*HighFlyah* From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 184 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 1 month 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2614 times:
As far as I know, Heavy = MTOW >= 255,000 lbs.
I have not heard on ATC the 757-200 of UA, US, DL, AA and NW being called "Heavy" though ATA's 757-200 is "Heavy."
I was told before that ATA is "heavy" because of the single class configuration, causing the MTOW to go over 255,000 lbs. All the other major carriers have 2 class configurations and fewer overall passenger loads.
Am I right? I keep hearing that because of wake turbulence issues, 757s are now considered HEAVY too regardless of MTOW. What's the truth?
Sxmarbury33 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 445 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (10 years 1 month 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2593 times:
Its mainly for wake turbulance seperations. The 757 is not classified as a heavy by weight. It is classified heavy because the aerodynamic high lift wings produce much more wake turb than most non-heavy aircraft. this has led to a few planes being flipped as a result of following a 75 to close.
CactusA319 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 2918 posts, RR: 29 Reply 3, posted (10 years 1 month 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2574 times:
The 757 is considered a heavy by ATC in terms of separation, i.e. controllers will space an aircraft behind a 757 the same distance as if it were a 747, 767, 777, etc. However, an aircraft only has to use the word "Heavy" in its callsign when MTOW is over 255,000. Most US airlines operating 757's have MTOW's just under 255K, so they won't use the designation. An airline like ATA, which packs 216 pax into their 752's routinely have flights that have an MTOW of 255 or above.
United_Fan From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 7160 posts, RR: 8 Reply 6, posted (10 years 1 month 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2346 times:
All 757-300's are heavies...........
'Empathy was yesterday...Today, you're wasting my Mother-F'ing time' - Heat.
Positive rate From Australia, joined Sep 2001, 2143 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (10 years 1 month 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2301 times:
It's due to wake turbulence. The 757 produces really viscous vortices which have led to some crashes in the past when aircraft follow too close behind.
Positive rate From Australia, joined Sep 2001, 2143 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (10 years 1 month 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2013 times:
"Tell that to the Cessna 172 student pilot taking off behind a 757 at MTOW"
Better make that tell that to any pilots flying anything in the "light" to medium category, including light jets such as the Learjet/Citation which can just as easily be flipped upside down by a 757's wake as a 172 can.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 184 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Australia, joined Mar 2003, 405 posts, 
From United Arab Emirates, joined Jun 2001, 2762 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
