View Full Version : emergency on 134.12 today
gurnzee
9th Jul 2002, 15:48
heard in the air today an a/c told to change to the above freq at the normal time (I think it was that one, London anyway) he then returned shortly afterwards to query it as there was radio silence due emergency traffic on said freq.
Q's what was the emergency anyone
why didn't the previous controller know not to transfer the a/c to that freq
I'm sure there was nothing sinister going on.???
HEATHROW DIRECTOR
9th Jul 2002, 16:23
I am on days off so can't answer but you asked why the a/c was transferred - just maybe the previous controller didn't know about the emergency? Maybe the transferring controller was in an airport tower... or maybe at a different ATCC? 134.12 is a Terminal Control channel and if it was transferred by NERC then maybe there had not been time to phone them...
LHR was closed this morning for 20 mins from about 0745Z. An a/c blacked 27L on landing and 27R was unavailable due to appproach 'obstacles'. Perhaps the 2 incidents are linked.
Don't you guys have an assumption (for planning purposes) that says an airport with two runways won't lose both at once? Just stirring!
barcode
9th Jul 2002, 16:53
We were on 134.12 when this happened - he was using the c/s "Allred 5" and said he'd had a "total instrument failure", and then a "trim failure" (3 POB I think).
Excellent job as ever by London ATCC, the aircraft was last heard being pointed at Exeter, I think the crew said they were familiar with there, and the wx everywhere else was fairly poor.
Any info on who "Allred" are (and just want to know if they made it safely onto terra firma)???
canberra
9th Jul 2002, 17:14
red 5 is the callsign that nigel mansell uses for his citation based at exeter. i was suprised that the caa let him use it cos it sounds like one of the dead sparrows.
NigelOnDraft
9th Jul 2002, 17:16
SLF3...
We can operate to a single runway airfield and assume it won't be closed! Its called "committing" i.e. using the fuel we start off with to enable a diversion to continue holding. Most pilots, however, are reluctant (for obvious reasons) to do this...
When LHR say 27R is "unavailable" for landings, it is currently due cranes working in the undershoot, and to the north. These presumably "infringe" the safety zone required around the threshold (when 27R is used, cranes have to lower). However, were one to have "committed", and now running really short (which common sense would dictate would only happen in good wx), one will land anyway (having declared a Mayday etc.), and miss the crane. Similarly, 23 is promulgated "closed" (same reason?) for some hours each day - however, it is still a long length of concrete, and can be cleared for much of its length of taxying aircraft PDQ. It'll ruffle a few feathers, tie up scores of managers in reams of paperwork for months, but preferable to an aircraft going down in the centre of London...
NoD
southern duel
9th Jul 2002, 17:21
Just for info Carp
27L was not closed for 20 minutes this morning.
A LH A320 landed at 07.43z with unsafe undercarriage indication problems. As is per normal an Aircraft Ground Incident was declared. A runway inspection carried out and a team retrievd tyre debris. The runway was reopened at 07.56. This was 13 minutes after the initial closure not 20 minutes. This may deemed to be pedantic but 7 minutes at a major airport is a lifetime. As for not being able to use 27R to land this was due to two cranes which were notamed. The operation of these cranes for a project off the airfield is carefully planned so they only operate at such heights when we are 27R for departures. These projects need to be built so we help them as much as possible. Once 27L was closed the cranes were lowered at once and 27R was available 07:57 enabling ATC to clear the backlog.
Hope this clears the matter up
:mad:
HEATHROW DIRECTOR
9th Jul 2002, 18:34
Nigel.. Just for info, runway 23 is "closed" for about 90% of the time and forms one of the major taxy routes on the airfield. When the weather forecast suggests we may need to use it, it can take 3 hours to clear it ready for use.
When 27R is closed to landing a/c with the crane up we are not permitted to vector traffic to it.
I guess in the event of a truly catastrophic emergency we'd have to do what we could but I don't think fuel shortage comes anywhere close and I have never experienced such a situation whilst I've been there.
NigelOnDraft
9th Jul 2002, 20:03
LHR Dctr...
I agree exactly... I am extending a previous thread about Fuel Policy. I would not "expect" the situation to happen, until (as I said), a Mayday had been declared...
If we "commit" to LHR i.e. burn into our Div fuel, then there becomes no alternative. At a certain point we call PAN, some what later we call Mayday, and what ensues... If this is combined with the present LHR situation, then the "only" solution may landing on 27R (crane), 23 (taxying ac get off, no chance to "clear" the W stands end), or even a taxiway. One would not expect a formal ATC clearance, but I'm sure assistance as required would prevail.
Then the management bun fight starts....
NoD
walesjr
9th Jul 2002, 20:27
Barcode, Allred 5 did make it safely to TE, according to the exeter controller the C750 was having trouble maintaining heading height and speed, Q, was a Pan declared for this?
Tight Slot
9th Jul 2002, 21:01
Nigelondraft - you would have to be a very silly boy to do anything close to your last thread. Ever heard of good old Stan. and Gatwick??
Its a big airmanship issue to ask LHR to close this open that, when there are plenty of other 10,000ft strips within the area.
barcode
9th Jul 2002, 21:51
walesjr - no, just a "we are declaring an emergency at this time".
Bodstrup,
Most of the participants on this forum are either pilots or air traffic controllers (i.e. r/t licence holders) who were quite legitimately listening to said frequencies in the course of their work.
For the record, in the UK scanner users are not (technically) allowed even to listen to the airband frequencies!
1261/bodstrup
It has been so long since I did my RT exam I can't rember the legalities but I recently did my Marine VHF course and it clearly states on the application for the license that it is illegal to repeat information heard on the VHF. I would imagine the same rules apply to Airband, so I think the answer to the first point is, yes, pilots, ATC, etc. could be prosecuted for repeating on here what was said on a frequncy.
Lon More
10th Jul 2002, 20:52
Back in nineteencanteen when I got my R/T licence, signing the Oficial Secrets Act was part of the paperwork. The wording was along the lines of, "Nothing heard on the frequency may be disclosed to a third party."
An Irish ex-colleague spent several months in a Belgian jail when found outside a NATO base witha VHF receiver, according to the prosecution it could have been converted to a transmitter and used to send information to Russia.
I said it to Wilbur and I said it to Orville, it'll never get of the ground.
tired
10th Jul 2002, 21:22
Tight Slot & LHR Director - I think what Nigel O.D. is saying is that once we've made the decision to divert in a low fuel situation we have commited ourselves to the runway to which we are diverting - we do not carry fuel to divert from the diversion.
Under certain well-defined conditions it is quite permissable, and dare I say prudent, to use your destination's 2nd runway as your diversion, rather than to set sail for a single runway airport.