Thanks from VS44

[Jumbo Jockey]

Just wanted to say a brief but heartfelt "Thank You" to all the Shannon, Scottish, London and Gatwick controllers involved in our medical Pan and beautifully-coordinated expeditious routing to LGW this morning 17th March. Without going into detail, for a while there we thought we were going to have to revise the "total on board" figure on the loadsheet, but no birth to report, at least not when we said goodbye to the couple at Gatwick anyway! Would you believe no less than four midwives answered the call for a medically-qualified volunteer?!
Thank you all.
Regards
JJ, operating skipper

[Julian Hensey]

Did you ever get an update from the couple on their "result"? Always nice to know that things turned out ok if you had to sweat a bit.... :D

[tczulu]

You're welcome-Downwind righthand for 26l can be a bit of a fiasco sometimes,but it worked well today!:)

[eyeinthesky]

Glad it went well..
However, it occurs to me that if you needed to thank Shannon, Scottish, London and Gatwick and that "for a while there we thought we were going to have to revise the "total on board" figure on the loadsheet" then perhaps a landing at one of the MANY suitable airfields you flew past on the way to Gatwick would have been a good idea.
Yet another case of a PAN which lasts for an hour or more....:hmm: Not really a PAN then, is it?

[Dont tell um pike]

Sorry eye i've got to disagree there , i can see no problems calling this a Pan or even a medical emergency in old money.

Sounds like well dones all round

DTUP :ok:

[fisbangwollop]

It would appear EYEINTHESKY does not agree with our Pan or Maday protocols if you read his responses to my report on biz jet and ag forum with regard reluctance to declare an emergency!!!

For info my brother a very senior Captain with BAW on 747's advises he as the company suggest WILL always declare Pan or Mayday at the earliest opportune moment.

[fisbangwollop]

EYEINTHESKY......quote"Yet another case of a PAN which lasts for an hour or more.... Not really a PAN then, is it?"

In my days at Shanwick quite often an airraft at 30W would wind down an engine and declare an immediate Pan......this Pan state would continue till the aircraft landed safetly, a time that may be a couple of hours hence.....whats the problem with that?? I will once again repeat my self, the sooner ATC know there is a problem the easier it is for us to offer assistance, even if that only means an expeditous routing!!!!!!!!!!

[Del Prado]

There are many circumstances when an aircraft can continue to destination but needs to bypass any holding/extended routing, a PAN is the appropriate call then, as it was here.

[Julian Hensey]

It is entirely correct to call PAN. A PAN call advises everyone that an urgent situation has developed, and that it may be necessary immediately to land, or at least have an open channel of communication available with every broadcast treated as urgent. A recent PAN call to Bristol Airport was made. The aircraft had a number of technical difficulties and the pilot said "I need to do some troubleshooting, but it may be necessary to land urgently, please bear with me." In that respect ATC could start informing fire service that they should be out on the field, and also start planning how they may have to deal with other incoming aircraft and diversions, and also gather every bit of information they could about surrounding airfields to assist the pilot. Any ATCO that berates a pilot for a PAN call because it was not resolved in five minutes would be taken aside by their manager for a stern talking to.

[captainlj]

Lets face it, the crew did the right thing in the situation detailed.

I only hope the mother named the baby after the pilot. :)

[PPRuNe Radar]

I only hope the mother named the baby after the pilot.

Poor kid .... now saddled with the name Jumbo Jockey :)

[fisbangwollop]

Quote...I only hope the mother named the baby after the pilot.

Well at least I guess it will be a "Virgin":p

[Mister Geezer]

Poor kid .... now saddled with the name Jumbo Jockey

If its boy... at least he will be popular with the females when he is older with a name like that!!! :}

[eyeinthesky]

I wasn't arguing with the declaration of the PAN (nor the protocol for doing so..)
What I was asking was whether flying past many suitable diversion airfields might suggest that the urgency to get the aircraft on the ground was not as high as it might have appeared to be by that declaration. 10W to EGKK is more than an hour's flying time, even with direct routings. By the time the aircraft reached the stand at Gatwick, the patient could have been in hospital in Manchester, Dublin Shannon or Prestwick for more than 30 mins. Having flown for more than an hour more than necessary, why should 10 mins holding for Gatwick be a problem?
Of course, it costs a lot of money to divert a 747... that wouldn't be a consideration, would it?:oh:

[Dont tell um pike]

In this case the most appropriate place to land was KK for 101 different reasons , a bit of common sense applied in unusual circumstances
shows (to me at least) a group of people well on top of their game.:D

DTUP

[Jumbo Jockey]

We continued to Gatwick on advice from Medlink via satphone. Had the situation changed for the worse, they would have been further consulted and might very well then have revised that advice and might indeed have suggested landing at one of the possible enroute diversion options. In the meantime, however, if their considered advice is to go to Gatwick, it seems only common sense to enlist all the assistance one can muster to speed the process along. I made this posting in the hope that some of those consummate professionals I had the pleasure of dealing with that morning might be readers of this forum, to thank those ladies and gentlemen involved for a very impressive and professional performance.

Liked the downwind right tczulu - when we were told that was the plan, my very first thought was Blimey, I bet that's "fun" from an ATC point of view... Nicely done.

Alas, Julian, we are often none the wiser as to the outcomes of these things until we get an SEP (Safety Equipment/Procedures) renewal day, which incorporates AVMED - resuscitating the plastic dummy, recovery position and all that. In the AVMED section they usually ask if anyone's had any passenger medical issues lately, and since they follow up any Medlink call, they often have updates on many of them. As luck would have it, I'm rostered one in April so will try and find out and let you know one way or the other.

Regards to all

JJ

[StoneyBridge Radar]

Seeing as it was a Virgin flight, I don't suppose the mother was called Mary, by any chance ...? :\

[757manipulator]

Eye
What I was asking was whether flying past many suitable diversion airfields might suggest that the urgency to get the aircraft on the ground was not as high as it might have appeared to be by that declaration.
with respect, you weren't there, and no matter how you attempt to question or dissect a decision that you had no part of, the fact is that in this case it was the correct course of action.
JJ merely expressed his gratitude to the various ATCO's for their help in resolving the situation...monday morning quarterback comments such as yours IMHO have no place on this thread:=

[Gonzo]

So perhaps the answer is for the airlines to disseminate more information to ATC organisations about how such a decision to continue to the original destination rather than divert is arrived at?

It is true that when we get an inbound PAN due to a medical issue on board, and we're given a few hours notice, we do often wonder why the aircraft doesn't divert to a nearer airfield if the situation is so urgent as to warrant a PAN.

Historically, more than one airline has used the tactic of declaring a medical emergency on board to avoid holding into LHR. Oddly, the pax seemed to fall very ill just after a 20 minute delay was announced, and seemed to recover very quickly once established. :yuk:

[757manipulator]

Gonzo
So perhaps the answer is for the airlines to disseminate more information to ATC organizations about how such a decision to continue to the original destination rather than divert is arrived at?

I see your point mate:ok: the trouble is, neither you (I assume) or I are medical experts, bearing that in mind we use a third party organization with whom we have a set procedure to follow.
On that basis, the symptoms of the ill person are described by crew on-board, and are then relayed to the third party for assessment. Once the assessment is complete, a decision to divert or continue is made.
I am aware that as far as financial considerations are concerned, these are met by the third party with whom the decision to divert rests with. It is only after the decision is made to divert that we decide on the options of where we are going.
So in essence, we are told to divert or not, such as the individual case may be.
Regarding the "phantom" sick passenger to avoid the 20 min hold, thats reprehensible if it is proved to be true:=

[The Fat Controller]

I wish more pilots with potentially serious problems would declare a PAN as soon as possible.
It enables us to get extra bodies in place, especially at ScACC where we sometimes single-man the sectors.
If it is resolved, the emergency can be cancelled, but if it gets worse then we are all prepared.
Just my personal opinion.

[begbie]

How can anyone (medically trained or not), advise that it is preferable to continue on at 30 odd thousand feet to an airport hundreds of miles away rather than a nearby diversion with nearby hospitals etc..

[begbie]

££££...? .

[747-436]

Unfortunatly at Heathrow to get an Ambulance to meet the aircraft you have to declare a medical emergency.

There are many situations that are not life threatening but where Medlink or whoever an Airline use advise that an Ambulance should meet the aircraft.

This means that a flight has to declare a PAN where it is not really needed just to get the Ambulance. It is a stupid situation but I guess as usual with most things it is down to money as the Amulances come from places like Hillingdon Hospital and are not based on the airport so they need a medical emergency to be declared so they come.

There should really be some other way of getting an ambulance for non urgent situations at Heathrow without having to declare a medical emergency with ATC.

[Leezyjet]

747-436,
As someone who is on the other end of "company",
That isn't technically correct. There is an ambulance based at LHR, medic 5 however there is only 1 and if that is already on a call then an external ambulance will be dispatched. The ambulance service will also prioritise the calls too based on the info we have given them. Also it is not uncommon for the nearest ambulance that is free to have to come from Hammersmith !!!, so barking at the poor Dispatcher/on Company when you arrive and the ambulance isn't there, it isn't actually the dispatcher's (or company's) fault.

A call to company or an acars message to request an ambulance is enough to get one arranged for you without having to go through ATC. The nuciance at LHR however is that it is an all or nothing situaton, you get the all singing all dancing Ambulance respose or nowt. However there are now a few paramedics on bikes that can come out to asses the situation before wasting the time of the ambulance if they happen to be in the right terminal at the right time.

For info, the details we are required to pass onto the Ambulance service are :-

Details of problem
Any medication taken
Is person concious and breathing
Aprroximate age
Sex

Also an updated eta if you have declared a pan and are coming direct.
Also for our info on company, we require pax name (seat number too but they may have moved seats so full name is preferable) and nationality as if your international, we have to tell Customs and Immigration. Also if it a disease or food poisoning we may have to advise Port Health too.

At my lot, we have a check-list of about 20 differant people we need to advise, from the ambulance service to loaders, to duty managers, to engineering to make sure everyone gives that flight priority with their staff allocations. If even the bloke who puts the chocks in is late, it can mean a delay getting the paramedics onboard asap.

It is frustrating from our point of view when we are requested to call an ambulance for things like sprained ankles when there is little the ambulance service can do anyway, and you know it is wasting their time. Sign of the cover one's posterior times we live in though I guess !!.

Hope that helped give an idea of what goes on at the other end of the radio after you make that call.
:)

[Del Prado]

Begbie, There could be 101 reasons to continue the flight. There are varying levels of injury/illness which are best decided by qualified medical personnel. The recent BA2166 Tampa to Gatwick is a good example. several cabin crew injured, thankfully not life threatening. Surely it was best to make them comfortable and continue the flight to get them home, at all times under the guidance of suitably qualified personnel? http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=247503&page=2&highlight=cabin+crew+injured