One for the twin drivers ...

[FullyFlapped]

If you lose a donkey whilst pootling along in your twin, do you declare a mayday ?

FF :ok:

[FlyingForFun]

It's up to you, as captain, to decide whether the situation warrants a Mayday.

What I'd do, and what I suggest to my students that they do, is as follows: after an engine failure, and once everything's under control, assess whether you're able to climb to, or maintain, a safe height. If you are, it's a Pan Pan. If not, it's a Mayday. If there's a fire, it's always a Mayday.

That doesn't mean other twin drivers would do the same. It also doesn't mean I wouldn't change my mind if it happened to me for real. But, probably the most relevant of all, I doubt it would really make any different to the way ATC treat the situation anyway.

FFF
---------------

[sternone]

http://ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20050104X00012&key=1

[DFC]

Yes.

Mayday and 7700.

No question about it in a twin.

Why?........because you have lost one of your two engines and at that very moment you probably don't know exactly why and need as much ATS assistance as possible.

If you are one of those that can guarantee that the other will not fail and that you will not have further complications with load shedding, Vacuum supply, performace and so on, then perhaps downgrade it to a Pan but I can't see the point in downgrading when you may have to upgrade again later.

Mayday is simply a tool for obtaining unhindered assistance from the rest of the team i.e. ATS and aerodrome providers.

However, one of the most important things is that you shut everyone else on the frequency up while you get it sorted, gather your thoughts and get the assistance you want.

Regards,

DFC

[Foxy Loxy]

As an aside, 50% power loss is treated by ATC as a "Full Emergency" anyway. As to the rest, I concur with DFC.

Foxy

[maxdrypower]

This video has been posted before but I think (not yet being a commercial pilot ) that this is almost textbook . and reinforces the point made by DFC superbly
http://flightlevel350.com/Aircraft_Boeing_757-200-Airline_Thomsonfly_Aviation_Video-8457.html

[rustle]

Well I am going to say "no", not necessarily.

Since the primary actions are to control the aircraft height/heading (asymmetry), understand if the failure is catastrophic (fire or bits flying off) or not and then go through re-start drills or shutdown/feather drills A/R then,

Secondary actions are to "secure" the live engine;

Then, and only then would you decide to call someone with a "mayday".

As, by then, you won't necessarily know if it is contagious ;) you might require an expeditious landing/return to base.

If it is "obviously" only one-out you don't need to immediately go to a "mayday" unless you can't maintain height (and need to) or have some secondary issue such as damage from debris, ice, or you suspect it might be fuel related or something that might affect the live one.

When it happened to me it was not a "mayday", we were still on frequency with departure aerodrome and asked for an expedited return.

No drama.

As PIC you would know what systems were affected by which engine inop, so it is your call. Always.

[High Wing Drifter]

Although I agree with Rustle's process in that there are very very few situations that require and instant response. A MEP single engine failure in the cruise probably is not a 'panicable' event, something like fire or ice being examples of the exception.

However, once you have assessed the situation, taken appropriate action and reviewed it and then you still only have one engine, a Mayday and a divert seems to me to be an eminently sensible course of action. In such situations there is no sense in considering others, that is ATC's job. One needs to keep one's options open and it costs nothing. It is always possible to downgrade later, but I imagine that it is potentially much harder to escalate if your situation suddenly deteriorates.

[Life's a Beech]

I'm with FFF.

I initially called a mayday, because I wasn't sure whether I could maintain height or not. We had just dirtied up and were in an orbit due to a slow aircraft ahead on approach. Gear up, descended a little to increase speed and bring flap up, able to make the field so I downgraded to a pan. But I was VMC and at 4000' on approach, enough height but also close to the airfield, ideal place for an engine to stop if you have to experience it.

The second time I didn't call anything, because I had just taxied off the runway, and a PA31 will taxy on one. Just.

[DFC]

I posted earlier very directly;

Yes.
Mayday and 7700.
No question about it in a twin.

Is there any if's buts or maybe's there?

NO! - for a very good reason - When your engine stops, you know the drills and you will have enough to work out without trying to disect the situation and thinking up what R/T you are going to use when the time comes.

Mayday at the appropriate time every time.

Even if you do not declare a MAYDAY, UK ATC are going to treat you as if you had.........because everyone knows that an engine failure in a twin is an emergency

The problem with getting this across is highlighted in one word from HWD's post above Panic. Can someone please explain the link between Mayday and Panic?

Regards,

DFC

[rustle]

Is there any if's buts or maybe's there?

NO! - for a very good reason - When your engine stops, you know the drills and you will have enough to work out without trying to disect the situation and thinking up what R/T you are going to use when the time comes.

Mayday at the appropriate time every time.

Disagree.

No blanket rule is going to cover the situation which is why, in their wisdom, the UK CAA haven't made it a "rule" to broadcast a "mayday" in the event of an engine failure in a MEP.

Normally you love quoting rules, DFC, but in this case you're wrong. There isn't one [a rule] and nor should there be.

[Fuji Abound]

I had one on my initial multi - or at least we couldn’t get the engine restarted. I asked the examiner if he wanted to make a pan or a mayday - in the event by the time we had sorted ourselves out we didn’t make either, and we got the engine restarted before landing. Having intentionally shut the engine down the aircraft was happily polling around on one, and we certainly knew why the other had stopped if not why it didn’t want to restart.

Mayday seems the correct answer but it is worth analysing why and in what circumstances.

Suppose you are mid channel working LI?

In the instant the last thing on your mind is the call. Sort the aircraft out and try and work out if the problem is stable and only related to one engine. By the time you have the aircraft under control and established the situation is stable its en route to the nearest diversion.

You now want total priority so it’s a mayday.

You might be panicked into making a call somewhat sooner and more than likely thats going to be a mayday as the natural reaction.

So, on balance, it seems to me the question is what do you achieve by calling a pan rather than a mayday given that AT will treat the event as an emergency in either circumstance? Moreover a mayday signifies you want the urgent assistance of AT - and you probably should just in case things do not remain stable, whereas a pan indicates you have a problem but do not need that urgent assistance.

Having said that, I recall my last rough running engine in a single. That resulted in an immediate pan but in hindsight I had no idea whether the engine might have stopped at any moment.

[DFC]

Does the CAA have to legislate for what should be (and is among the professional operators atleast) simply good practice?

Have a look at the video example given above. Here we have a professional crew who will have had less than 6 months since they handled all types of emergency and unusual situations in a very expensive simulator, flying a high performance aircraft with an engine failure situation where the engine that has failed is probably still producing some thrust..........was there any delay, was there any sense of hey we are climbing well, going into the special departure procedure, the fire is out we are VMC ah perhaps we will just call a PAN?..........No straight to the point - Mayday.

Where oh where is this reluctance to use the word Mayday on the R/T among non-professional pilots?

Is it seen as I asked previously to be some indication of Panic? Wrong!

Is it seen as the Pilot God Hero not having the right stuff? Wrong!

Is it seen as an over reaction to a situation? Wrong!

The only way the word Mayday can get you into trouble when you have an emergency is in the accident report that notes it's omission!

PPLs do not have the advantage of multi-crew and regular 6 monthly sim practice and (for the most part) being absolutely current with the aircraft. Thus an engine failure is more of a problem.

Finally, the engine failure is only the start of the problems. Why not get the help you want to land at the nearest suitable aerodrome? Or is anyone thinking that they would not immediately divert in that situation?

Regards,

DFC

[rustle]

I had one on my initial multi - or at least we couldn’t get the engine restarted. I asked the examiner if he wanted to make a pan or a mayday

IMHO that should have been a fail then.

Examiner in the case of additional ratings is a "passenger" to all intents and purposes, and it is Captain's Call what happens next: In an exam you're the Captain - your call. What you gonna do next time? Ring him? ;)

[Fuji Abound]

What you gonna do next time? Ring him?

What a good idea -

you got his number then?

[rustle]

PPLs do not have the advantage of multi-crew and regular 6 monthly sim practice and (for the most part) being absolutely current with the aircraft. Thus an engine failure is more of a problem.

Finally, the engine failure is only the start of the problems. Why not get the help you want to land at the nearest suitable aerodrome? Or is anyone thinking that they would not immediately divert in that situation?

Regards,

DFC

Read the question - this isn't an EFATO situation, this is loss of power "whilst pootling along" which, to my mind, suggests you have time and altitude on your side.

The video link is totally irrelevant.

Stop trying to invent situations to justify your "rule" and accept that sometimes a "mayday" is required, and sometimes it ain't.

It is captain's decision whether to call a "mayday" or not. Not your's ;)

[Fuji Abound]

Captaincy is a valid point.

The reason why I think a “discussion” about whether to call a pan or mayday was the right call was because there was no immediate danger or need for urgent assistance at that moment. There was no reason to think the engine would not restart as it had been intentionally shut down. I was happy to do neither and as it turned out so was the examiner. Captaincy in whatever situation, even in a test, is about using the resources at your disposal in the best way. Personally I would happily consult with any pilot in the seat next to me if I could. In the same way, whilst you may well jest about getting on the ‘phone, I would happily call ops from the air if I thought they might be able to assist with an issue once I was happy the aircraft was stable.

If the engine has failed, or in this case, had refused to restart, on balance I want the urgent attention of AT. If I was enroute and was talking to a unit other than that at my diversion a pan might be sufficient, but it is still going to me a mayday at my diversion, so again, on balance why bother with the pan.

The fact is a single engine approach is a mayday situation imo .. .. ..

.. .. .. unless, that is, you know of so other way of getting back on the ground?

[Foxy Loxy]

At the risk of being shot down in flames here.....

Declare a Mayday. You'd like to think that the 2nd engine will function nicely, but you don't know that. You need assistance (or at least the awareness) from ATC. Nothing, trust me, NOTHING cuts through background noise in a tower and on a frequency quite like the M word. I know this because I have missed a wishy-washy "oh I have a bit of an engine problem" call on two occasions. "Pan Pan" or "Mayday" GETS YOU NOTICED! And gets the help you may need in place. If you subsequently decide you don't need it..... that's your call.

Don't hesitate, is my advice. I personally would rather it that way around than potentially miss another one.

Safe flying,

Foxy

[Chilli Monster]

DFC, Foxy Loxy et al - I suggest you actually learn the definitions of "MAYDAY" and "PAN".

With those definitions in mind - my answer isn't "Yes" or "No" but "depends on the situation" - however, I suspect in most of the cases (and indeed, in my engine failure event) anything greater than a PAN isn't necessary.

I had a "thump" come from the engine at top of climb. MP dropped dramatically, no other indications, no increase in MP when adjusting the throttle. Was this a MAYDAY - no, of course not. I just shut the engine down and carried on to the destination (which happened to be the maintenance base). Being light, with no structural damage, and only a short journey I didn't even declare a PAN - it WAS NOT an emergency. I advised ATC of the scenario, told them there were no other problems with the aircraft and carried on.

Rest of the journey - including the approach and landing, totally uneventful.

[Foxy Loxy]

Chilli Monster,
I know MATS1 as well as you do.

What I was trying to get across was, if unsure, declare.

Downgrade if you want to, or you don't feel you need further assistance. Not all pilots are as confident as you seemingly are.

I know a lot of pilots in the single crew MEP single crew environment. Some are extremely calm and measured. Those who aren't tend to be the ones who have less experience. As far as I'm concerned, I'm there to help whoever needs that extra attention to get it. Those who don't require it all the way..... I'm there for them too.

It's what I do. I've had the fire engines out for all sorts of situations, for pilots of all different levels of experience. At the end of the day, it's a judgment call. If the pilot sounds like they're on top of it, then fine. If they don't, they need all the reassurance they can get.

Foxy

[englishal]

I agree with Chilli and Rustle......

Otherwise everytime you shut down an engine for training, or pull then power back to 40% to descend, you'd have to call Mayday.

Mayday really means "help, we could very easily die unless we get some help very soon". When an engine fails on a twin, this could be the case or it could be a "bugger, better turn around the engine has gone". Pan means "We have a problem which could get worse, can we get some help please"...

To be honest, it is just words anyway. If you have an emergency you fly the plane and then tell whoever...

[Three Yellows]

... so like everything in aviation, ask a group of 'n' pilots a seemingly straightforward question and get at least 3n answers!:}

[High Wing Drifter]

The problem with getting this across is highlighted in one word from HWD's post above Panic. Can someone please explain the link between Mayday and Panic?I hoped the single quotes would mean that I could get away with writing a whole paragraph explaining the difference between the process of assessing, diagnosing, resolving/mitigating and reviewing a potential emergency situation using the appropriate checklist and the instant canned drill response required in some few very specific scenarios.

Regardless of the opinions about what is or is not a Mayday in relation to an engine failure, the received training by people who make their living flying these things around Europe is not only specific but also totally logical. The name of the game is to give yourself room, keep as many options open as possible and account for the thing you didn't think of. As an engine is a critical component, there are potential ramifications that are not at first obvious. The absolutely last thing you need when single engine is to go-around or be generally delayed by traffic and other stuff. If you have told ATC that you are single engine, then I can't imagine that they would treat it as anything else, but it is probably be a mistake to assume that they will treat the situation as would expect unless you as commander unambiguously told them exactly what you want and expect.

So, if after trying to correct the situation, you are still with one engine, the initial Mayday will maximise the time available for everybody to ensure the above. As said by me and Foxy, downgrade if appropriate.

[rustle]

... so like everything in aviation, ask a group of 'n' pilots a seemingly straightforward question and get at least 3n answers!:}

I believe there are only 2 opinions being expressed here.

Simplistically these are:

On the one hand various people (myself included) are suggesting that each situation of engine failure is different and a "mayday" call is just one of many tools in the captain's toolbox;

On the other hand some people are trying to insist that the captain has no discretion about handling an event onboard his/her aircraft.

Remember, the original question wasn't about EFATO (my bolding below).

If you lose a donkey whilst pootling along in your twin, do you declare a mayday ?

FF :ok:

[Fuji Abound]

Being light, with no structural damage, and only a short journey I didn't even declare a PAN - it WAS NOT an emergency. I advised ATC of the scenario, told them there were no other problems with the aircraft and carried on.

But how did ATC react?

Was the approach effectively "cleared" for you?

If, on the approach, a go around had proved necessary because another aircraft was slow to depart what would you have done?

Flight crew can declare emergencies at two levels: Pan and Mayday. A Pan call concerns the safety of an aircraft, or of a person on board, where immediate assistance is not required. A Mayday call is the more serious. A Mayday call does not necessarily indicate that the aircraft is in imminent danger but that the crew requires urgent attention from the air traffic controller.

This is what Lord Oldham said in the House when asked.

I wonder what definitions we each have in mind?

[Bravo73]

Just a quick re-cap for DFC et al:

1.2.1 The states of emergency are classified as follows:

a) Distress A condition of being threatened by serious and/or imminent danger and of requiring immediate assistance.
b) Urgency A condition concerning the safety of an aircraft or other vehicle, or of some person on board or within sight, but does not require immediate assistance.
So my money's with Chilli, rustle et al. If anything, declare a PAN (to warn ATC that things aren't quite hunky dory). If the second engine should go, then declare MAYDAY.

[Ambulance G-BLNW]

All you need to do is ANC. :)

Aviate = Fly aeroplane
Navigate = Diversion/MSA etc
Communicate = MADAY then if under control safely Down grade to PanPan :ok:

[FlyingForFun]

The video of the airliner is very interesting, I've never seen that before. Very well handled.

Incidentally, I would consider that it backs up my original post. There was a fire, therefore it's a Mayday. Fire does nasty things to materials, and I have no idea whether any structural damage has been caused, so for me, it's a Mayday every time, even if the fire has gone out.

But, as Fuji says, it makes no difference anyway, because ATC will take their own view on how serious the incident is. I remember a few years ago when I had a sticky fuel drain on a C172. It appeared to be closed, and did not drip or leak on the ground, but on rotation the extra air pressure under the wing forced it open, and we saw a slow, steady stream of fuel coming out of the drain. I did not consider it an emergency - we had full tanks of fuel and weren't going to run out, and the fuel that was escaping was vapourising and not causing any concern. With hindsight, that was probably a bad call - in the same situation again, I would declare a Mayday (because I couldn't really be sure of either of those two things). But, in any case, I just told ATC that we'd be returning with a suspected fuel leak, could we please have a visual circuit. And guess what they did? Cleared me to land on any runway, and sent the fire trucks out to meet me. Absolutely the correct thing to do, regardless of what calls I may or may not have made.

FFF
--------------

[stickandrudderman]

Yet another thread that's really a discussion about egos........
"I'm right and you're wrong"
"No, no, I'm right and you're wrong"
"No, no, I'm right and so's my wife!"

PLEASE STOP BITCHING. YOU'RE LIKE A BUNCH OF OLD LADIES AT BINGO!

Remember: there's no such thing as a good or a bad decision, there's just decisions.
However, NOT MAKING ONE AT ALL IS BAD!

[High Wing Drifter]

FFF,

I agree with your personal critique from your description of your fuel scenario. I don't believe it is up to ATC to decide how the situation should be handled, but in the absence of any clear instructions from the pilot, they can be trusted to make the sensible decision on your behalf. But I don't believe that is the point.

Bravo,

a) Distress A condition of being threatened by serious and/or imminent danger and of requiring immediate assistance.For the scenario we are discussing here, I believe that a useless engine on a twin does required immediate assistance, it is a distinct threat to the safety of the aircraft and certain measures should be put in place to mitigate. I can understand why people believe that a Mayday is a sledgehammer to crack a nut, but I suspect there is a distinct possibility that the size of the nut is often times not fully appreciated.

[Bravo73]

Bravo,
For the scenario we are discussing here, I believe that a useless engine on a twin does required immediate assistance, it is a distinct threat to the safety of the aircraft and certain measures should be put in place to mitigate. I can understand why people believe that a Mayday is a sledgehammer to crack a nut, but I suspect there is a distinct possibility that the size of the nut is often times not fully appreciated.

HWD,

In this scenario, I don't think that losing an engine requires a automatic 'MAYDAY'. If all other things remain equal (and I had no reason to believe that the cause of failure might lead to a failure of the second power unit ie contaminated fuel or icing for example), then I am now effectively flying a 'single'. I might be performance limited for certain flight profiles, but it's still a 'single'.

Does flying a single engine aircraft necessitate a 'MAYDAY' call? ;)




And just to refresh, the 'scenario' makes no mention of VMC or IMC. My presumption is that 'pootling' implies nice, VMC conditions.

[rodthesod]

My God - this is a Private Flying forum!

The guy asked a simple question and received all the options he needs in the first and third responses. What is the purpose of this ongoing debate; to totally confuse and demoralise him?

I think a lot of posters here need to grow up and K.I.S.S. - save the CRM discussions for a more appropriate place.

[Fuji Abound]

My God - this is a Private Flying forum!

Yet another thread that's really a discussion about egos........

Hmmm, unfortunately life isnt black or white, that is why these discussions take place.

Egos, maybe, but that is part of flying, and best you understand it is, so when the fella's ego in the seat next to you gets the better of the safety of the flight you have a chance to spot it.

.. .. .. if you dont want to take part in the discussion, thats fine,

.. .. .. if you have nothing useful to contribute .. .. ..

.. .. .. and if you want one word answers, then Flyer is the place for you :).

[Bravo73]

My God - this is a Private Flying forum!

rod,

The aircraft doesn't know (or care) about the type of licence that the driver holds.


(Or does that belong somewhere in the 'Naff sayings' thread...?:})

[rustle]

Remember: there's no such thing as a good or a bad decision, there's just decisions.
However, NOT MAKING ONE AT ALL IS BAD!

What bizarre parallel universe do you occupy where there are no good or bad decisions? :hmm:

Shutting down the wrong engine sounds like an inexcusably bad decision;

Overflying instead of landing at a suitable airfield when engine-out sounds like a bad decision in a light twin;

Leaving the PIC to decide whether any situation is a "mayday" or "PAN" (rather than decide it in advance here) sounds like a good decision ;)

[Fuji Abound]

Looks like we've got ourselves a new moderator.....

Fraid not, just my opinion, much like yours I suppose.

Sorry to be so forthright but I feel that neither of these posts contriubuted anything at all to the discussion, and they could probably have been made on pretty much any other thread on PPRuNe. For that reason I thought these comments were pointless and it would have been far better to just not take part.

Thinking again about this thread it does seem to me there is a reasonably subtle different between a pan and a mayday, if not in the precise meaning, certainly in the way ATC react.

My single pan in a sep produced a full ATC response with fire engines in hot pursuit down the runway.

On balance I can see Rustle and others point of view - but I still feel that you may as well have the full attention of AT. After all how often do engine failures occur in a twin or for that matter other events "justifying" a mayday. Have the full attention of AT on hopefully the very few occasions it happens and for sure if I am in the area it will not inconvenience me one bit. I will just be say a silent prayer that it all works out well for you. :)

[Bravo73]

Fuji,

Shy was talking about rodthesod.


(Look at your respective post times.:p)

[Fuji Abound]

Fuji,

Shy was talking about rodthesod.


Sorry. ----

[rustle]

DO NOT TAKE CHANCES WITH YOUR SAFETY, IF IN DOUBT, DECLARE AN EMERGENCY!!

Don't think anyone is arguing with this, are they?

Myself (and a couple of others) are merely pointing out that one engine inop isn't automatically a "mayday", and may not even be a "pan".

If there's a doubt about amount of damage, flyability, making it back, existing circuit traffic, etc., etc., then a "mayday" will clear the traffic and get you the attention you need. No argument.

If there's no doubt about amount of damage, flyability, making it back, existing circuit traffic, etc., etc., then it ain't a "mayday".

This isn't bravado, it's just reaching a different conclusion when presented with similar circumstances.

BTW, coming here and calling people "dummies" because they don't subscribe to your opinion doesn't generally help either.

[Life's a Beech]

DFC

You quote the pilot on the video who rightly called a Mayday. He and I are both commercial pilots who fly regularly and practice single-engine approaches and go-arounds every six months. The difference is that he had a catastrophic engine failure on departure, probably with a full pax load, which should always be a mayday on a twin unless you are perf A and very light. I had an engine stop producing thrust, at 4000 feet on 10 nm final for a decent length runway with two qualified pilots on board (a single-crew aircraft). Once I established that I could make the runway I did not "require immediate assistance", apart from the priority given anyway to a pan.

[bookworm]

Myself (and a couple of others) are merely pointing out that one engine inop isn't automatically a "mayday", and may not even be a "pan".
But rustle, if you don't declare a Mayday, how is ATC going to know that it has to launch a big green rescue helicopter with Charlton Heston aboard in a spirited but flawed air-to-air rescue attempt? You'll be bravely fighting the controls on your own without all that extra help that ATC can provide you with to keep your aircraft flying the right way up... :rolleyes:

[Bravo73]

I hope that you don't mind if I answer on your behalf, rustle.


What possible logical justification can anyone make for not making a Mayday all?

If the situation isn't "a condition of being threatened by serious and/or imminent danger and of requiring immediate assistance."

Read my previous posts (if you haven't already), but IMHO (and rustle's, from what I can tell), a power unit failure whilst in the cruise in VMC shouldn't warrant an automatic 'MAYDAY' call.

[Fuji Abound]

But rustle, if you don't declare a Mayday, how is ATC going to know that it has to launch a big green rescue helicopter with Charlton Heston aboard in a spirited but flawed air-to-air rescue attempt? You'll be bravely fighting the controls on your own without all that extra help that ATC can provide you with to keep your aircraft flying the right way up...

Tongue in cheek I know, one wonders how much help ATC can really provide, fly the aircraft, manage the problem, thats going to save you in most cases.

However, I have witnessed three pans. Everyone who hears the call is on the look out for the aircraft. The airways are silenced. Every possible assistance that ATC could provide comes your way. In a non controlled enviroment everyone is doing their best to stay out of your way at a time when your eyes may well not be outside the cockpit. Nothing is too much trouble.

If something unexpected happens on landing the fire and rescue services are prepared.

I lost a very good friend of mine in a light aircraft accident. The medics reckon both people were alive at the crash site and if they had been found more quickly may well have lived. They never declared a mayday or pan although talking to the AIB it was clear they knew they had a problem some considerable while before.

I agree with Astro - how can you ever be certain you know the full extent of the problem? How do you know there is no collateral damage? How do you know the problem is not about to cascade? If you have made the mayday, at least that is one less thing to worry about if the problem escalates.

I guess you are never going to be criticised for calling a mayday, but might you be for not? Captaincy it is, and in an emergency isnt that about taking every precaution at your disposal?

[bookworm]

What possible logical justification can anyone make for not making a Mayday all?


Let me offer another angle.

Two distinct priorities of emergency exist for a reason. If two aircraft have emergencies at the same time, the prioritisation may be necessary. As someone who has spent a long time flying behind one engine by design, if I were able to fly satisfactorily with one engine out in a twin, I'd be uncomfortable about competing for ATS resource against an aircraft where immediate ATS assistance could really make a difference to life or death. That is the potential "cost".

If, as would usually be the case, I am the only aircraft with an emergency at the time, why does it matter whether I declare a Mayday or a Pan? ATC will devote itself to helping me regardless of the status I choose.

If you have to think about whether declaring an emergency is necessary, the decision is already made for you, just do it!

That is naive. Wherever you choose to set your threshold for asking for extra help, there are always cases at the margin. If you can honestly say that you've never thought about declaring an emergency and decided not to do so, you clearly don't do enough thinking when you fly... ;)

[Fuji Abound]

If two aircraft have emergencies at the same time, the prioritisation may be necessary.

Now that would be a really bad day - or moment - has it ever happened other than where two aircraft were involved in a collision?

[Gonzo]

I see some here are under the understandable misapprehension that the emergency response initiated by ATC will depend entirely upon whether a PAN or MAYDAY is declared.....this is not the case.

Airfields have varying levels of response which range from the fire crews opening the doors to the station and putting their snooker cues down, to a full response by airfield and local emergency services, and local NHS hospital Casualty departments being put on alert. We decide this by you, the pilot, telling us what's wrong, and in many cases our emergency orders are definitive in the category of response to certain a/c problems, such as 50% power loss on multi-engine a/c, or any hydraulic problems.

[Bravo73]

I have a challenge for you and anyone else who seems reluctant to declare an emergency.

I bet a fiver that you can't find anywhere in writing from an official source where a pilot has been criticised for declaring a Mayday.

<snip due to irrelevance>

Thanks for the challenge, Av, but please remember what the topic of discussion actually is: should a 'MAYDAY' call be made in the case of an engine failure in a twin?

We're not disputing declaring an emergency (in the form of a 'PAN'), if the situation warrants it.

We're just saying (again, as you don't seem to be actually reading our posts), that it doesn't automatically necessitate a 'MAYDAY' call.

Ok?

[bookworm]

has it ever happened other than where two aircraft were involved in a collision?

Certainly. I'm not sure it's as infrequent as you might think. I remember an occasion coming through the TMA when there were delays because two emergencies were being dealt with at Stansted.

But the point is, if there aren't two emergencies, why does it matter whether I use the words Pan Pan or Mayday?

[bookworm]

I personally declared two Maydays last year; one was tech related, and the other was due to a sick pax. ... if for example another Mayday call was made on the frequency with a rather more serious problem, for example smoke in the cockpit, putting all souls on board at risk, ATC will prioritise just as they are trained to.

Do you really expect ATC to assess the priority of emergencies rather than those in the cockpit?

Let me flip the situation around:

The left engine on my light twin has a habit of running hot. The right engine does not. On this particular trip, the problem with the left engine appears to have got worse, and, as I'm risk averse, I shut down the left engine as a precaution against a more serious failure. I'm holding quite happily OEO at 5000 ft overhead my destination airport, and have declared an emergency. Now you come along with your sick passenger. Who should land first? Would ATC see it that way if I had broadcast a Mayday?

[BackPacker]

'been reading the thread with interest. Not being a twin driver, but a single, every failure is an automatic emergency. And you know what, I think that's actually very easy. Let me explain.

The posts I have read so far have all centered around what the outside world is going to do when they hear your mayday or pan call. Will ATC clear the airways for you or not, will the fire brigade come out of the shed in full force, will everybody else shut up and look out for you. That's all very fine and dandy, but there's one other thing that a mayday call will achieve.

And that is to convince yourself that you have an emergency.

We've all heard the phrase "the second engine just takes you to the scene of the accident". There's also a lot of other stories, non-aviation related, of people who got into trouble in arctic or desert condition and despite the setbacks/loss of all drinking water/malfunctioning of critical equipment/whatever, decided to carry on with the original plan. Or rather, did not decide for themselves to treat their situation as an emergency, kept on doing things towards achieving the original goal and died trying. If they would have declared themselves in an emergency (even if they had no means of telling anybody else) and then acted upon that declaration - meaning from that point on the only priority is survival - they would have lived.

One example. There's a movie about a couple with a young child who had to cross the Rocky Mountains (I think) in inclement weather. All passes were closed, except for one, they thought. They missed a "road closed" sign, got stuck in a snowdrift, car could not get out etc. Instead of the guy walking five or so miles *back* to civilization, he continued for I don't know how many miles forward, over the snowed-in pass, on foot. Spent a couple of days bunched up in a hole somewhere, several fingers and toes frozen off. I don't recall the movie exactly, but I do recall that civilization was only about five miles back down the road. If they would just have talked between themselves, came to an understanding that it was an emergency, assessed their situation, abandoned the original plan (which was to get over the mountains), and looked at what other options were available and sensible, I doubt whether the situation would have warranted the making of a movie.

So declaring an emergency has a very important psychological aspect. And that's that from that point on, your survival is the most important consideration. Saving the airplane is secondary. Exorbitant landing fees and a lot of paperwork because you landed at Heathrow without proper clearance and handing arranged - don't worry about it. Reaching your original destination - who cares. As long as you can walk away from the situation.

And as I said, if the donkey stops in a single, the decision to declare a mayday is easy. The hardest decisions are when the situation is not so clear cut. And in such a situation, if you do declare a mayday anyway, to me it means you've made your mind up. You are going to treat the situation as an emergency and make survival your first priority.

[rustle]

OK, back to the original question, the answer is yes, yes and yes again. You have lost 50% of your power and 80% of your performance if I remember my ATPLs correctly. The aircraft may not be able to climb at all under circumstances (let's say you need to divert because some numpty doing circuits has just broke the nosewheel on his Cherokee on landing). There may be secondary damage not immediately apparent. The cause of the engine failure may also effect the remaining power plant.

It may be true in some light twins that 50% of engines equals 80% of excess power required for a climb, but not all ;)

I think we're getting a bit lost in the semantics here.

My default response is that it isn't a "mayday" until it becomes a "mayday", whereas others have a default response that immediately an engine fails it is a "mayday".

I don't think there are many miles difference between the two views, no-one wants to die for sake of keying the mike button, it is just a differing default.

Commercial SOPS have their place and are excellent picking-grounds for private SOPS as well - but we shouldn't follow them all blindly: We'd never get airborne in the private world as we don't carry enough CC for starters. :p

BTW apologies for the delayed response but I had to see if the "Condle in the Wind" woman got through tonight :rolleyes::8:O

[Fuji Abound]

Certainly. I'm not sure it's as infrequent as you might think.

OK, so lets assume it is more frequent than I had imagined .. .. ..

so there are two aircraft on frequency both "working" a mayday.

So whats the chances of them both arriving at the runway at the same time, even if ATC dont prioritise?

I appreciate ATC do not want a blocked runway and that may be a factor in prioritising, but I would far rather they do their job in terms of assessing who is most at risk, and who should go where, and leave me to manage the aircraft - after all I am not sure I want anything else to worry about.

In short maybe your argument actually supports declaring a mayday.

[Bravo73]

the twin engined aircraft I fly doesn't lose 50% power in the event of a single engine shutdown

Me neither.

And I'm not even sure that I would need the runway to be cleared in the event of an emergency landing... :cool:


:E

[englishal]

We're talking about light twins and being a "private flying" forum not nescessarily commercial ops. We have a few posters who have lots of experience, and a few who have maybe done their ATPL exams and know it all as usual, and then get arsey if someone disagrees with them.

In the PRIVATE world, we have choices. We can CHOOSE to declare a mayday or NOT, depending on the situation. In the COMMERCIAL world you don't have choices, but company SOPs. In the airline video, they declared a mayday. Were they in grave danger? Not at all, these aeroplanes are designed to fly on 1 engine & once shut down the popping and exhause flames stopped. Of course you have 200 souls in the back, so company SOPs (and no doubt legislation) dictate you declare a mayday, and being a far more complex aeroplane than a light twin, it is hard to visually assess the amount of damage done so a mayday was appropriate, and also gave the FO something to do other than operate the gear and flaps.

If I am flying a twin, and I shut down one engine, I maybe able to climb quite happily. Where is the grave danger now? Sure I may urgently want to get on the ground, but my life is not in danger at the moment - I am flying along ok, gaining altitude, so now I have to remember my training and make the best of a bad situation. Of course if the engine lets go, takes part of the wing with it and causes a fire it is a completely different matter...

Common sense, if you feel the need to declare mayday, then do so, if not then you don't have to.....ATC can't do a whole lot on the ground other than move people out of the way.

Bye.

[Bravo73]

englishal,

Well said. :D:D:D

[Fuji Abound]

In a multi crew turbine aircraft you have a surplus of power and resources on your side. You have a wider range of engine monitoring, fire suppression and redundancy at your disposal. Finally you have two pilots who are current and practiced in handling an engine failure. In spite of all that, the standard procedure is to declare a matday.

Yes, I hear you say, because commercial operators will bias their procedures towards safety and towards standardising the response of their pilots, but I don’t think for a moment that negates a respect for their response to an engine failure.

[bookworm]

Not being a twin driver, but a single, every failure is an automatic emergency.

Every failure? The clock? The VSI maybe? How about the second altimeter?

How about intermittent problems? Let's say the engine misfires once, just coughs a little (maybe, did I really hear it cough?) and recovers. Are you going to divert to Heathrow if that happens to be the nearest place with a hard runway? Thousands of pounds of costs and huge disruption for the commercial traffic -- hey, don't worry about it, you might have an engine problem. Well "As long as you can walk away from the situation". "Your survival is the most important consideration".

That's all very fine and dandy, but there's one other thing that a mayday call will achieve.

And that is to convince yourself that you have an emergency.

Well if that's the case, is it OK if I make the call without pressing the PTT then?

[High Wing Drifter]

Not sure what the point is of supposing the experience of posters. Somebody who knows only the theory has plenty contribute IMHO. To coin another naff saying "The best pilots make the worst mistakes".

With regard to commercial vs private ops, I don't see the distinction other than SOPs are an amalgam of experience of considerable depth. Not some contrived H&S initiative.

The common sense angle is the usual backstop when all other attempts at reasoning have failed ;) When the term is used it usually implies that you don't know the answer to the problem, but that you can arrive at an unverifiable good decision by interpolating what you do know based on some subjective values (hopefully you get my drift, words aren't my strong point). The Mayday advocates are saying that there are numerous factors that can mess things up and that as an individual in a non-normal situation with a failed critical component that at best adversely affects the controllability and performance of the aircraft, your first port of call is for assistance to give you room to understand the problem and confirm that the failure is as normally non-normal as much as one can hope.

[Fuji Abound]

Every failure? The clock? The VSI maybe? How about the second altimeter?

Hmm, I thought he was talking about the engine.

Thousands of pounds of costs and huge disruption for the commercial traffic -- hey, don't worry about it, you might have an engine problem.

Never black or white, but I know one thing for sure, if Heathrow looks to me like the best option the fact it is Heathrow is not going to put be off one bit. I am afraid Heathrow holds nothing special for me - it is just another airport.

With regard to commercial vs private ops, I don't see the distinction other than SOPs are an amalgam of experience of considerable depth. Not some contrived H&S initiative.

Very well put. I dont thing SOPs have been too contaminated by the yellow jacket brigade.

[rustle]

FTAOD, all my answers assume a fixed wing twin.

ShyTorque and Bravo73 are you answering on the basis of rotary?

[Bravo73]

ShyTorque and Bravo73 are you answering on the basis of rotary?

rustle,

I'm answering on the basis of flying a twin. The twin I fly just happens to rotary winged. (The clue is in my profile!;))

(The only real difference, from my point of view, is that I won't necessarily need a runway to make an emergency landing.)

[High Wing Drifter]

I'm not sure I understand how a twin turbine helicopter compares to a discussion on operating a twin piston fixed wing :hmm:

[Bravo73]

I'm not sure if either the engine type or wing specification was ever really established.

If you lose a donkey whilst pootling along in your twin, do you declare a mayday ?

Just the usual presumptions on the part of many posters.


Anyway, does it really matter? The principles are the same. (And, yes, that question is rhetorical!) ;)

[BackPacker]

I'm not sure if either the engine type or wing specification was ever really established.
If you lose a donkey whilst pootling along in your twin, do you declare a mayday?
Just the usual presumptions on the part of many posters.

True, but the question was asked in the Private Flying forum. How many private flyers fly a twin-turbine helicopter, privately, as opposed to twin piston fixed wing?

Doesn't mean that twin-turbine rotary pilots are not welcome here. But if they answer from their own expertise, without making it clear, we do get confused. Equally, what would a behavioural scientist, psychiatrist, vet or criminal investigator say about:

If you lose a donkey whilst pootling along in your twin?

[Bravo73]

Yes, Backpacker, but my point is that engine or wing types doesn't really matter.

A twin is still a twin, regardless of how the wings are configured. The principles are still the same.



I could also point out that the question was directed at 'twin drivers'. But I'm not that much of a b@stard so I won't... :E

[rustle]

rustle,

I'm answering on the basis of flying a twin. The twin I fly just happens to rotary winged. (The clue is in my profile!;))

I know. I checked, hence the clarification to those who didn't :)

[Fuji Abound]

Bravo73 - fine, but I am not about to check everyone's profile before understanding better their posts.

Your contribution is interesting but I have to say for one that I would now read your contribution in a totally different light.

I know very little about rotary flying, but I would have to say that your options in the event of an engine failure appear vastly greater than for us fixed wing drivers as to make its relevance to the fixed wing discussion rather less apparent.

[rustle]

I think checking a poster's profile is a reasonable exercise if you either strongly disagree with a poster or if you strongly agree.

ShyTorque's pseudonym is also a bit of a clue. ;)

For those posters with no profile (or very sketchy information) the "value" of their contribution in any particular thread has to be biased by their previous postings: Someone who usually posts crap* may have a valid point [in a particular thread] but it will be lost/ignored/dismissed in their noise.

* Either meaningless drivel, or just plain wrong...

Now what were you saying, FA? :}

[High Wing Drifter]

This thread has now gone from the sublime to the ridiculous :\ Shame, twas an engaging debate.

[Kit d'Rection KG]

The usual high quality informed debate here... :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

If you are ever going to need to know, you'll have been trained, and so your instructor will have given you guidance. :cool:

Some 'experts', DFC being notable amongst them, come along with their 'expertise' and simply disappoint... :hmm:

Sticking with aircraft on which I have training experience (some of it current):

Twin Jets of all descriptions: No, not a mayday, but definitely a pan, when you have time.
Twin turboprops: No, unless feathering is a problem.
Twin pistons: No, if you can sustain flight in safe conditions (eg, remain above MSA in IMC, or carry out a safe visual recovery), otherwise yes.

If you are, or think you might be, on fire, then mayday it is (the majority of my mayday calls have been for fire or smoke). :eek:

That said, if you're operating a twin piston, then you'll make sure that in the event of engine failure in unfavourable circumstances, you'll either crash in a controlled fashion or climb away, won't you? (Well you will, if you want me to sign your paperwork). Performance E aircraft are not performance A aircraft, and should not be flown as such. :)

[Kit d'Rection KG]

Oh, and Bravo73, you're right that a twin is just a twin, as long as you're happy that the distinction between <aircraft which can land vertically in a 2D clearing> and <aircraft which can't> is a given, in the debate (which it wasn't - but that's not going to worry your little mind, is it?).
:yuk:

[Fuji Abound]

The usual high quality informed debate here...

Twin pistons: No, if you can sustain flight in safe conditions (eg, remain above MSA in IMC, or carry out a safe visual recovery), otherwise yes.

Hmm, the trouble is to have a debate you have to justify why you would or wouldnt do certain things, but I suppose we could make it all a lot simpler by just answering "yes" or "no".

For those posters with no profile (or very sketchy information) the "value" of their contribution in any particular thread has to be biased by their previous postings: Someone who usually posts crap* may have a valid point [in a particular thread] but it will be lost/ignored/dismissed in their noise.

So very true .. .. .. and your point was?

That's only true to some extent, bearing in mind that many helicopters can't hover on one engine. It takes more power to carry out a normal landing than to fly S + L

In which circumstance your only option is to land asap. So do you call a mayday before landing in the hope the landing turns out well or simply hope that it will?

I am off to do my MEP renewal this week so this should provide an interesting point for discussion - if my examiner doesnt fail me for chatting and flying at the same time :).

[Kit d'Rection KG]

Well done... You found the 'quote' button!

No-one asked for a debate, someone asked for the right answers, so there they are!

Oh, and rest assured, if you need to know my 'profile', someone will tell you... :rolleyes:

Finally, I am moved to point out that the vast majority of helicopters will hover on one engine...

Right from the R22 to the world's 'safest single-engined aircraft', the Jetranger, to take examples from my log book alone...

:E:E:E

[Bravo73]

Bravo73 <snip> that's not going to worry your little mind, is it?

Now, now Kit. Play fair. There's no need to get personal about this.


But I see that your reading lessons are coming along so well:


(The only real difference, from my point of view, is that I won't necessarily need a runway to make an emergency landing.)


:ugh:

[Kit d'Rection KG]

My reading lessons are fine, thanks. In several languages.

Off-airport landings are often perfectly survivable in piston twins, and when training and checking in such aircraft, I will brief (or expect candidates to brief) appropriate plans for off-airport landings in the event of power loss at less than blue line speed and/or with gear or flap down.

Alles Klar?

[Fuji Abound]

No-one asked for a debate, someone asked for the right answers, so there they are!


Yes


(This bit is only added because I have just discovered this forum doesnt accept yes and no answers :))

[FullyFlapped]

RodtheSod:
My God - this is a Private Flying forum!
The guy asked a simple question and received all the options he needs in the first and third responses. What is the purpose of this ongoing debate; to totally confuse and demoralise him?

Hey. don't worry about me, my friend - my current count is one Mayday, one Pan and several "ATC - I have a problem and need an immediate return" calls, and believe me, I know where I stand in this great debate.

I have a twin rating, but fly almost exclusively SEPs. I am firmly in the "it's up to the pilot" camp, and I do not believe that "every problem is an emergency" or whatever the quote was. Strangely, only yesterday I had a seriously rough-running engine after take off, and went straight back in without a Mayday. Was that wise ? Well, buggered if I know, but I'd told ATC what was going on, and got the clearance I wanted without using "that word".

Last year, I had a fairly serious problem after taking off from Blackpool. My belief was that the 'plane was flying well enough to get me back in, and I know what the problem was and that it wasn't likely to get any worse. In other words, I wanted me (and the PAX) on the ground, but believed we'd get there under control.

I called a "Pan", and reported my conditions and requirements. Almost immediately, ATC came back and asked "Are you delcaring an emergency?". Well, was I ?
I repeated my conditions and requirements, and said that if they wanted me to call Mayday to get me straight in, I would. (I may have been a little "flowery" with my language at that point ...:p). Next thing I heard was ATC shifting everythng out of my way : excellent service.

However, it has left me wondering about the "mayday"/"pan" thing ... do ATC treat them any differently ?

Anyway, I guess the answer to my original question is "it depends ..." : and isn't that the way on Proon !

FF :ok:

[Life's a Beech]

Have any of the people advocating an automatic Mayday actually read the definition of the Mayday call?

The difference between that and a Pan is "requiring immediate assistance". In some situations (such as a large commercial aircraft that has suddenly become a single, i.e. not really allowed to be where it is) then immediate assistance is required for a diversion. No matter the skill and experience of the crew, a complicated bit of machinery has to be prepared for landing, with crew and passenger briefings and actions. Any assistance from the ground is really useful.

On the other hand a private twin has just become a really under-powered private single. No reason, other than lack of experience in handling at low speeds that it should be more dangerous than a tricky approach in any other single. Sure it is not a normal condition, and a pan call is the minimum, but in a failure in the cruise or very early (or very late) on approach immediate assistance might not be required. If in doubt call mayday. If you have the experience to know you don't need to call mayday, call pan.

It does happen that an ATSU has multiple emergencies, or other considerations that could become emergencies. Over calling your own situation could make someone else's more threatening.

I called pan for a small problem, not a threat to my remaining airborne. I was asked if I could hold for an aircraft with low fuel state (Vampire - normal condition). Had I over called as a mayday, he would have been stuck with a divert. Not a problem, until his diversion airfield goes black, or out of crosswind limits. I might have taken away one of his three options, and left him under silk.

It might be apocryphal but surely everyone has heard the one about the F16 who calls for priority approach with low fuel state, to be told to hold for a B52 with an engine failure.

"Oh, no! The dreaded seven-engine approach".

[Life's a Beech]

That's only true to some extent, bearing in mind that many helicopters can't hover on one engine. It takes more power to carry out a normal landing than to fly S + L In which circumstance your only option is to land asap. So do you call a mayday before landing in the hope the landing turns out well or simply hope that it will?You are misunderstanding helicopters. The aircraft is flying perfectly well on one. They do at MTOM. Have been in the sim and told not to react as instructor turns off every major system in turn - no drama. Little reaction from the airframe except to aux hydraulics.

Typically flown at about 70 knots single-engine, min power speed, that is faster than the cruise for a Schwiezer 300! The remaining (turbine) engine is also far more reliable than the 300's single piston. So why is there a requirement for landing asap on a private flight?

Also what do you mean by "asap"? "As soon as possible" is often wrong. The meaning of that to me when taught to fly rotary was to put down in the nearest suitable site. This might be correct if I was concerned about the other powerplant, but if not then that would not usually be my choice. "As soon as practicable" is often better for an engine failure on a twin - land at the nearest suitable aviation facility (how we plank fliers would define "as soon as possible", I suppose), in this case one with some sort of runway. The reason for this is that the aviation facility has services, and needing a run-on landing I want somewhere that had a known smooth, level surface for the purpose.

The single-engine cruise is no more a hazard for the helicopter than an aeroplane, so why treat it differently and introduce new hazards?

[Fuji Abound]

I know almost nothing about rotary and was simply responding to the suggestions by you both.

I am very happy to be "put right" and also for you expert input.

Thank you.

[CamelhAir]

My thoughts from the commercial jet camp:
Declare a Mayday first. You need to get noticed asap by ATC and you need to do this before you've had time to analyse the reason for the failure. For example if contaminated fuel was the reason, you can expect the shortly loose the other one. Until you have assessed the situation, you need to err on the side of caution and assume you are in need of immediate assistance.
Once the engine is secured and the problem analysed, you may decide that you are no longer in need of immediate assistance, at which time you can downgrade to a Pan.
I can't understand why people (including commercial pilots) are reluctant to declare a Mayday. You need to stack the odds in your favour at all times, the facility for a Mayday is there so use it.

And if nothing else if you declare a Mayday on 121.5 it may stop all those d1ckheads screaming "you're on guard" at you any time anyone opens there mouth on 121.5.

[Jambo Jet]

This is actually quite a good little thread; aside from the bickering.
The best thing to come from it though is that each individual should have a fair idea of what is a "Mayday" for him. If a loss of a donk or even just a loss of power from one leaves you feeling in peril then by all means call a Mayday.
The best time to discuss what you consider is a mayday is on the ground talking to your mates rather that "What was that?".
In the end calling mayday won't change the fact that you've lost your donk.
If SIHT does happen then ...
What you should be doing is sorting out the drills, getting the airey in a safe configuration, deciding your course of actions and then telling someone what you want to do.
The benefits of telling ATC "hey I've got a problem here" rather than "Mayday" is that you cannot escalate a Mayday.
Lets say you are recovering to an en-route airfield with 1 shut down and you have calmly told ATC what you want to do. And then something ATC wants you to do is different than what you want to do. (Hypothetically, and more likely when English is not the first language of the controller) Even after you have now explained to them again what you wish to do they dither a bit. Now call Mayday and do it anyway.
Example; I was flying back from Brindisi, Italy at FL190 when I lost pressurization. My cabin was climbing. I advised ATC that I have a pressurization problem and might need descent. Couldn't fix it. Cabin now through 13000', I requested descent. ATC - Standby - silence.
Requested again. ATC - coordinating standby.
Mayday, Now descending to FL100.
Its a tool to get what you want, but remember you're on your own still.
Plan for your emergencies so that if and when they happen you are pretty sure you know what you are going to do.

[Fuji Abound]

JamboJet

I dont entirely following your logic about escalating.

If you first declare a mayday you "can do as you will" so no escalation is required or indeed possible.

If you first declare a pan, granted you can escalate to get what you want, but doesnt that put you in the same situation as if you had first called the mayday?

In short if you are in urgent need of have ATs full attention, why not just call a mayday in the first place, and downgrade if you are certain you have matters under control and no longer require their absolute attention and freedom to do as you wish.

In the event you can "downgrade" a mayday to a pan.

Sorry, all a little confused but I hope I have explained that adequately.

[Jambo Jet]

Fuji

It's all about how you feel the situation is going.

If you are in a single and you have lost the donk, and you are going down then "Mayday away, making sure they know your position and that you are forced landing"

but

With a twin there are lots of different situations that require ATC assistance and the loss of an engine is one. But if the otherone is working fine then just negociate. In the states pilots usually "Declare an emergency" or "Require a bit of priority" or "Urgency" and leave the "Mayday" until the fan has been really covered in sh*t. (ie lost one and the other feels poorly too)

Calling mayday is fine but I'm just advocating that perhaps you can get the same service without calling mayday, and leaving it for when you really have lost that paddle.

[High Wing Drifter]

Interesting reading, don't you think Fuji ;)

http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/pdf/aic/4P068.PDF

[Kit d'Rection KG]

My thoughts from the commercial jet camp:

Camel, you may have posted what they've been teaching you in a certain airline (should that, in fact, be a very uncertain airline?), but your ideas don't reflect the usual teaching in UK CAT operations.

Hang on, you don't work for a UK operator, do you?! :cool:

Anyhow, calling 'Mayday' for any little thing will get you onto the front page of the tabloids as fast as it gets you into the fleet management offices. If I were you, I'd reserve the big 'M' word for the big problems. Perhaps your colleagues in the LHS have a view on this?