Mayday @ YPJT

[AirSic]

Any news on a mayday from a Cirrus at JT today? The only Cirrus I know is SRM from RACWA. Didn't get any details only overheard third party conversation.:sad:

[Woomera]

AirSic

A jammed open throttle is hardly a Mayday.:ugh:

Only used when a vessel or person is in grave and imminent danger and immediate assistance is required.

The aircraft landed safely after waiting for the emergency services to arrive.:D

[Capt. Queeg]

It's a Mayday situation if the pilot declared a Mayday. Did he declare a Mayday? If he declared a Mayday then his jammed throttle Mayday situation was a Mayday situation.

If someone has heard that a Mayday was declared, why try to tell him it's not a Mayday?

It wasn't Airsic's decision to declare the Mayday....

As for whether it was appropriate or not to declare a Mayday for a jammed throttle, well, if it were this guy's first solo or something and he could see his last moments staring him in the face, why not declare a Mayday? :rolleyes:

Obviously he got it together before he landed but maybe he was chewing up the seat cushion before that....

[The Voice]

Perhaps Woomera, Capt Queeg has a point .. the point being level of experience given the acft type and the field location would tend to suggest that a student pilot or a pilot with low hours may have been PIC, and given the newness of the whole aviaton experience to the person, called the first thing in his/her mind.

As a person on the other end of the headset, It wouldn't necessarily matter to me what he/she called - as long as he/she did! The niceties can be tidied up as time progresses.

Capt Queeg - if I may, you seem a little touchy?

[Bob Murphie]

Doesn't the Cirrus have it's own parachute for when the aircraft's occupants are in grave and imminent danger?

[scrambler]

I would have thouht that a Cirrus wasn't the kind of machine that would be used for a first solo.

[Wanderin_dave]

I'm fully with The Voice.
He/She in command felt they needed help and did what they felt they needed to to get it. Maybe an over reaction, but who cares, that can be discussed over beers.
I certainly don't think we should be putting them down or making fun of them. What about the low time pilot reading this thread (we know there are HEAPS of newbies here) who gets in a little pickle and DOESN'T ask for help because they have seen somebody bashed on here for a perceived over-reaction?
We want a culture of assistance in this industry, not bashing, well i do anyway.
Good on them for calling for help when they needed it, a good pilot uses all resources available, inside and outside of the cockpit.

[Pass-A-Frozo]

I would have thouht that a Cirrus wasn't the kind of machine that would be used for a first solo.
Why not?? :confused:

[FL440]

Mayday is still at the pilots discretion, and thus why the AIP does not have a list of situations listed. Every situation is different and so to is every emergency and how you would deal with it.

Having done alot of flying in the Cirrus i can assure you that having the throttle jam open is a serious issue, especially if its a SR22- with the 310hp and slick aerodynamics these aircraft can exceed Vne in the cruise at full power no problem, not to mention that for every knot faster you go you have less time to make those decisions!

All ups to the pilot! Would not be an easy machine to fly an approach using the mixture control.

Does anyone know what machine it was? SR20 or SR22?

Also the parachute system is to be used when all other avenues have been exhausted! You must also be doing less than 133kts to deploy(not easy level with the throttle wide open) and in tests the parachute took 600-800ft to stabilise the descent rate.
But certainly in other situations that parachute has and will in the future save many lives!
:ok:

[Sunfish]

Does the Cirrus have a mixture control that can be used to "throttle back" the engine?? I for one know of someone who is learning to fly on a Cirrus.

[Woomera]

Point/s taken, but I wonder at the possibility of an "inexperienced" person being allowed to hire a Cirrus and as for "first solo", sure no reason beyond good judgment on the part of the instructor.:hmm:

maybe he was chewing up the seat cushion before that...suggests that he shouldn't have been in command in the first place.

Notwithstanding, my point was in regard to the actual Thread Title rather than the actual event. "Emergency" may have been better choice of words.

Inappropriate titles such as "Boeing 747 down...." in reference to an unscheduled landing for a relatively minor issue is a good and but one actual example of what I mean.

[Capt. Queeg]

I remember chewing up the seat cushion on many occasions. I'd have thought we've all been there and done that and still been worthy of command of one machine or another. It's all part of the learning process.

Dealing with a stuck-throttle at an early stage will possibly have an effect on a student's confidence well in excess of hours of routine training.

So far, we don't know what level the pilot was, student or otherwise. "First solo" was simply a possibility which would give credence to the declaration of a Mayday. Maybe he can fill us in when he's had a beer and a change of pants...:uhoh:

Emergency may be appropriate, it may not. If Airsic heard that a Mayday was declared, then the title is appropriate! :p

As for throttling back with mixture.... OUCH! Don't let the ginger beers (safe in the hangar) hear you say that.

Another unknown in this tale is what position the throttle was jammed at. It might have been mid-range. Maybe fly onto final a little high, then mixture to cut off when assured of a landing? Don't forget to call the company and organise a tug.....

[TLAW]

As for throttling back with mixture.... OUCH! Don't let the ginger beers (safe in the hangar) hear you say that.

I wouldn't care less. Let them strip it down afterwards, but if I don't get it down there won't be anything to strip ;)

[Woomera]

TLAW thanks for that.

So why dont we get constructive here and have a discussion on what might be an appropriate plan of action for such an event, beyond chewing up the seat cushion:(

[Capt. Queeg]

I knew someone would say that, TLAW!

I was just speaking up for the ginger beers in whose mind the emergency, once safely dealt with, never seems quite as bad as the pilot whose @rse chewed up the seat cushion, felt it to be at the time. Just picturing them standing around the cooked donk, pointing and grumbling.

I'm sure Sunfish meant emergency-use only with that technique.....

Chewing up the seat cushion, AKA pucker-factor, is a natural reaction to stressful and abnormal situations for many pilots and/or trainees, other than, it would seem, our fearless woomera! :ok: One of them anyway, not sure which. Maybe the grumpy one.

[TLAW]

Hence the ;)

I still think it's the best course of action in an emergency. Safer than getting lined up on final, cutting off the engine and discovering you misjudged the approach.

[Woomera]

OK so if the throttle IS stuck in a more or less "open" situation the only way of controlling the amount of power produced is by;

1. removing the source of ignition = turning the key off = unforeseen and uncontrollable explosive/detonation problems all the way from the induction side, from inside the cylinder all the way down the exhaust system ?? = :{ engineers.

2. removing the source of the above (explosive/detonation problems) = using the mixture control = the judicious use of, will produce little, some, or lots of power ??? with a consequent lower probability of internal damage.

As for throttling back with mixture.... OUCH! Don't let the ginger beers (safe in the hangar) hear you say that. is a contradiction in terms. I would be interested to learn what "damage" would be caused to cause the ginger beers concern = no fuel= no power. The only concern they could have, is if you somehow set the "mixture" control in a position that may produce optimum stoichiometric or somwhere near max power/temp for the volume of air available = so what, which, given that is exactly what you dont need is highly unlikely.

Then we need only hark back to the real old days of the Sopwith Camel, I think, when the ONLY control of power (either on or off) was by the "blip" switch, i.e. turning the mags ( = engine) on and off to adjust power on the descent and landing. There was no issue with the induction and exhaust system because they were permanently "open". Mind you, I am open to be corrected on the details.

Remember a reciprocating piston engine is but an air pump with a means of producing self sustaining power by the addition of a combustible liquid and a source of ignition, if required.

Chewing up the seat cushion, AKA pucker-factor, is a natural reaction to stressful and abnormal situations for many pilots and/or trainees, is not normal and IMHO a regretable result of the current training standards and overall lack of "old hands" = experienced instructors, to pass on the "old tricks" = what every pilot should basically know, before he goes to commit aviation.

A not grumpy, but despairing Woomera.:=

[AirSic]

Gee....Sorry guy's and gals...only wanted to know if anyone knew what the scenario was. Mayday was the call at the time that I overheard the conversation. Since then I have learned that a Mayday was called, adn that the PIC also used the words "tally-ho" when he landed, Engine off... Please don't shoot me for that!!!:{ :ok:

[Capt. Queeg]

Does the Cirrus have a mixture control that can be used to "throttle back" the engine?? As for throttling back with mixture.... OUCH! Don't let the ginger beers (safe in the hangar) hear you say thata contradiction in termsI para-phrased Sunfish's original question. Obviously the throttle action of the carburettor is nothing to do with the mixture. Is this what you meant by a contradiction in terms?

I think not but anyway... I'm not all that hot on piston donks these days as it's been a while but I seem to recall something about high power settings at low altitudes require a rich mixture.:p High EGTs, detonation, pre-ignition????? ...whatever, I'm really not entirely sure exactly. Once again, I'm presuming the throttle was jammed at a high setting.

Sunfish mentioned "throttling" back the engine with the mixture control. Other than the fact that this is not a "throttle" action (I'm sure he knew that) he does seem to be considering the notion of power control as opposed to simply cutting the engine by cutting the mixture.

I believe this technique will lead to some sort of bad news for the engine to some degree. What the damage would be I am not sure and yes, who cares as long as you land safely, I agree.

Airsic, if you mean mixture to cut-off on final when landing is assured, then I agree it is the best course and what I would do, myself. pucker-factor
is not normal and IMHO a regretable result of the current training standards and overall lack of "old hands"I didn't know they used to teach Resistance to Fear in the old days. So you weren't even a tad anxious on your first solo? Or any time in your first few hours when the engine gave a hiccup? Or the fuel needle was a little low for your liking? Or when you thought you'd screwed it with the weather closing in? Well what can I say, you sound fearless. :D I wish I'd had nerves like that in GA.......:ok:

[QNH1013.2]

Is this a rumour network or a MYTH network????

For those that haven't flown a Cirrus before - keep out of the argument on Cirrus related facts; you know who you are!

A Cirrus is eminently suitable for ab-initio, however they are generally not used because they are too expensive; everyone knows that. As for being hard to fly and complicated... nope. They are a single engine tricicle undercarriage with a throttle and a mixture control. You *could* fly very normally with the glass turned off and you'd have a stock standard aircraft.

If it was an SR22 with a wide open throttle you'd be in for one hell of a ride, particularly with 2 POB on board or less. No matter who you were, experienced or not, it would be a difficult situation to think quickly over. You likely wouldn't exceed VNE however you'd probably be well into the yellow and if there were turbulence around you'd be in for one hell of a bumpy ride, believe me.

That being said, it wouldn't be too hard to bring her in nicely.

One of the most dangerous situations that you could have in a Cirrus would be a brake failure on 1 or possibly 2 brakes! Ouch! Now THAT is an aircraft I WOULDN'T like to be in!

[Rich-Fine-Green]

Several Flight Schools around the country now use Cirrus for ab-initio - both SR20s and SR22s.

From what I hear, quite a number of Pilots now have solo'd in a Cirrus.

As per 1013.2; the hardest part to flying a Cirrus is the higher rental price paid to fly the latest and greatest.

[Bob Murphie]

Quote from QNH 1013.2;

"nope. They are a single engine tricicle undercarriage with a throttle and a mixture control. You *could* fly very normally with the glass turned off and you'd have a stock standard aircraft".

My understanding of things is that a Mayday... is for "grave and imminent danger" and a Pan is for an "emergency"....which this clearly appears to be likened to.

BTW QNH 1013.2, why should I butt out of this because I haven't flown a Cirrus and, given my highlighted quote of yours, a stock standard aircraft (Cessna perhaps), should have no trouble doing a dead stick from 1500 ft overhead even if it were a student pilot).

You write like someone I know who said he wouldn't be seen dead posting here.

Also detonation is a product of fuel, so if you cut off the fuel or limit it via mixture, so you have another option in case of an undershoot, there should be no damage to the engine if you "blip" the ignition. The Sopwith Camel did it all the time. (Ah, modern technology, sorry).

[QNH1013.2]

Bobbie says "You write like someone I know who said he wouldn't be seen dead posting here."

- Nope, QNH is alive and well here at his desk; hence this post.

My comment regarding those "butting out" as you put it, is for those who haven't flown a Cirrus, but yet still seem to know all about them, their parachute system and flight characteristics., etc. I note that the actual offending post has since been removed.

As to what constitutes a mayday... grave and imminent danger... well do we know where the throttle was when it froze, on or off..? I for one would be transmitting a mayday if I had no throttle wide out in the circuit after following a crappy old 172 bug smasher that's 2 mile out becuase of is 300 fpm climb rate. A Cirrus isn't the best glider with a bit of weight on-board, especially the 22 and there's certainly no feathering of the Cirrus prop with only a throttle and a mixture control.

QNH (Alive and well)

[FL440]

seems shortly we'll be arguing that new technology is wasted and lets get back to old simplicity.

The cirrus aircraft is still simple design, but you must still know the ins and outs of the system, if you've done the standardized Cirrus Instructor course you'll know what im talking about!

I agree with QNH1013.2, its definately going to be a hell of a ride with the throttle wide open, and given the system of Prop RPM control theres no guarentee that your not going to end up with a prop runaway and a completly different problem as the continental up front does the preverbial.......

QNH1013.2 I have had a single brake failure on the cirrus and wasnt the easiest situation to deal with, alot of opposite rudder, landing on runway side oppsite to dead brake and used nearly 1000m!

As for them getting on the ground safely, great outcome and well done to the pilot, especially if they are a low timer!
As far as comparing them with C172's at Ab initio level, lets not even go there!!

[Capt. Queeg]

Seems to be some confusion settling in here.

Single engine pistons are not able, as a rule, to feather the propellor. The pitch can be made coarse or fine but feathering is a different prospect.

Throttles are not "on or off", they are open or closed or somewhere in between.

If the throttle was stuck at or near closed ("off") then it seems unlikely he would've been still floating around when the RFF took up positions.

As for:Also detonation is a product of fuel, so if you cut off the fuel or limit it via mixture, so you have another option in case of an undershoot, there should be no damage to the engine if you "blip" the ignitionThe thing is, if you've cut off the fuel, "blipping" the ignition isn't going to do very much. Once again, the damage is sustained not by cutting off the fuel but by attempting to reduce power by leaning it too much at wide throttle settings and low altitude.

[gaunty]

Capt. Queeg

I think you may have conflated Mr Murphies comments about mixture and blipping. They are in the same sentence but separated by a comma which I read as and/or.

With respect you can't have it both ways, the use of the mixture for "power" control wasn't suggested as a means of controlling power by "leaning" which will not change the power produced more than a little bit, maybe +/- 4-5 % from memory, but of complete removal of fuel i.e. ICO = the engine will happily continue to windmill = throttle is "open" = just a very expensive air pump until you need some power to correct your descent/approach/flare = gently push the mixture control in to add fuel to the air pump which with the ignition still selected ON will eventually restore power for as long as you need it. The engine will only "fire" when the correct amount of fuel relative to the volume of air being pumped through it becomes stoichiometric from lean thru rich = the too high power thingy it was doing before. It might be a clunky way of controlling the flight path. But hey it wont do any damage to the engine and with a bit of juggling will get you back to terra firma.

There have been yards of posts here about the pros and cons of what is the best and safest way to routinely "slot" an engine producing high power (twins) AND the best and safest means of quickly bringing it back to life if necessary.

But then I am always open to being corrected.

[Icarus2001]

I know it is an old chestnut but...A Cirrus isn't the best glider with a bit of weight on-board, especially the 22 Weight has no effect on gliding ability. It is a function of lift/drag ratio.

Flight path control using the mixture control was something I covered during my commercial training back before the CAA was created.:hmm: An interesting exercise. Does that even get briefed nowadays?

[Woomera]

Icarus2001

My point exactly, there seems to be an awful lot of basic "what if" stuff that is not covered nowadays, that would have the efect of significantly lowering the overall "pucker factor" and preparing a more confident pilot.
But I guess that costs money, and they either don't want to pay what it costs or the flying schools only teach the bare necessities for the money.

Anyone involved with training new airline intakes or entry level turboprop will tell you there are some fairly big holes in the overall level of aviation knowledge and handling. Not necessarily the young pilots fault if they don't know what they don't know, hence airlines increasing tendency towards their own training schools.

[Capt Claret]

Does it really matter if the pilot called MAYDAY? Perhaps s/he was sh!t scared. Perhaps other things were happening at the time and they thought that the end was nigh.

Perhaps they didn't have thousands of hours of terrified experience to remain perfect at the time. :zzz:

[The Voice]

Clarrie - that's exactly what I said - no point being in the air, WITH a drama, a not say something - anything! No extra points given for keeping secrets in these instances!

[Sunfish]

This is a very dangerous thread.

There are postings on it that convey the idea that a pilot is somehow a nancy boy for declaring a Mayday under circumstances that were not warranted, at least according to supposed "Old Hands" who post here.

There is also the implication that some techniques of dealing with a supposed emergency may result in "damage to the aircraft", and therefore should be avoided, even if they are the most appropriate measure available to the pilot concerned.

All it needs Folks, is for one student pilot to read this guff and absorb your spurious message, and then decide he/she is not going to do the "Nancy Boy" thing when an emergency eventuates, thereby killing himself.

What I am going to say now is probably going to cost me, and it is this.

If you believe you are in a life threatening situation call Mayday, you can always cancel it later with the loss of a few dignity points, so what? ATC won't mind, you are just demonstrating your prudence. Don't wait too long either. Just run through your checks to confirm that its not a false alarm according to your level of experience. Your emergency may be subjective - one that an "Old Hand" can deal with, but unless you get help, your never going to get to be an "Old Hand" are you?

The alternative scenario I have knowledge of was a marine drowning where the crew concerned waited 45 minutes before calling mayday, as they fought to get a drowning crew member back on board. When they finally did call Mayday, a rescue helicopter arrived in only 15 minutes, underlining the fact that a prompt Mayday would in all probability have resulted in a successful rescue. The Coroner was not very kind to the skipper concerned. Just hold the picture of the Coroner asking "Why didn't he/she declare an emergency?" in your mind.

Furthermore, If I was ever in a "Mayday" situation (God help me), the state of the aircraft and its engine after you have safely extracted yourself and your passengers from it must be of absolutely no concern whatsoever, and you have to remind yourself of this at all times. You can worry about the aircraft once you are safely standing on solid ground.

It's better to be alive and perhaps slightly embarrassed then dead. The stuff about "Old and Bold" is not myth.

[Capt Fathom]

This is a very dangerous thread.
Sunfish. Are you declaring a Pan or a Mayday ?

[VH-XXX]

I agree with the Fishmiester.

You can always cancel your mayday and you won't get in trouble.

I don't even think you can get in trouble for calling mayday; better to be safe than sorry.

If you're in busy GAAP or CTA with a lot of radio traffic it's definitely the right thing to do to let your message of distress be heard. Best that everyone knows as they will normally keep quiet. I've heard it before; if a mayday doesn't get declared every man and his dog gets on the radio offering their assistance.

When I'm in trouble, I want everyone to know!

[Rich-Fine-Green]

A Cirrus isn't the best glider with a bit of weight on-board, especially the 22

(downloaded from cirrus design website)

From SR20 POH: Best Glide Ratio = 10.9:1

From SR22 POH: Best Glide Ratio = 9.6:1

Compared to a lot of other aircraft, I would suggest the Cirrus SR20 & SR22 glide ratio is pretty good.

[Sunfish]

Capt Fathom, it would depend. Myguess is it depends on the immediacy of the threat. Stuck landing gear wouldn't be a Mayday in my untutored opinion. Engine failure in a single would be.

[VH-XXX]

Perhaps I think he meant that the 22 wasn't a good glider in terms of manoeuvring. They are very heavy, especially with a heavy nose at slow speed. The controls are quite heavy, especially in a low speed go-around or similar. After all there's 300+ HP up there, especially in the SR22-GTS model; it has something crazy like 350hp... hmmmm nice. Those yanks love a big engine in their cars and planes. Fossil fuel; it's the only way to go!

[gaunty]

Sunfish me old


Lets get back to tors eh.:ok:

A call of pan-pan means that there is an emergency on board a boat, ship, aircraft or other vehicle but that, for the time being at least, there is no immediate danger to anyone's life or to the vessel itself. This is distinct from a Mayday call, which means that there is imminent danger to life or to the continued viability of the vessel itself. Thus 'pan-pan' will inform potential rescuers (including emergency services and other craft in the area) that a safety problem exists whereas 'mayday' will call upon them to drop all other activities and immediately instigate a rescue attempt.

You don't need to be an "old hand" to work that one out.

You just need to slow down or stop even and thimk.:p

Icarus 2001 must have had the same instructors as I, everyone of them taught me, the first action when a problem arises is to do nothing maintain control of the aircraft, until you have analysed and thought the problem through and worked out what needs to be done and in what order. You don't need to be an "old hand" to do that.
If you think you dont have the time to do that, then you are indeed in grave and imminent danger, probably from yourself.

And I don't believe the "marine" story is relevant without full knowledge of the context. At what points in the rescue, did it go, from a man over board through for the time being no immediate danger, to his being in grave and imminent danger. That's a command judgement The Coroner may or may not have been fully justified in asking that question, they are known on occasion to possess perfect 20/20 hindsight.

Whilst I agree with the Voice on most things I think the Voice would also be the first to agree that a stuck throttle in normal flight does not constitute "grave and imminent danger" it only heralds a potential safety problem if it cant be unstuck or a landing attempt needs to be made so configured.
Did anyone request an engineer or the Chief Pilot on the line for a bit of a chat.

I'm not belying the potential seriousness of the event other than trying to point out that with thorough training and yes a fair bit of hangar or bar flying there is always more than one way to skin a cat.
Ever tried landing a turboprop that wont slow down below 150KIAS at flight idle, no biggie but no Mayday or Pan either. Nothing in the book, but my old mate Franks words from a long ago hangar session saved the day.

ATCers are very good at sussing the issues and acting accordingly, problem for them is that when a pilot calls a Mayday they must act on the assumption that the aircraft is in "grave and imminent danger" and act accordingly, big red trucks and ambos, the lot, and neither do they have an easy option to unilaterally "implement" or "suggest" a downgrade of the call to Pan.
The responsibility therefore, and it always does, rest with the pilot to make the appropriate call.
IMHO Pan Pan would have been waaay more appropriate and if it gets more serious it can always be upgraded, in any event you can expect serious attention and whatever assistance is possible from ATC should you need it.
A Pan call should also have the same effect insofar as radio traffic is concerned as a May Day, i.e. everybody shut up for the moment until ATC sort it out, maybe even go to another frequency, and/or the Panner has the floor, so to speak. The world, in a busy CTA, cant just stop, hence the reponsibility of the pilot to consider the consequences.

I think most "old hands" would also agree that rushing a problem when a deep breath should be taken will be more likely to bring a negative conclusion or as they say "adverse" consequences".

Dangerous thread, nah, far from it.
It's how we all learn from each other in this business. The call may well have been fully justified, but at least the newbies out there now know that there are 2 simple "remedies" available for this situation, that they can discuss with their peers and instructors for the good goss.

The notion that you will trash the engine by the manipulation of the mixture control anywhere between closed and full rich under those circumstances is nonsense.

convey the idea that a pilot is somehow a nancy boy I would be disapppointed were the pilot to draw that conclusion, I am sure that if he was worthy of his command he will have debriefed himself or sought one out, gone through the event step by step, and if we are lucky, will relate his experience to us. That is how it has been since Wilbur was a boy.

It is correct there is no penalty for declaring a Mayday and that is as it should be, but there is a command responsiblilty attached whether you are flying a Cirrus or a Tiger. It is fair that we should be able to discuss the notion.

[Capt. Queeg]

There is also the implication that some techniques of dealing with a supposed emergency may result in "damage to the aircraft", and therefore should be avoidedAh yes but who was it who first suggested the technique? As I've already stated several times (and as have others) engine considerations rank far below safety in this kind of situation. If the pilot is task-saturated with ensuring survival, then he will do what he must.

But a pilot with a higher level of skill, experience and knowledge might be able to ensure survival and look after the aircraft a little, as well.

Example: Gear-up landing where the pilot manages to cut the engines and line the props up to avoid ground contact prior to touchdown. It has been done but most people will be content just to make sure they live through it and that is fine.

The technique of leaning the mixture to control power, as pointed out, makes a small difference to total power output. Cutting the misture outright would have a far greater benefit (in my opinion) if the technique is carried out with correct timing.

Do you get it now? Be careful what you suggest Sunfish, and how you word it or the thread may, indeed, become "dangerous".

[Jerrym]

All this is all well and good, but maybe there is another issue worth considering. I've heard that the pilot suspected a stuck throttle because the rpm didn't change when he pulled the throttle back. This is due to the throttle and pitch being combined in the 1 lever. If this was the case, what's to be said about the training in the first place? Just a thought.

[Sunfish]

Thank you for you excellent post Gaunty.

[The Voice]

Gaunty - an eloquent post as usual.

Having been on the receiving end of all manner of 'distress' calls I understand what you are saying ref the type of call made in this instance v nature of problem.

BUT, I, and I have no doubt others, have been in siutations where it is darned obvious there is an issue with a flight and NOTHING is said at all, no declaration of anything by the pilot even though the situation unfolding appears anything but normal. The ATC (and FSO when they were around) has the ability to place an alert on the flight if they think it warrants one, but that doesn't negate the responsibility of the pilot to make the notification.

One incident that immediately springs to mind is that of the DHC8 up northern WA some several years ago. The flight arrived in the vicinity of the field but didn't execute the normal end stages of the flight. I knew there was an issue, couldn't extricate from the crew what, (they did have their hands full with a particularly disabled aircraft as we know now) but even so, nothing was said.

So, I say again - I'd rather that something was said even if in everyones mind it is the wrong thing, to at least allow some other intervention to occur, if it is due.

[Monopole]

Ok, so a:

Mayday= Grave and imminent danger, where as a
Pan= Urgency
(I don't think there is any issue with this :) )

The way that I see it then for this particular concern is (and somewhat simplified :E )

1. If the throttle is stuck closed = Mayday, as you
have not many choices but to go down or stall.

2. If the throttle is stuck open = Pan. You are still flying
aren't you, and your not in grave or imminent danger.
In fact, some people will probably argue that you are
not yet in an urgent situation yet either :confused:

3. If the throttle is stuck open and you then run out of
fuel = Mayday (see No. 1.)

At the end of the day I suppose it comes down to aircraft type and PIC experience. The aircraft I fly states in its POH that an engine failure is an ABNORMAL.
So based on that how could you be in Grave Danger (everything being equal and by the book of course) :ok:

[gaunty]

Monopole:ok:

An ABNORMAL can have many consequences ranging from "bugger looks like we wont be going much further today" = Flt Plan Amndment, "This is not going well we'd better give someone a heads up" = Pan, to "Aaaaaah ****!" = "Venez m’aider" ("Come help me"). abbrv. "M'aidez" or more correctly "À l'aide!" or "Au secours!" Wikipedia.:p but Mayday will do.

The Voice

Thank you.
And I agree you must have many frustrating events, I'm not an ATCer but like yours my work involves a very high level of communication skills including listening to and understanding the underlying subtext of speech. That is what's really happening v whats being communicated.
The incident to which you refer is IMHO a deeply disturbing lack of command judgement, which should at the very least demand "counseling" of the crew and/or, it may be an equally likely problem, as the event on face value is evidence of a "cover up" culture in operation, CASA should go through the org like a dose of salts . "We'll probably get away with this so lets not start a paper war with CASA and expensive maintenance issue down route."
Was it ultimately reported??
A Mayday or Pan takes less than 15 secs to transmit and should in normal circumstances, especially "with their hands full" suggesting they were in "grave and imminent danger), be made. That's why the mic switch is on the control wheel at the end of your finger.
Grrrrrrrr.:=

[Bob Murphie]

Now that we all agree on the subject of rational declarations of inflight abnormalities, and at the risk of being accused of having the last say;

May I suggest that not one pilot goes solo before He/ She demonstrates an ability to do a dead stick emergency or "forced" landing in whatever aircraft they elect to train in. (or have things changed)?

Therefor, why couldn't the pilot have gone to glider mode (Pan Pan), at 1500 ft over YPJT airport with a 1392 meter runway or declared same emergency (Pan Pan), and gone to YPPH with a three and a half kilometer runway?

From an "old hand" I can say that there are some engine failures in light twins that deserve a "Mayday" call and some engine failures in singles that only deserve a "Pan Pan" call.

I hope this thread has passed some rational comment for the benefit of people flying because it concerns me that of of three post solo junior pilots spoken to today, only one has ever heard of a Pan call.

[gaunty]

Sorry Bob :} I'll save you from the "last word".

BTW, I agree absolutely and not at all amazed at the results of your poll.:ok:

Monopole
I missed something that is even more important than all of the above re calls during ANY ABNORMAL event.

You gave me the clue?

as you have not many choices but to go down or stall.

There is absolutely no excuse short of total control/structural failure for the pilot to lose control of the aircraft. It is the first, middle and last priority. All the Maydays, Pans and "fixes" in the world are useless to you once the aircraft has departed from controlled flight.

As another "old hand" is wont to say, "if a crash is inevitable at least make it a controlled crash, and just keep flying the aircraft, until the after noise has stopped and the dust is starting to settle.", bit like you haven't "landed" a Tiger Moth until it is parked in the hangar.:E