Question for ATC

[springbok449]

Hi,

May I ask, if an operator suffers an engine failure on departure lets say out of LGW, what would you as ATC expect them to do?
Fly the SID if possible? Climb straight ahead to say 3000 feet with a Mayday? Something else?

Would you find it acceptable that a particular opeator had is own engine out SID procedure for say on 26L and fly to MID and hold.

Thanks for any constructive answers bearing in mind how busy the airspace can be around certain airfields.

Rgds. Bokkie.

[BOAC]

(Hopefully!) Standard procedure is notify ATC if you are NOT going to fly the published/cleared SID (WITH ALTITUDE GATES!!).

EG Previous airline - follow SID (LGW R26L). Current - fly straight ahead.

Previous - after initial PAN/MAYDAY, no need for further IMMEDIATE information to ATC. Current, after call, 'climbing straight ahead to xxxx feet'.

ATC WILL 'expect' the SID if they hear nothing.

[fly bhoy]

To be honest, I would put the ball well and truly in the pilot's court as its you thats on the flight deck and you have more information than me.

My first question would be "can you maintain altitude, and do you wish to follow the SID?" followed quickly by "what are your intentions?"

Thats just my response, however, and not a gatwick specific one as I work at another unit, and I think they might use something like "left or right turn at your discretion" if an immediate return is required.

Basically the point i'm trying to make is, if its a serious problem (i.e. you need an immediate return), we'll generally let you do whatever you want provided it isn't unsafe for others and we'll co-ordinate with adjacent controllers and work around your requests. If you want to go and hold somewhere to dump, I would expect you to follow the SID. Either way I would hope you could accept a frequency change, either to the outbound sector for holding, or to the approach controllers for radar vectors.

I know you'll be very busy on the flight deck, but as BOAC says, i'd hope you'd tell ATC as soon as possible.

FB:ok:

[Gonzo]

I would just acknowledge the mayday and then wait for the crew to get back to me when they can regarding intentions.

Meanwhile, I would be expecting him to do anything, and would be co-ordinating as such.

[Empty Cruise]

Would be interesting to learn how ATCOs are trained to handle such a situation. Is it like fly bhoy, an approach that is - from a legal point of view - desireable, since the flight crew are requested to describe their actions in detail, thereby giving the ATCO precise information to act upon? Or is it like Gonzo, an approach that is - from an operational point of wiev - desireable, since the flight crew are left alone to deal with the non-normal and then get back to ATC when they have time?

I know which I would prefer...

Having flown at airports where you are required to "Contact Departure immediately after take-off", I have often checked in and included the word "...standby" at the end - to no avail, still got 3 amendments to the SID in one long spatter of words. I therefore wonder how many ATCOs would actually respect the request in case we had a non-normal situation. If coordination between TWR & DEP is that limited in normal ops (after all, from the time the take-off clearance is issued by TWR till you have checked in with DEP, we are talking all of 60 sec. :rolleyes: ) - how would the system handle an aircraft not able to recieve ammended instructions 30 sec. after lift-off, e.g. due non-normal situation?

I know a lot of airports are very good at this coordination, and a lot of ATCOs actually hear & respect the requests for "...standby" - but suds law dictates that the engine never quits when flying into & out of one of these places :{ - so what does the official training teach ATCOs - ask the questions or keep quiet? :)

Brgds to all from
Empty

[Downwind.Maddl-Land]

As an ex-Mil ATCO I would suggest the best response is along the lines of "Mayday/Pan acknowledged - Advise intentions when able - Out" and let crew solve their critical problems first. Aviate, navigate, communicate in that order isn't it?

Then monitor the situation VERY closely, especially for terrain clearance and get everyone ELSE out of distressed ac's way. If that means delays, turns, increased workload, delays for others - tough. Assistance to aircraft in emergency is the No 1 reason for being there, isn't it?

[GT3]

My answer to a mayday engine out on departure would be roger your mayday, report intentions when able. Then wait and see. Phones used to get anything out of the way.

On a recent Fam Flight in a 747-400 the capt said that they would more than likely climb straight ahead to 3000' in the event of loosing an engine after V1. If there was something in the way then they would alter their path as appropriate.

[Northerner]

I would hope, like others, that I would simply acknowledge the Mayday, then get everything else out of the way and wait until the Pilots told me what they wanted to do.

I expect the unexpected, and separate accordingly.

It helps if you can tell me what you want though!!!
:)

Cheers,
N

"Keep smiling, it makes people wonder what you're up to...."

[Capt Claret]

springbok449

Though a pilot and not a controller this may help you.

At the company I work for, Special Departure Procedures are published where obstacle clearance is an issue. Sometimes the SDP conform to the first leg of a SID, sometimes not.

A performance loss (enfgine failure) requiring a turn or flight path contrary to the cleared SID would see us tell ATC, "engine failure, turning left/right heading, climbing to xxx", and we'd then let the ATCOs sort it out.

Debate continues as to whether a single engine failure on a four engined aircraft requires a PAN or MAYDAY call.

The last failure I had was at 1500' agl, 500' before a RADAR SID left turn. ATC were advised of the failure and a clearance obtained to maintain RWY heading to 20DME, then return to hold at a locator at a height that should have kept us out of the way of inbound and outbound traffic but allow us to slip into the ILS when MLW had been attained.

[ayrprox]

If you say nothing we will expect a standard departure. if you say you've lost an engine I would let you get on with things and talk to me when you can and i'll coordinate with anyone affected. if its a mayday i'd acknoledge the mayday and ask you when able to squawk 7700(helps anyone with a radar to explain any deviations from the norm) and when able state your intentions again coordinating my way through any problems. hope this helps

[pushapproved]

The scenarios for aircraft emergencies are virtually infinite - few are the same! This particular scenario has happened to me at Gatwick - Pilot reported engine shut down just after departure due to bird passing through the fans, no Mayday call perhaps a Pan (Can't remember exact details) - my response was "roger, confirm you wish to return to Gatwick?" once confirmed pilot told to standby for radar vectors for 26L. Meanwhile co-ordination takes place with the Radar controller, runway to be inspected for debris and alerting action taken. Aircraft lands safely 10 minutes later.

The scenario changes due to several factors including:

Is there a fire?
Is the weather suitable for a visual circuit?
Does the aircraft need to dump fuel?
etc, etc.

I suspect that unless the aircraft needs to be returned immediately to the ground in a life threatening situation that in these modern twin jets it is not too much of a 'big deal' losing an engine - radar vectors would be the prefered choice to reduce workload whilst carrying out QRH actions etc. (Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong - as I'm sure you would anyway!)

Ultimately the controller should expect the unexpected - this is where the training and experience comes into play. What one controller does may be completely different from another but hopefully both would be effective!

The more information you can give us the better but we understand that it is not your priority. All I will say is that if you need to turn off the expected route, advise ATC so we can ensure separation from other traffic.

As Downwind.Maddl-Land says, "Aviate, navigate, Communicate"

We can of course help you navigate if you communicate!

Hope this helps answer your question along with the other responses.

[Empty Cruise]

Thank you, gents - the general line of your responses are in happy agreement with how I'd like to see the world :)

Of course - as pushapproved says, if we don't speak up, you cannot second-guess us & give us the help we might require. I think for most aircrews, when the fit hits the non-normal shan, for the first minute or so, we'd like to stick with the briefed plan, if for no other reason than KISS :p Once we've got our pit in one shile - we're the usual happy, communicative bunch & more than welcome all the assistance that you have on offer :D

Best regards fm
Empty

[av8boy]

This is one of those things that I find fascinating. There is so much implied in these kinds of calls and it is very satisfying to work it al out. Please note that here in the US there are FAR fewer Pan/Mayday calls. It’s much more likely to be the case that a crew with an engine out simply states that fact…

Pilot: “We’ve just lost engine number one.”
Me (radio): “Roger. Say intentions.”
Me (I unkey the mic and say to supervisor, etc, in tower cab, while pointing): “That 73 just lost number one.”
Pilot: “We’ll get back to you on that.”
Tower Sup (at the same time pilot is responding): “What’s he want to do?”
Me (radio): “Roger.”
Me (to tower sup): “Don’t know yet.”

Now, I’ve been at this for a few decades, and I know darned well that:

1. The pilot is going to say “stand by” when I ask his intentions; and,
2. The tower sup is going to ask me what the pilot’s intentions are, even though the sup knows very well that the pilot probably told me to “stand by.”

However, I believe the exchange serves a purpose. I’m placing a verbal marker with the crew which says,
1. You owe me some info when you get a chance
2. I recognize from your RT that something requiring special handling is going on and I’m telling you that I'm on it
3. You’ve got some flexibility at the moment. I can protect you even in the absence of more info right now

I’m also prompting for an immediate follow-up from the pilot that would take the level up a notch if necessary. For instance, the word “fire” might be included in a response to my “intentions” query, and that would tend to alter what I do next.

If number three is NOT true, then my response would attempt to get more info out of the crew so I could help them get to a place where I could protect them. In any case, my simple “roger” in response to “we’ve lost an engine” doesn’t seem like enough. In the same way, my short conversation with the tower sup also carries an implicit message. He or she not only wants to know what I know, but also, what I think. The absence of the words “need the equipment” is telling. There. I’ve rambled on and committed thread creep. But I love this stuff.

Bottom-line… I expect the crew to do what the crew needs to do. If it is not time-critical and the crew would like to do something out of the ordinary (for instance, go somewhere and hold) I would expect them to engage in some meaningful coordination with me. If we don’t have the luxury of time, then I expect you to aviate first. I’ll deal with it.

Dave

[Giles Wembley-Hogg]

springbok449 - what a useful thread!

It is interesting that you chose Gatwick as your example. In places where terrain clearance can be a problem the Performance Engineers generate "emergency turns". On westerly operations from EGKK we would (currently) not fly the SID, but fly the emergency turn, which is jink slightly to the right (I think) and climb. If terrain is not a problem, then we fly the lateral track of the SID although we may not be able to acheive the vertical profile and may leave controlled airspace.

Emergency turns are both type and company specific. We don't have one on my fleet for EGCC any more, but if I remember correctly they do exist for EGPH and EGPF and I think that the EGKK emergency turn is about to be removed. Once we get above MSA (which is shown on the flight plan and will change with the flight planned route) then we are free to go wherever you want us.

In terms of the R/T we will use, I would suspect that you will get a potted version of the problem and a brief statement of our intentions. Use of Pan Pan or Mayday might be appropriate for a twin and is a good shorthand way of characterising the severity of the problem.

As for places where you are required to change frequency "immediately after take-off", I count the end of "take-off" to be selecting the flaps to up so I don't call anyone until then - problem or none. I personally think that this procedure is not really best practice and if I had any say in it, it would not be used.

Just a few of my thoughts.

G W-H

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<Having flown at airports where you are required to "Contact Departure immediately after take-off>>

There are still places with this ultra-dangerous procedure then?

I was trained to let the guy get on with his problem, keep anything else out of his way, and ask him to advise intentions. Bit different in the area/approach environment where the controller needs a bit more info so he can plan the approach accordingly.

First one I had at Heathrow - Caravelle with smoke in the cockpit. He told me this as he started his left turn on the SID. I said "What are your intentions" and he said one word: "Downwind"!

[springbok449]

Thanks for all your replies, it certainly is interesting to get different views...

The way I would be inclined to do it if terrain was not an issue, would be to climb straight ahead to 3000 feet or MSA, advise ATC with a PAN/MAYDAY and SBY for intentions.

With my current employer we have Emergency turn procedure for say at GVA but we have Engine out SIDs at other places.

What I cant get my head around is for say at AGP off RWY 14, we would climb to a certain altitude then turn back towards to beacon, towards high terrain, why when there is an ocean in front of us with a very decent MSA?? BCN would be another example...
Also some some of those EOSIDs have us turning towards major holding beacons for LHR...

Regards.

[Giles Wembley-Hogg]

springbok449

Could you provide some detail about the EOSIDs which take you towards the LHR beacons please? Do they even turn in the same direction as your ATC assigned SID?

Could you also explain the difference between an EOSID and an emergency turn please? (I've a feeling one is accessible from the FMC if an engine fails whilst the other is just a written procedure, but I am not sure)

Thanks in advance. Always keen to learn.

G W-H

[Empty Cruise]

HD :D - unfortunately, your colleagues on one of the major airports on the Emerald Island still have this in force. We have our FSO on the problem, and hopefully, this procedure will change soon. Even BHX that has no major say of anything above FL 80 or so (and you would therefore think coordination would/could be more pressing) - they manage to leave us alone up to 2000 ft. :ok:

GW-H, we do the same, when climb sequence is complete, we give a call, but switch to DEP frequency after gear retraction, so ATCO can give us a bell shoud he/she desperately need to do so.

I am still amazed at the lack of co-ordination, though. Even if TWR had to state and ammended clearance, get the read-back & then clear us for T/O, it would consume only 15 extra seconds - there should be time enough to sqeeze that in between issuing the landing clearnace to the aircraft we are waiting for and the time he/she expect us to be rolling. I have never gotten more than 5 NM into the SID, so one may question the benefit of having SIDs at all (except for COMFAIL, where they are more handy than a heading :(

Good thread - rating added ;)

Brgds fm Empty

[springbok449]

HGW,

An engine out SID is a procedure you follow when you loose an engine with no immediate terrain or obstacles to clear. IE you dont have to follow it. For say LGW.

However an Emergency turn, you have to follow in order to avoid obstacles and/or terrain especially when IMC. For say ZRH or GVA.

Hope this helps.

On you first question, I will get the details and let you know...

RGDS.

[Giles Wembley-Hogg]

Springbok499

Forgive me I am probably being really thick here, but if terrain is not an issue, why do you need an EOSID? Why not just follow the SID you have been assigned?

(Sorry if I am being a bit dense!!)

A slightly confused

G W-H

[West Coast]

As was mentioned, some airports have special departure procedures for us to comply with if one of the engines takes a dump. As an example, out of KSLC off 34R, it calls for a left turn to 320 heading. This crosses the upwind for 34L. I always include in my briefing to advise ATC not only of the failure but that we will be turning in to traffic for the other runway. I guess my advice to ATC is not to be surprised if the acft turns in a direction that isn't anything you might expect. Trying to get away from rising terrain, but this doesn't account for local traffic flows.

[av8boy]

WC-
Trust me. We assume you'll be turning away from rising terrain. In our training they tell us how bad it is for you to run into terrain. "Real bad" as I recall...

HD-
At my first small airport decades ago... Eurocoupe takes off and there's traffic to depart behind the 'coupe. Said to the 'coupe, "say direction of flight." His response? "Down!" His engine had just given up. Thankfully it was a 4000 foot runway and he'd only been airborne for a few minutes, so he had plenty of concrete left in front of him to get it back on the runway safely. :)