"heavy" callsign

Ask and learn how to fly better and more realistically.

Moderator: Moderating Team

Post Reply
User avatar
jaronamo77
Pilot
Posts: 540
Joined: 14 Jan 2008, 03:46
Location: Denver, CO

"heavy" callsign

Post by jaronamo77 » 03 Feb 2008, 01:15

What's the basic rule for designating an aircraft a "heavy" aircraft? This is something I've been wanting to ask for awhile, and I'm sure it's a very noobish question. 8)

Northwestdc9
Management/Moderator
Posts: 9866
Joined: 10 Jan 2005, 03:32
Location: Iowa City, IA
Contact:

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by Northwestdc9 » 03 Feb 2008, 01:45

Heavy is used when the aircraft's gross weight is over 255,000lbs.

All widebodies are heavies as far as I know.
Image
Aviation Research Engineer - University of Iowa

Yaroslav
Pilot
Posts: 949
Joined: 20 Sep 2005, 16:45
Location: Belgium, Brussels (EBBR)
Contact:

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by Yaroslav » 03 Feb 2008, 01:50

I think it goes as following: light = less than 7 tons (15,500 lb), medium = between 7 and 136 tons, heavy = higher than 136 tons (300,000 lb).
Source: IVAO.
"Avec l'avion, nous avons appris la ligne droite" - Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
Image
Thanks to Nick Anderson for the banner!

User avatar
jaronamo77
Pilot
Posts: 540
Joined: 14 Jan 2008, 03:46
Location: Denver, CO

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by jaronamo77 » 03 Feb 2008, 02:31

Alright, thanks. Wanted to check before I took my first flight in the 757, which can go either way if I remember correctly.

User avatar
Samuel Arnold
Management
Posts: 1774
Joined: 14 May 2006, 10:17
Location: Picton, New Zealand
Contact:

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by Samuel Arnold » 03 Feb 2008, 02:45

The 757 can't go either way, but usually if you are flying a US airline, then it's heavy.
Outside the US, it's not a heavy.
Image
|| Signature banner by Fraser Jeffery ||
Samuel Arnold | Virtual Airline Manager - ANA Virtual, Varig Virtual
samuel.arnold@simairline.net | AIM: SamArnold960

Northwestdc9
Management/Moderator
Posts: 9866
Joined: 10 Jan 2005, 03:32
Location: Iowa City, IA
Contact:

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by Northwestdc9 » 03 Feb 2008, 03:03

The 757 technically isn't a heavy however it depends on the model. There are some upgraded MTOW 757s and the 757-300s.

I keep things simple and when I fly the 757s, the -200 isn't a heavy while the -300 is.
Image
Aviation Research Engineer - University of Iowa

User avatar
Aaron Robinson
Administrator
Posts: 3747
Joined: 07 Jan 2005, 18:14
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by Aaron Robinson » 03 Feb 2008, 05:22

Wasn't there a topic on this recently? I did a search but couldn't find anything...
Aaron Robinson | Managing Director and Owner
aaron.robinson@simairline.net | AIM: SimAirlineNet
Read the latest SimAirline.net news and updates at Viewpoint
SimAirline.net on Facebook and LinkedIn

NWADC9
Pilot
Posts: 5845
Joined: 11 Mar 2005, 23:27
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by NWADC9 » 03 Feb 2008, 05:23

The 757 has an awesome wake that sometimes ATC will call 'em heavy just for spacing.

Oh, and for future reference, the A3UGLY is a Super-not a Heavy :winking:

Aaron Robinson wrote:Wasn't there a topic on this recently? I did a search but couldn't find anything...

Search function seems to only work on posts made after the new boards came on the scene.
Image

Northwestdc9
Management/Moderator
Posts: 9866
Joined: 10 Jan 2005, 03:32
Location: Iowa City, IA
Contact:

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by Northwestdc9 » 03 Feb 2008, 05:54

There was but I can't find it either.

From what I hear the 757 is more commonly just given a wake caution " cleared to land, 22L following 757 3 miles ahead caution wake... "
Image
Aviation Research Engineer - University of Iowa

User avatar
Samuel Arnold
Management
Posts: 1774
Joined: 14 May 2006, 10:17
Location: Picton, New Zealand
Contact:

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by Samuel Arnold » 03 Feb 2008, 08:13

NWADC9 wrote:Oh, and for future reference, the A3UGLY is a Super-not a Heavy :winking:

Are you serious ?
Sarcasm has it's limits you know.
Image
|| Signature banner by Fraser Jeffery ||
Samuel Arnold | Virtual Airline Manager - ANA Virtual, Varig Virtual
samuel.arnold@simairline.net | AIM: SamArnold960

User avatar
Dennis
Management/Moderator
Posts: 2861
Joined: 03 Jan 2007, 16:40
Location: Bayamon, Puerto Rico
Contact:

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by Dennis » 03 Feb 2008, 12:57

That's weird. Even ATC sometimes gives the 757 a heavy designation. Regardless of that, I go either way (it's both a heavy, and a not a heavy).

Sure is bad that FS doesn't have the Superheavy designation. That would've made my A380 flights more realistic.
Image
^^Courtesy of Fraser Jeffery. To SimAirline.net. It's been a blast!^^
*Click on the banner for the latest on Viewpoint, the official SimAirline.net blog*

NWADC9
Pilot
Posts: 5845
Joined: 11 Mar 2005, 23:27
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by NWADC9 » 03 Feb 2008, 13:45

Samuel Arnold wrote:
NWADC9 wrote:Oh, and for future reference, the A3UGLY is a Super-not a Heavy :winking:

Are you serious ?
Sarcasm has it's limits you know.

No joke-it's truely Super.
Image

RatherBFlyin
Moderator
Posts: 3086
Joined: 09 Jan 2005, 06:52
Location: Apex, NC
Contact:

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by RatherBFlyin » 03 Feb 2008, 17:55

The cutoff for the "heavy" designation is if the MTOW for the aircraft is 255,000 pounds or more (I actually believe it is "greater than 255,000," but I'm not going to quibble over one pound). This is based on the aircraft's certification, and not their actual weight at the time. The problem with the 757 is that some aircraft are certified with a MTOW below 255,000, and other models are certified higher.

The 757-200 is certified at 220,000 or 240,000 pounds. However, the 757-200ER model is either 255,000 or 255,550 pounds, making that model a Heavy.

The 757-300 is certified at 270,000 pounds, putting it squarely in the Heavy category.

And yes, there was a discussion about this some time ago, but I'm not sure exactly where it was.

User avatar
jaronamo77
Pilot
Posts: 540
Joined: 14 Jan 2008, 03:46
Location: Denver, CO

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by jaronamo77 » 04 Feb 2008, 05:13

Ok, nice to know. I just remember ATC calling some 757's heavies and some normal, so I just wanted to clear it up before I started flying the thing, for realism's sake 8)

User avatar
Samuel Arnold
Management
Posts: 1774
Joined: 14 May 2006, 10:17
Location: Picton, New Zealand
Contact:

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by Samuel Arnold » 04 Feb 2008, 10:20

NWADC9 wrote:
Samuel Arnold wrote:
NWADC9 wrote:Oh, and for future reference, the A3UGLY is a Super-not a Heavy :winking:

Are you serious ?
Sarcasm has it's limits you know.

No joke-it's truely Super.

Oh my gawd :roll: :roll: :roll:
Such a bump to me. LOL
Image
|| Signature banner by Fraser Jeffery ||
Samuel Arnold | Virtual Airline Manager - ANA Virtual, Varig Virtual
samuel.arnold@simairline.net | AIM: SamArnold960

BOKITO
Pilot
Posts: 33
Joined: 27 Jan 2008, 14:44
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by BOKITO » 07 Oct 2008, 23:17

Mechanic in education speaking here.

The 757 has a heavy callsign. The heavy on the callsign is made because of the turbulence behind the aircraft. On heavier aircrafts, there is more turbulence than on lighter aircrafts so planes behind them need to take more distance. There is an exeption for the 757, in reality they seem to cause more turbulence, even if they are below "that-number" of pounds. And I believe, but I'm not sure, that 757's with winglets don't need the heavy callsign.

User avatar
COA413
Pilot
Posts: 2362
Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 00:40
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by COA413 » 08 Oct 2008, 01:19

I thought that regular configured 752s didn't have the heavy, while 757s reconfigured to have a higher TOW required the "heavy" call sign. Also, I thought all 753s used the call sign.

Northwestdc9
Management/Moderator
Posts: 9866
Joined: 10 Jan 2005, 03:32
Location: Iowa City, IA
Contact:

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by Northwestdc9 » 08 Oct 2008, 03:20

Technically that's exactly right.

The actual practice is going to vary from airline to airline.
Image
Aviation Research Engineer - University of Iowa

RatherBFlyin
Moderator
Posts: 3086
Joined: 09 Jan 2005, 06:52
Location: Apex, NC
Contact:

Re: "heavy" callsign

Post by RatherBFlyin » 08 Oct 2008, 03:56

There has apparently been some question about whether or not any 757's should be classified as "Heavy" aircraft for wake turbulence separation purposes.

http://pdf.aiaa.org/preview/CDReadyMASM ... 07_288.pdf

Unfortunately that is just the first page of the paper, and I have been unsuccessful at turning up the rest of it. If anyone else has any better luck, I'd love to be able to read the entire paper.

Post Reply