Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 25, 2014, 05:12:25 PM
Home Help Login Register      
News: LiveATC.net Flyers Released!  Please click here to download & print a copy and be sure to post at an airport near you!


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Air Traffic Monitoring
| |-+  Listener Forum (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  KJFK - B757 Heavy vs. Large
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Go Down Print
Author Topic: KJFK - B757 Heavy vs. Large  (Read 7978 times)
atcman23
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 367



« Reply #15 on: July 03, 2009, 07:49:30 PM »

Yep, the -300 is a Heavy as defined by the FAA; the MTOW on the -300 is over 255,000 pounds.  Delta acquired them from NWA.
Logged

Mark Spencer
camrnlendy1274
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #16 on: July 04, 2009, 01:50:44 PM »

Message deleted as it was meant to be a PM.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2009, 08:38:09 PM by camrnlendy1274 » Logged
tyketto
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 913


« Reply #17 on: July 04, 2009, 04:10:27 PM »

Well, why is the controller asking the pilot?!  The controller needs a copy of the 7110.65 right now!

In an effort to help you succeed in your new career choice, I would suggest you reserve comments such as these until you are either a seasoned controller.  I would also suggest you do not publicly antagonize your soon to be brothers and sisters who will be training you in a public form

Love,

A real world 2152

May I also suggest that you take the same advice and not antagonize your soon to be brother, as he will be assisting you in working all of the air traffic that we have, especially considering the shortage of you out there from retiring, especially in a public forum. There are others who read this, especially those who are looking at a career in ATC. And an attitude like the one you've just shown may deter them from that, adding to the shortage problem you already have.

If he was incorrect, then how about positively correcting him, along with the rest of us, instead of jumping on him and the rest of us here saying that we don't have any idea of what we're talking about. If you can't do it nicely, please don't do it at all; we'll wait for someone who can.

BL.
Logged
cessna157
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 708



WWW
« Reply #18 on: July 04, 2009, 05:21:18 PM »

This has to be the most ignorant statement I have seen on here ever.  My friend, YOU are incorrect.  Maybe you should write this down in your CTI school notebook -- you are NOT a controller and have no idea what you are talking about. 

The controller is asking the pilot because the FAA seems to have screwed up again, and for some reason, ARTS is not displaying the correct designation for B757's now that they can be considered Heavy.  Sometimes they are regular B757's and sometimes they are classified as HEAVY.  As you keenly pointed out, this would change the separation requirements.  Not all pilots always state they are heavy, most of the time it is not remarked on the flight strip, and 50% of the time it is not reflected in the ARTS readout.  So controllers are "flying blind" sometimes when it comes to the B757.  I believe a fix is being worked on.

So for the controller to ask the pilot if he is "heavy" is not only a prudent decision, but a requirement to ensure that aircraft are safely spaced apart.   

As for you, just cause you read the 7110.65, graduated BVI, and paid diligent attention in CTI school, does not mean you have any inkling of what goes on in the real world of ATC.  Your comment above it a prime example of you having no idea what you are talking about.  In an effort to help you succeed in your new career choice, I would suggest you reserve comments such as these until you are a seasoned controller. 

Peace.


Who pooped in your corn flakes?  Your comments are totally out of line.  There is no reason to turn this into an un-civil discussion like 8 year old children.  Something tells me that you have no training or instruction background.

When a CFI is training a pilot-to-be, and the student makes a rough landing, the CFI doesn't throw him out the door and say go read your books and quit wasting my time.  He positively shows him how to correct his mistake.

I'm not even saying the original comment was incorrect.  I freely admit that I do not know the details of the subject at hand.
Logged

CRJ7/CRJ9 F/O, Travel Agent
camrnlendy1274
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #19 on: July 04, 2009, 08:43:50 PM »

My original post was meant to be a private message and I apologize for incorrectly posting it here.

I have removed it and will correctly send it. I hope that the 2 replies do the same.

For the record my intent was not to jump on the OP but to explain the truth of what really happened. I also felt the OP should understand that he should not just blame the controller automatically without understanding the entire situation. Controllers are constantly accused of wrongdoing these days and it is disappointing to see a fresh CTI going on this forum and knocking those he will be working with. I was simply defending my brother whom this thread was based on.
Logged
atcman23
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 367



« Reply #20 on: July 05, 2009, 07:55:22 AM »

Wow, I didn't mean to offend anyone nor would I ever poke fun at a controller.  If I came across that way, I sincerely apologize.  Someone else posted a document recently published by the FAA (recently = within the past 2 weeks) about the B757 and such related issues that I was not aware of.  I am glad that he pointed it out otherwise, yes, I would have been completely incorrect.

After reading the document that was posted earlier, I can see exactly why the controller was asking the B757 if he was a large or heavy, so I would agree that the question is valid and if I was seeing the same thing on the strip or the ARTS screen that the controller did, I may have asked the same question myself since I know that some B752s are indded heavies, while some aren't, and that Delta acquired -300s from NWA, which is a heavy.

Logged

Mark Spencer
evilcuban
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66


« Reply #21 on: July 05, 2009, 06:09:07 PM »

The 757-200 can be modified for a MTOW of 255,000 lbs., which is (apparently, because this is new information to me as well) about 5,000lbs above what just about every B752 is configured at.  I believe, and I think someone already said this as well, that ATA had a number of B752s configured as heavy B752s.  The only commercial U.S. air carriers I've heard use heavy B752s are AAL and AWE.  Perhaps those two bought some of ATA's old stock?  I looked it up on the interwebs some time ago when I was listening to CLT, so if anyone is that curious I'm sure you can find it as easily as I did.  It appears to be more of a structural thing than anything else, but I'm not a "2152" so I don't have the whole story.
Logged
NY Z Pilot
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 195


« Reply #22 on: July 10, 2009, 03:16:47 PM »

If you listen to JFK ground earlier today about 1545-1600Z...youll hear an explenation.
Logged
nycatcn90
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #23 on: July 22, 2009, 05:55:57 AM »

I'm a controller at JFK, the reason we have to ask is some companies(primarily american) have started retrofitting their 757s which classifies them as heavy jets, however the ARTS still doesn't recognize it and the FIDO will print out a strip that doesn't identify it as a heavy.  Obviously this is an important piece of information to know when you are trying to sequence them in with large aircraft or picking which planes are going to a parallel runway for staggered approaches.
Logged
cateyes_777
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 40



« Reply #24 on: July 25, 2009, 12:38:55 AM »

Love this site.... always learning something new.
Thanks to Dave and all who help to keep it going Smiley
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!