passenger PA to explain what the

turbulence was from.

It seems that 1000 feet below separation between 747s and 737s is not adequate. ATC

separation standards should be evaluated.

Synopsis

B737-700 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence at FL310 from an opposite

direction B747 at FL320. Reporter stated he would like to see the separation standards

increased.

ACN: 1408242 (35 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : IAD.Airport

State Reference : DC


Environment


Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Center : ZDC

Aircraft Operator : Government

Make Model Name : Gulfstream V / G500 / G550



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Route In Use.STAR : HYPER7

Airspace.Class E : ZDC

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Center : ZDC





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Route In Use.STAR : HYPER7

Airspace.Class E : ZDC

Person

Reference : 1















Events








Assessments




Narrative: 1

[We were] level at 17,000 feet in cruise flight near LRP at 300 KIAS. ATC informed the

crew that they were ten miles in trail of an A380. A few minutes earlier, the G550 had

been cruising at 320 KIAS when ATC ordered a speed reduction to 300 KIAS to maintain

required separation with [the A380]. Crew complied with the speed reduction. [The A380]

was visible in the distance out of the cockpit windows. The G550 suddenly entered a 20 to

30 degree uncommanded right roll at 10-20 degrees per second. The left seat PF copilot

disengaged the autopilot and corrected roll using left roll input and turned on the seatbelt

sign. The G550 returned to level flight with about 200 feet of altitude loss. The Captain, as

right seat PM, then alerted ATC to the wake turbulence encounter and requested a turn

and descent. ATC then provided a vector to the right [to] take the G550 out of a trailing

position between [the A380]. No significant G forces were experienced during the upset or

recovery and there were no injuries or damage. Management was notified upon landing.

Synopsis

G550 First Officer reported a wake turbulence encounter at 17,000 feet while ten miles in

trail of an A380 that resulted in a 20 to 30 degree roll and a loss of 200 feet.

ACN: 1407339 (36 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612

Aircraft

Reference : X




Mission : Passenger



Person

Reference : 1












Human Factors : Time Pressure

Events



Anomaly.Conflict : Ground Conflict, Less Severe






Assessments




Narrative: 1

There has been a continuing trend where tower is clearing aircraft for take-off, primarily

DFW, ORD, before the preceding aircraft have even left the runway. The result is, if not

always, improper separation between aircraft, and experiencing wake turbulence from the

preceding aircraft. What is the rush? Ask for a slight delay and you get attitude from the

controller.

I find it ironic that when on approach, SNA and LAX for example ATC will say maintain

airspeed but "caution wake turbulence" from the aircraft you are following. Please tell me,

what action should a pilot take at that point? How do you "caution wake turbulence" and

told not to slow down when you are on a stable approach? How many go-arounds do I

have to make to remain safe because a controller is in a rush?

These events occur because ATC appears to be in a rush to "get 'em out." The new

separation standards are not safe. These constant wake turbulence events are going to

lead to a disaster. When I once asked a controller what the separation was between our

aircraft, the response was "adequate." Sorry,but I think that is for the PIC to decide.

How about the aircraft in front of you actually leaves the tarmac with gear up before

clearing the next aircraft for take-off? How about not putting an aircraft that is 20k slower

in front of you but you are told to keep your speed up?

Synopsis

Regional jet pilot reported wake turbulence concerns related to departing behind and

following aircraft into and out of airports. Pilot stated ATC appears to be in a rush.

ACN: 1407328 (37 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : DFW.Airport



Environment


Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : DFW





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Airspace.Class B : DFW

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Airspace.Class B : DFW

Person

Reference : 1









Events





Assessments




Narrative: 1

On initial climb out from runway 18L, at approximately 1200 AGL, after calling for "VNAV",

we encountered extreme wake turbulence from the preceding A321. I recovered the

aircraft. The rest of the departure and climb out was normal. DFW TWR cleared us onto

the runway, line up and wait, after the A321 was given takeoff clearance. Once into

position, Tower cleared us to takeoff, while the A321 was still on the runway. I elected to

wait 15-30 seconds for the A321 to become airborne before applying takeoff thrust, trying

to ensure adequate spacing behind the A321. After the upset event I should have allowed

even more time behind the A321.

This is the second major aircraft upset I have experienced since the new FAA wake

turbulence separations standards went into effect. The first was behind a B757. The FAA

needs to return to the 2 minute spacing behind B757 and A321 aircraft. I will not put

myself into this position again.

Callback: 1

Reporter emphasized his displeasure with the reduced separation techniques in use that he

feels increase the likelihood of wake turbulence encounters.

Synopsis

B737-800 Captain reported encountering "extreme" wake turbulence at approximately

1,200 feet AGL departing DFW in trail of an A321.

ACN: 1407147 (38 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : HWD.Airport


Relative Position.Angle.Radial : 133



Environment



Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : NCT

Aircraft Operator : FBO

Make Model Name : Small Aircraft, High Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear



Flight Plan : VFR

Mission : Traffic Watch


Airspace.Class C : OAK

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Tower : OAK


Make Model Name : MD-11



Flight Plan : IFR





Person

Reference : 1



Reporter Organization : Contracted Service











Events




Result.Aircraft : Aircraft Damaged

Assessments




Narrative: 1

While flying along the San Mateo/92 Highway towards the 880 North at 2000 feet MSL

inside the OAK class C airspace near the Jackson Street waypoint. We were instructed by

ATC to remain clear of an MD11 on final into OAK. We had more than a mile of separation

and turned right to the south east to stay away from the approach path of the MD11. ATC

then cleared us to continue pilot navigation once the MD11 was approximately 3 miles

farther down the approach. I turned toward a point that I determined would keep us above

the MD11's wake turbulence at 2000 feet MSL. We then encountered wake turbulence I

would describe like going over a speed bump in a car too fast. I would estimate a

momentary negative G of around -0.2. The rest of the flight was a normal flight back to

our base airport. The reclining function of the passenger seat was damaged and we think it

occurred in the wake turbulence event. No other damage.

Synopsis

Single engine aircraft pilot reported the aircraft incurred minor damage during a wake

turbulence encounter with an MD11.

ACN: 1406756 (39 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place




Environment


Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : SCT





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Route In Use.STAR : SADDE7


Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Person : 1

Reference : 1














Person : 2

Reference : 2













Events








Assessments




Narrative: 1

Descending on the SADDE arrival we began receiving vectors for the visual for runway 24R

into LAX with a speed assignment of 180 KTS. SOCAL Approach had descended us below

7,000 ft and advised us traffic to follow, a Boeing 777 at our 3 o'clock. Both [the] Captain

and I saw the 777 right away and notified approach of this. At this point approach gave us

a base leg turn, followed by clearing us for the visual runway 24R. Since we had been

cleared for the visual approach I spun in an intercept heading of 220, followed by ATC

assigning heading 230 to intercept. At this point we were leveling at 2200 ft. As the LOC

became alive I noticed we were on about a 12 mile final when the approach controller

stated, "speed 160 if you like." This confused both [the] Captain and myself because we

had never been told how fast the preceding 777 was traveling, if we were flying faster

than the 777, or how far ahead the 777 was. At this point we had flown into the wake of

the heavy 777. This caused the airplane to bank right to roughly 45-60 degrees. Without

hesitation both the Captain and I grabbed the controls, disconnected the auto pilot, and

reestablished straight and level flight.

Once re-arming the auto pilot we captured the localizer and glide path for the visual for

runway 24R still outside the final approach fix. While in the recovery and configuring for

landing, the master caution had been silenced due to high work load. It was not until just

before "1000 ft instruments normal" call that [the] Captain noticed that we had 3 EICAS

caution messages, (WINDSHEAR FAIL, AOA LIMIT FAIL, SHAKER ANTICIPATED). At this

point [the] Captain called for a GA (go-around) and we executed the GA per SOPs. Once

established in the GA [the] Captain assigned control of the aircraft and radios to myself

while he ran the QRH for the 3 EICAS messages we had received. The WINDSHEAR FAIL,

and AOA LIMIT FAIL check list ended with them just being crew awareness messages while

the SHAKER ANTICIPATED messages led to a new landing configuration with landing data.

Once we had this all figured out with new landing data for the new landing configuration

we continued with the climb check, descent check, and approach check before notifying

ATC that we were ready to come back to LAX for another landing attempt on runway 24R.

This attempt occur normally, but during taxi into the gate the 3 EICAS caution messages

cleared and 2 EICAS cyan messages of ADS PROBS 2 and 4 FAIL appeared. Once at the

gate with the flight officially ended [the] Captain and I debriefed what had happened, the

go around, all EICAS messages, and that no limitations had been exceeded in the last few

moments of the flight.

After an in-depth discussion with [the] Captain I believe the root cause of this was a lack

of communication between us as a crew and ATC as to our spacing and speed difference

with the 777 that we were following. Neither the Captain nor myself [queried] ATC as to

how far behind or the speed difference between the two aircraft, and the confusing

terminology that was used by ATC in by telling us to maintain 160 KTS if we wish were all

causes.

Narrative: 2


Synopsis

EMB-175 flight crew reported encountering wake turbulence from a preceding B777 on

arrival into LAX.

ACN: 1406143 (40 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201612


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : DCA.Airport

State Reference : DC

Environment

Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : DCA





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Route In Use.SID : WYNGS3

Airspace.Class B : DCA

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : PCT


Make Model Name : Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Route In Use.SID : WYNGS3

Airspace.Class B : DCA

Person

Reference : 1










Events








Assessments





Narrative: 1

This course deviation occurred shortly after departing runway 01 at DCA via the WYNGS

departure. I was the pilot monitoring and [the First Officer] was the pilot flying. I accepted

a clearance from tower to maintain visual separation from the preceding aircraft. Once

airborne and after FO began left turn to NW (up the river) I focused my attention on the

aircraft ahead of us. We had minimum spacing and [encountered] his wake. Once clear of

his wake, and sure his flight path was not a conflict to ours, I came inside the cockpit to

check the instruments for aircraft position and noticed we were slightly right of course, but

did not say anything as FO had proper correction established. Shortly thereafter, I was

given a phone number to call for a possible deviation.

I should not have accepted the ATC clearance to maintain visual separation due to the

short distance between aircraft. This created a distraction from my primary duties of a

pilot monitoring and delayed my cross check to ensure the aircraft was in the proper

position.

Synopsis

B737-800 Captain reported a track deviation occurred departing DCA when they were

distracted by a wake turbulence encounter.

ACN: 1405673 (41 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201611


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : OAK.Airport



Environment


Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X



Make Model Name : Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Route In Use.SID : CNDEL3


Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y



Make Model Name : MD-11



Flight Plan : IFR




Person

Reference : 1









Events

Anomaly.Deviation - Altitude : Overshoot

Anomaly.Deviation - Altitude : Crossing Restriction Not Met







Assessments




Narrative: 1

We were given the CNDEL3 RNAV departure out of OAK. We had a wheels-up time and

were advised that if we didn't make the time we would have to wait about 30 minutes on

the ground before being released again. We made it to the runway right on time and were

given instructions to takeoff behind a MD-11 heavy. This caused us to takeoff with normal

thrust as opposed to the planned reduced. After takeoff we started experiencing the

effects of wake turbulence due to the heavy that took off prior to us. Trying to minimize

the effect of the wake turbulence we missed a crossing restriction of at-or-below 2,000 ft

over LEJAY, the first fix in the departure. ATC instructed us to climb unrestricted to 10,000

ft and at that same moment notified us of the crossing restriction we had missed. We

proceeded with the rest of the flight with no further issues.

Suggest not getting too caught up with making the wheel-up time and be aware of the

threat of a low crossing restriction with the combination of taking off with normal thrust

and wake turbulence from the proceeding heavy.

Synopsis

Medium size regional jet First Officer reported overshooting a crossing restriction climbing

out of OAK as they were dealing with a wake turbulence encounter from the preceding

MD-11.

ACN: 1404436 (42 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201611


Place




Environment


Light : Night

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Center : ZAU





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Route In Use.STAR : TRTLL4

Airspace.Class E : ZAU

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Center : ZAU





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Route In Use.STAR : TRTLL4

Airspace.Class E : ZAU

Person : 1

Reference : 1










Person : 2

Reference : 2










Events

Anomaly.Deviation - Altitude : Undershoot

Anomaly.Deviation - Altitude : Crossing Restriction Not Met






Assessments




Narrative: 1

During descent we encountered wake turbulence from preceding aircraft which interrupted

our VNAV descent causing us to be 500 ft high at TRTLL.

Narrative: 2

Was given cross TRTLL at 11000 from our cruise alt of FL390. The aircraft started down in

VNAV PATH which was verbalized by both pilots. In the descent we ran into some wake. A

moment later I noticed the FMA said VNAV SPD. I opened the speed brakes to try and get

back on path. The Captain tried to contact ATC and get relief on the crossing restriction

however the aircraft ahead was talking. We leveled at 11000. The next clearance was for

us to change to approach control.

Synopsis

B737 flight crew reported missing a crossing restriction after encountering wake

turbulence during descent into ORD.

ACN: 1403281 (43 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201611


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : BWI.Airport

State Reference : MD


Environment



Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Airspace.Class B : BWI

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Tower : BWI





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Person : 1

Reference : 1









Person : 2

Reference : 2








Events







Assessments




Narrative: 1

With BWI Approach Control [Potomac], we were vectored onto a visual approach to 33L.

They put us in between 2 B737s which where only separated by 5 NM, by referencing the

TCAS map. We were told to slow to final approach speed. We configured to flaps 22 and

gear down. Passing through 150 KIAS and approximately 1400 ft AGL with the autopilot

on, the aircraft began to roll to the right and suspected wake turbulence. As we continued

to roll to the right passing 25-30 degrees of bank, I decided to take control of the aircraft

and autopilot automatically disabled when rolling the yoke to the left. I continued to roll

the yoke to the left to the stop. I had no more aileron input to the left and we continued to

roll through 60-70 degrees.

At this time the Pilot Monitoring decided to push the power to full forward helping in any

way to regain control the aircraft. Audial 'Bank Angle' was heard and we continued to roll.

At this time I decided the best course of action was to stop trying to roll the aircraft level

to the left and let the aircraft to continue to roll and try to maintain a 1G roll with the

direction of the wake. We had no control of the aircraft as we passed 80 degrees bank. At

about 90 degrees bank, with the engine spooled up, we regained control of the aircraft and

recovered from the unusual attitude. We apparently were no longer in the wake of the

aircraft in front of us. Recovering from the excessive bank, we executed a go-around. We

told BWI Tower that we encountered wake turbulence and called the go around. We were

vectored around for another visual and landed.

BWI TRACON [Potomac] seems to put aircraft very close on visuals. I know separation can

be reduced to 2.5 NM on visual approaches within 10 miles of runway, but 3 miles might

be safer with an RJ behind a B737-800. In doing some research, a 737-800 can have the

same wake at max landing weight as a 757. Would suggest to at least move to 3 [miles].

Callback: 1

Reporter stated various degrees of wake encounter have happened multiple times in the

past during BWI arrivals.

Narrative: 2

We were arriving Baltimore and were handed off to Baltimore Tower from Approach. We

were tracking the localizer and glideslope for the visual approach to 33L. After flaps 45

was set the aircraft began to buffet severely and then rolled left to approximately 80-90

degrees of bank and then proceeded to nose down. [The Captain] had two hands on the

yoke trying to regain control of the aircraft. I saw he was having a difficult time controlling

it so I pushed the thrust levers full forward and grabbed the yoke to assist [the] Captain.

After 5-10 seconds of uncontrollable flight we regained control of the aircraft and

proceeded to complete the go around procedure and check lists and circled back for a

successful approach and landing. BWI Tower said we were following a B737. This upset

was due to severe wake turbulence due to separation on approach into BWI.

Synopsis

EMB-145 flight crew reported a loss of control and aircraft upset following a wake

turbulence encounter on approach to BWI in trail of a B737 which caused a 90 degree

bank.

ACN: 1402975 (44 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201611


Place




Environment

Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Route In Use.SID : BANNG2

Airspace.Class E : ZTL

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Route In Use.SID : BANNG2


Person

Reference : 1









Events







Assessments




Narrative: 1

Cleared for takeoff 27R ATL on the BANNG departure behind an Airbus 321. Airbus was on

the same departure as us. We both got vectors toward BANNG intersection. Climbing

through about 16000 ft got wake turbulence from the Airbus - he was 2000+ ft above us.

I immediately turned 30 degrees left to exit the wake [and] advised Controller. Airbus was

about 10 miles from us.

Wake turbulence and the upset of an aircraft that is a direct result of putting aircraft on

the same departure. Our event started with traffic downfield on takeoff which gave us

additional spacing but still did not keep us clear of wake. I will never take off behind the

Airbus 321 without the full 2 minutes. With so many departure routes we should not have

to follow another aircraft on the same departure.

Synopsis

CRJ-200 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence departing ATL ten miles in trail of

an A321.

ACN: 1402692 (45 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201611


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : CLT.Airport

State Reference : NC


Environment



Light : Night

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : CLT





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Airspace.Class B : CLT

Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.TRACON : CLT





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Airspace.Class B : CLT

Person

Reference : 1









Events







Assessments





Narrative: 1

Taking off Runway 36C in CLT. FO was flying I was PM. Normal takeoff profile. I called

positive rate. FO called for gear up. As I was moving the gear lever we got a brief stick

shaker. FO adjusted pitch/shaker stopped immediately. Airspeed was around 155-160.

Rotation was a bit faster than normal. FO stated he was pitching to maintain V2+10-15

knots. Additionally, as the event was occurring we hit some rough air/light turbulence.

Later, around 800 feet we hit some light wake turbulence from the proceeding aircraft

which makes me think this was a contributing factor.

Synopsis

CRJ-200 Captain reported they experienced a brief stick shaker shortly after takeoff

associated with pitch rate, turbulence, and a possible wake vortex encounter.

ACN: 1402000 (46 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201611


Place




Environment


Light : Night

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X


Aircraft Operator : Air Taxi

Make Model Name : PC-12



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger




Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y



Make Model Name : Airbus 318/319/320/321 Undifferentiated



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Person

Reference : 1



Reporter Organization : Air Taxi






Events

Anomaly.Deviation - Altitude : Excursion From Assigned Altitude







Assessments




Narrative: 1

We were on the ATL 26R ILS PRM approach. We were at 5,000 about 2 NM east of HAINZ

and approximately 4 NM behind a small Airbus when we hit significant wake turbulence.

The Pilatus rumbled then very quickly banked left 30-40 degrees and pitched down five to

ten degrees. I quickly disconnected the autopilot, leveled the wings and leveled the pitch.

We regained control of the aircraft and continued the approach. We ended up about 100 ft

above our assigned altitude but no deviation was noted by ATC. We landed uneventfully,

we were not able to notify ATC due to frequency congestion.

Synopsis

PC-12 Captain reported they experienced a 30-40 degree bank and 5-10 degree pitch

down when they encountered wake turbulence on arrival into ATL in trail of a "small

Airbus".

ACN: 1401976 (47 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201611


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : PHL.Airport

State Reference : PA


Environment

Light : Night

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X

ATC / Advisory.Tower : PHL





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y

ATC / Advisory.Tower : PHL





Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger


Airspace.Class B : PHL

Person

Reference : 1










Events

Anomaly.Ground Event / Encounter : Other / Unknown





Assessments





Narrative: 1

During takeoff from 27L in PHL, winds reported prior to takeoff 320/9. The hour old ATIS

reported gust earlier 360@16/G30. With the more current report we felt comfortable we

were within limits and that the wind had died down. Having used our resources, we

applied the windshear guidance procedures and elected a max thrust takeoff, longest

runway with an adjusted Vr of 140. On takeoff roll, we experienced some sort of massive

gust or wing tip vortices from the previous Airbus 321 which pushed the nose about 20-30

[degrees] left. Having my hands in a grasp position, I accidentally removed TOGA power

momentarily due to the lateral jolt. Passed 80 knots, I elected to continue after FO

regained immediate directional control. I quickly reapplied TOGA and called rotate at

preplanned adjusted Vr. We rotated halfway down 27L and the remainder of the flight was

uneventful. Due to the lateral movement, I called the Purser to ensure everyone was okay,

she reaffirmed everyone was okay.

I think even with a highly experienced FO, I'll elect to conduct the takeoff next time when

there is any doubt of a potential direct crosswind scenario in addition to wind shear

precautions being used. I feel I need to adjust my hands as not to grasp the thrust levers

on takeoff to prevent an inadvertent thrust reduction in the future. This was an eye opener

for me and I learned a lot from the experience.

Synopsis

ERJ-190 Captain reported the nose swung 20 to 30 degrees left on the takeoff roll in

response to a wind gust or wake from the previous takeoff.

ACN: 1401464 (48 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201611


Place



Environment

Light : Night

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y






Flight Plan : IFR



Person

Reference : 1









Events










Assessments




Narrative: 1

On climb out from Atlanta we hit wake turbulence right as we were about to turn to follow

the SID out of Atlanta. I delayed the turn to maintain positive aircraft control while we

were in wake turbulence. After we got out of the wake turbulence we were about a half

dot off course. Seeing this I immediately turned to get on course, shortly after ATC issued

us a heading of 330 to join the SID. Nothing else out of the normal occurred the rest of

the flight.

In learning from this event, I could have keyed the mic and let ATC know what happened

and the corrective action being taken so there won't be any confusion.

Synopsis

CRJ-200 First Officer reported a track deviation occurred when they delayed their turn on

the SID departing ATL because of a wake turbulence encounter.

ACN: 1400248 (49 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201610


Place

Locale Reference.Airport : BWI.Airport

State Reference : MD



Environment




Light : Night


Aircraft

Reference : X



Make Model Name : M-20 J (201) / Allegro



Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Personal

Nav In Use : GPS



Person

Reference : 1






Qualification.Flight Crew : Private







Human Factors : Workload



Events







Result.Flight Crew : Diverted

Assessments




Narrative: 1

On approach to BWI at night while on an IFR flight plan, but in VFR conditions, I had

difficulty following ATC requested headings and I missed the intercept for the ILS. At the

time my new GPS (Garmin 650) self-dimmed to such a low level that it could not be seen.

I could not figure out how to make it brighter and readable. At the same time the airspeed

indicator and directional gyro were also poorly lighted despite the fact that I had the panel

lighting turned up to maximum. I used a flashlight to light those two instruments while I

was flying the plane. The original plan was to land at Carroll County Airport (DMW), but

due to very bad weather there, at the last moment, I made a choice to land at BWI. I was

also experiencing at times severe wake turbulence.

Next time I should make sure that these instruments and the GPS are well lighted. Also, I

waited in the decision to divert, and once I did so I was immediately exposed to an

extremely busy ATC environment with no time to prepare or find the approach in my back-

up paper approach plates. I was way too busy, and overwhelmed. Next time the decision

to divert will be made further out and I will prepare for the approach way ahead of time. I

will practice my instrument approaches more and practice landing at busy airports. Also it

probably would have been much better to divert to a much less busy major GA airport

such as Martin State Airport (MTN).

Synopsis

M20J pilot reported having difficulty with complying with ATC headings when the workload

of a night IFR flight became more than he could comfortably handle.

ACN: 1399829 (50 of 50)

Time / Day

Date : 201611


Place




Environment

Light : Daylight

Aircraft : 1

Reference : X






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Ferry



Aircraft : 2

Reference : Y






Flight Plan : IFR

Mission : Passenger



Person

Reference : 1









Events




Were Passengers Involved In Event : N


Result.Flight Crew : Overcame Equipment Problem

Assessments





Narrative: 1

On an empty repositioning flight (Part 91) to LAX we experienced wake turbulence which

caused 20 degrees of bank at about 2100 feet AGL. There was only me and the First

Officer onboard the plane. We had a 737 (If I identified that correctly) about 4 to 5 miles

ahead, and another aircraft approaching 24R. The First Officer was pilot flying and

automation was engaged (A/P and A/T). We were on speed 180, and on profile with flaps

3, approaching point LIMMA. Aircraft first started to shake and then suddenly started to

bank to the right. I immediately took the control, disconnected the A/P and brought back

the wings to level. After that rapid turn it started to smooth out and we were almost over

point LIMMA so we started to configure the plane and continued the approach with AP/AT

disengaged. We were stable at, and below 1000 feet and landing and the rest of approach

were uneventful and normal.

After landing tower advised on Wake Turbulence experience. Before we touched down we

got 3 EICAS msgs of AT FAIL, AOA LIMIT FAIL, and WINDSHEAR FAIL. Once we touched

down all of those msgs disappeared and instead we got 4 blue advisory msgs of ADS

PROBE 1, 2, 3, 4 FAIL. Since it was just a MX repositioning flight we had to take the plane

to hangar. During taxi to hangar the APU did not start and because the hangar area was

busy we had to power down the plane. Dispatcher and maintenance had been contacted

and advised of the issues and problem we experienced before landing. With the

concurrence of maintenance APU restarted and the plane computers restarted with no

EICAS msgs. MX mentioned that receiving those messages during encounter with strong

wake turbulence is typical. I guess being very light, with only me and First Officer onboard

made us more sensitive to wake of nearby traffic.

Synopsis

EMB-175 Captain reported receiving several EICAS messages on system anomalies that

were determined to be a result of a wake turbulence encounter during approach. All items

were successfully cleared after landing.

Documents

ASRS Database Report Set - Wake Turbulence Encounters