Is the B757-300 considered a "Heavy"

[Spunker]

just curious
Gene

[moose135]

Yes it is - "Heavy" is applied to aircraft with a Max Takeoff weight over 255,000 pounds, and the -300 has a max weight of 272,500.

[AirtrafficController]

Any 757 is not a heavy. According to the FAA Order 7110.65, aircraft with a maximum certified takeoff weight of more than 300,000 lbs are considered heavy.

[moose135]

You're right, Luke, I forgot they changed the regs on that recently.

[Art at ISP]

The weight limit for heavy was originally 300,000 pounds, but I think it was reduced to cover high weight 757's which had an issue with wake turbulence. I was not aware it was changed back to 300,000 pounds again, but if I remember correctly they do allow heavy spacing most of the time with 757's.

[snydersnapshots]

I've flown both the -200 and -300 for several years. For the first few years we added "heavy" to the callsign when flying the -300. A year or two ago they came out with a bulletin that said to drop the "heavy" when flying the -300. The explanation was that ATC applies heavy jet separation for all 757's regardless, so we don't need to use the heavy callsign.

This brings up the question: If ATC knows all 757's are considered "heavy" and apply the separation without using the callsign, why do we have to use "heavy" when flying larger aircraft like the 767, 777, and so-on? Could it be related to landing fees in some way (i.e. airplanes that use the word "heavy" are charged more for landing)?

[USAF Pilot 07]

FWIW the 757 seems to have the worst wake turbulence compared to other airliners....

[Spunker]

Thanks everyone for the very knowledgeable answers I appreciate it
Gene

[Mateo]

It wasn't just the 300s, either. The ATA 752s had extra fuel tanks or something which kicked them over the 250K limit and were referred to as heavy on the radio. Of course, neither ATA nor the 250K designation exist anymore...

[PhilDernerJr]

The 757 is known for the worst wake, yeah. When was that reg changed?

[AirtrafficController]

I believe last year. Yes it is known that 757s produce one of the worst effects of wake turbulence.

[MarkLawrence]

If I remember right the regs changed about 4 years ago - interestingly enough, the first US Airways 752W conversions under the old regs were also considered heavy if i remember right because of fuel tank adjustments (Ron Peel - I think you were the one that pointed it out to me). I know at FLL after every B752 or B753 departure or landing, anything less than a B738 landing or departing are given the "Caution wake turbulence" warning.

[cancidas]

If I remember right the regs changed about 4 years ago - interestingly enough, the first US Airways 752W conversions under the old regs were also considered heavy if i remember right because of fuel tank adjustments (Ron Peel - I think you were the one that pointed it out to me). I know at FLL after every B752 or B753 departure or landing, anything less than a B738 landing or departing are given the "Caution wake turbulence" warning.

every airplane will get the wake turbulence advisory behind a 757 or larger. them's the rules.

[AirtrafficController]

The change took place in April 2010:
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Notice/N7110.525.pdf

[Ari707]

I've flown both the -200 and -300 for several years. For the first few years we added "heavy" to the callsign when flying the -300. A year or two ago they came out with a bulletin that said to drop the "heavy" when flying the -300. The explanation was that ATC applies heavy jet separation for all 757's regardless, so we don't need to use the heavy callsign.

This brings up the question: If ATC knows all 757's are considered "heavy" and apply the separation without using the callsign, why do we have to use "heavy" when flying larger aircraft like the 767, 777, and so-on? Could it be related to landing fees in some way (i.e. airplanes that use the word "heavy" are charged more for landing)?

They use the heavy call sign because over the air the other planes just hear a call sign and don't know the type, this way they can tell if they are behind a heavy or not without having to know the type (Delta 127 - B737, Delta 127 Heavy B767)

[megatop412]

This was answered in an issue of Airliners about 10 years ago and I thought I remembered the 255k weight limit and the detail on the 75's.

So, if the 75 triggers wake turbulence warnings, why then would it not be referred to as heavy, despite the weight issue? As a pilot following, I could care less about the actual weight of the plane in front of me unless it had the potential to cause me problems- the 75 should just be included in the heavy category for practical purposes