"Heavy" Helicopters?

DotsonUSAF Rookie Little Rock, AR

Today we had a CH-53 depart the surface area and when departing from the taxiway(close to the runway), LC gave a C130 2MI final "Caution, wake turbulence, heavy CH-53 departing northbound." Our CCTLR happened to be upstairs listening to this and asked "Why did he say heavy?" Multiple controllers turned around said "...because HE IS a heavy." Looking at the .65, we quickly found out we were wrong.

We discussed the matter further but no one could come up with a legitimate explanation as to where they heard this. We all know that an H-53 is nowhere near being a heavy, in terms of actual weight, but every controller who thought he was a heavy, had the same explanation:

"H-53's and H-47's are considered 'heavy' due to the large amount of rotor wash given off and could create substantial turbulence for taxiing, departing, and arriving aircraft," however, we cannot find this anywhere.

Has anyone else ever heard this? The only thing I can think of is that we were all duped in believing something a controller once said and trusted the opinion, rather than confirming it for ourselves. I've heard controllers make some dumb assumptions (though it’s usually just a single controller) but the fact that we had multiple controllers, excellent ones too, believe this to be common knowledge was odd.

DotsonUSAF Rookie Little Rock, AR

And I know the "wake-turbulance" application can be deemed appropriate in a situation like this, the matter is we had thought its weight classification was "heavy."

atcguruaf Rico Suave Right here

Well, it's a large. And no, there is nothing written stating what you said your military controllers believe is the reasoning. In the military, I worked those helos sometimes, and although we never said caution wake turbulence, we didn't allow our F-16's, F-15's, A-10's, etc. to taxi near the helo, especially with the amount of dust/debris it kicked up. Although not "small" aircraft, we used our common sense and didn't want the fighters sucking up rocks and shit in to their engines. Perhaps those same controllers were "taught" that information from controllers that were stationed there in the past. You know, one of those unwritten rules that just gets handed down from controller to controller because someone thought it was a good idea and thought to put it in practice.

Your reasoning of "we, as controllers, deemed it necessary" suffices and is not a bad call, just not required. I probably wouldn't have done it with a C-130, and if so, I probably would have said caution "rotor wash", but you're not wrong (as you know) in what you did. Your CCTLR should have just said nothing and realized that you guys were just being safe.

Now the fact that you said "heavy CH-53" is in fact, wrong.

DotsonUSAF Rookie Little Rock, AR

Thanks I appreciate the input. Ya, we just were kind of shocked to read it wasn't a heavy because we had always been taught that. Like you said, it was likely passed along from another controller.

We don't do helicopters here usually, though today we have a ton of them. We just felt pretty dumb discovering that haha.

Thanks again.

WatchThis Trusted Contributor Arizona

I think you'll find these helicopters are referred to as "heavy-lift" helicopters. It has nothing to do with wake turbulence or gross weight, it has to do with their significant lifting capabilities. I'm not sure what load weight makes a helicopter a heavy-lift machine but the term is valid.

Maybe the heavy-lift term is where the misinterpretation got started.

Roddy_Piper Resident Knucklehead Vegas baby

you also wouldn't be wrong saying "caution rotor-wash". it would be more appropriate.

jtomes Senior Member Memphis TN

my understanding would be that in order to be a heavy is simply gross take off weight not anything else

MikeATC Retired FAA, NATCA Member Nashville TN

Whoever thought a H53 or H47 was a heavy, now that caused me to really chuckle, you do realize that the Heavy designation is for aircraft weighing over 225,000 lbs?

On another note, helicopters rotor wash is very dangerous and it disipates very quickly, but it isn't a bad idea to issue a caution about rotor wash to aircraft that may pass through it. I've seen a H53 ground taxiing cause several small aircraft to flip over.

FM_Weasel Trusted Contributor

You're probably joking. But it used to be 255,000lbs. Now it is 300,000lbs.

But yes, the point is a helicopter will never weigh that much ever.

peterpumpkin Newcomer

You might want to check the 7110 on this one. A heavy is an aircraft capable of takeoff weights of 300,000 pounds or more whether or not they are operating at this weight during a particular phase of flight. Chuckle away funny man.