Caution wake turbulence, Martin from the Netherlands

Mail and other feedback from listeners.
User avatar
jackhodgson
Site Admin
Posts: 1297
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:07 pm
Location: Lookout Point, Nottingham, NH / Nashua Airport (ASH)
Contact:

Caution wake turbulence, Martin from the Netherlands

Postby jackhodgson » Thu Mar 20, 2008 9:17 am

From: martinboehme
Subject: Caution wake turbulence
Date: March 20, 2008 4:06:44 AM EDT
To: podcast@uncontrolledairspace.com

Dear UCAP gang,

first of all, let me say how much I enjoy the podcast -- the way you
mix up aviation information with friendlly banter is great!

There were a few topics in recent podcasts on which I'd like to throw
in my two cents... On the subject of airports that are threatened by
rising sea levels, a prime candidate here in Europe would have to be
Amsterdam Schiphol (EHAM) in the Netherlands, which is already 12 feet
_under_ mean sea level. So if you've got your QNH set correctly, the
altimeter should be showing a negative indication on the ground...

In the same podcast, Jeb talked about taking a boat out to Washington
National for some wake vortex spotting. I don't know if you've seen
this -- there's a great collection of photos on airliners.net of wake
vortices in clouds and other cool phenomena. One of my favourite
images is this one

http://www.airliners.net/photo/British- ... 1091105/M/

but the other ones are all worth looking at as well -- here's the full
collection:

http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.s ... lbum=11558

Finally, a few episodes ago you talked about an Airbus that scraped a
wingtip while attempting to land in a crosswind at Hamburg, Germany.
That kind of hit home with me because Hamburg is only about forty
miles from here, and it's the airport I usually fly out of
commercially. Anyway, one small point I wanted to add to that story:
Apparently, Airbuses, because of their FBW controls, are a bit more
tricky to handle in a crosswind than conventional aircraft. I think
this is something I read on the Internet, so no claims about the
accuracy of the information, but if I remember correctly, the
sidestick commands not an aileron deflection, but a roll rate. So if
you want to use the wing-low method, you have to feed in rudder while
using the sidestick to lower the opposite wing into the wind, but then
you have to _release_ the sidestick or the aircraft will continue
rolling (because it's a roll rate command). Again, this is not
first-hand information, and I'm not sure if it's relevant to this
particular incident, but I thought it was an interesting point
nonetheless.

Just a bit of information about myself so you know who's writing to
you ;-). I'm not a pilot (yet) but a definite aviation nut, and I plan
to get my private just as soon as I can... I'm currently doing my PhD
here in Luebeck, Germany, so getting my licence (and, more
importantly, keeping it current) is not really realistic right now
from a financial point of view -- especially over here in Europe. But
your podcast is very inspirational -- keep up the good work!

See you in the hangar,

Martin

t0r0nad0
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:57 am
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

Re: Caution wake turbulence, Martin from the Netherlands

Postby t0r0nad0 » Thu Mar 20, 2008 2:17 pm

Wow, I love the shots of the vortices in the clouds! That should be part of the Private Pilot syllabus to illustrate why you need to stay above the flight path of a jet...
-PJ

PP-ASEL as of 8/15/2007
AGI as of 6/30/2008
FAASTeam Representative

States in which I have been the sole manipulator of the controls on takeoff and/or landing:
Image


Return to “Listener Mail”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests