Kestrel MAYDAY

[Carl Rawson]

Just coming out of MAN/EGCC last night and heard that MAN CTRL 134.425 had a Kestrel MAYDAY joining them. We kept a listen out but got transfered to LON a few minutes later.
Any news anyone?
Most of all. Everyone safe and sound I hope!

[Avman]

Posted 15:29 today.

last night bla bla bla etc.

Everyone safe and sound I hope!

No, hundreds killed, including scores of infants in school hit by aircraft. National press and tv have remained silent out of respect. :hmm:

[Double Zero]

Avman,

on the face of it your reply seems pretty crass. It would appear someone was either in trouble or at least deeply worried, so just because it didn't make the news ( i.e. a good outcome ) one should not take the P' & possibly deter the next guy, who really IS in trouble, from calling.

[Flintstone]

Oh, the drama :eek:

Somehow I doubt that when/if the sh!t hits the fan I'll consider what someone my or may not write on an internet forum before declaring a mayday, nor can I think of any other professional pilot who's likely to do so.


Purlleeeeeease :rolleyes:

[Carl Rawson]

Thanks for your support:ok:
I didn't even think it AVMAN warranted a reply.
I guess all was O.K. As I haven't seen any references to it in the media thus far.

[Avman]

Double Zero, I think you failed to see the point of my cynical post. I just found it odd for a professional pilot making an enquiry (no problem with that by the way) some 20 odd hours after hearing a MAYDAY call to end his question with "everyone safe and sound I hope". My point was that if there had been anything worth reporting it would have been splashed across the front pages of the press. I've seen other curious posters blasted by pilots for much less in these forums.

And then he comes back with:

I guess all was O.K. As I haven't seen any references to it in the media thus far.

Exactly!!! :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[oneowl]

Guys

I was the controller on Manch Wallasey last night when the Mayday was reluctantly declared. Nothing too exciting just the right engine showing absolutely no oil level whatsoever so the engine was shut down about 15 miles south of Nokin (possibly to protect the engine itself) which unfortunately triggers an automatic Mayday for all concerned. The aircraft was given a left hand circuit via Dayne and obviously got an expeditious arrival to land safely on 23. The guys up the front were textbook throughout.:D

[DooblerChina]

which unfortunately triggers an automatic Mayday for all concerned.

why? I would have thought a PAN to be more appropriate

Im not questioning the actions of the crew involved, just the above statement, did ATC action the MAYDAY?

[oneowl]

The aircraft was a Boeing 757-300 therefore a 50% loss of power is an automtic Mayday as far as ATC is concerned.

[Flap33]

I would assume it is an automatic MAYDAY because they had just lost 50% of their propulsion!!

A PAN, would IMHO, be sufficient for an aircraft with more than 2 engines assuming it was, as this seems to be, a precautionary shut-down.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<did ATC action the MAYDAY?>>

There is no special "action" other than providing separation from other traffic and assisting the aircraft in trouble as much as possible. Later on, airfield safety services would have been alerted if still required. That's it, no lights flash, no supervisors "take over"; the guy/lady wearing the electric hat just gets on with it...

[Spitoon]

This comes up from time to time so if you do a search you'll find more detail.

In the UK certainly, ATC has a variety of different categories of emergency that can be declared - none is called mayday or PAN. ATC decide, either on the basis of experience and professional judgement or procedures, what category to declare. ATC can declare an emergency even if the pilot does not make a mayday or PAN call. If a pilot does make an emergency call, ATC will certainly declare some level of emergency.

[CREAMER]

Why the reluctance from some people to put out a Mayday call? The Pan / Mayday dilemma is down to command choice but In the case of an engine failure / shut-down I don't think I would have a problem putting out a Mayday. It gets everyone thinking along the correct lines, gives focus and gives the Emergency Services something to do. In my experience they chomp at the bit to do something so you shouldn't feel guilty about putting them to some inconvenience (they would come out for a Pan anyway). If you later downgrade to Pan then you've already made your point and everyone will be there to help. Some places overseas might not get 'Pan' anyway.;):E:eek::ok:

[Double Zero]

As an experienced yachtie, and also having done a lot of flying ( unqualified ) sitting alongside the best Test Pilots, it strikes me as a 'Pan' call too, but if the rules say 'Mayday' then what the hell, as a previous poster said, it gives the airfield services something to do, and they're there in case the situation gets worse.

I'm saying this in the hope that it won't in some perverse way be held against the Captain's record - with large companies such as this, often with a 'human resources' dept. run by little girls, nothing would surprise me.

BTW When our airfileld's Personnel Dept changed into Human Resources - briefly, while they were dumping the most useful people, so I got away with it -, I asked them "why not go the whole hog and call it meat-based guidance & maintenance assets' ? "

I was met with a blank look - there's more to this story but I'll spare you for now.

[Starbear]

Nothing too exciting just the right engine showing absolutely no oil level whatsoever so the engine was shut down about 15 miles south of Nokin (possibly to protect the engine itself)Interesting point though, is that IF there are no other supporting parameters, zero oil quantity, is categorically not a reason for engine shutdown on RB211-535 as fitted to B7575 as per Boeing and RR operating instructions. e.g there is no QRH item.

However, crew may have reported just the basics at that stage with out elaboration and once the engine was shutdown, then a Mayday is quite correct IMHO.

[Atlantis]

It is quite feasible to have sufficient oil to keep the engine running normally, even though the indicated oil quantity is zero. This applies to more than just Rolls Royce engines. There have been previous instances of engine shutdowns unnecessarily. Of course, zero oil pressure is something different. If the oil filler cap has not been replaced, on some engines, venting can occur to the extent that enough oil will disappear to the extent of zero indicated quantity, but sufficient oil remains for the engine to operate.

[Double Zero]

Shirley,

If an engine is indicating no oil, it may or may not keep running, but the last thing one needs is something which may pack up or pick up; better to shut it down so one knows the situation ?

Also less damage to the afflicted engine, but that's a minor consideration.

[Herod]

The Captain's decision (and he is the only person able to make that decision) was to declare a Mayday. END OF ARGUMENT.

[M.Mouse]

Double Zero

The point being made is that, certainly according to our SOPS, an engine is not shutdown if the oil quantity reads zero and all other parameters remain normal.

[Old Fella]

As others have said, there is no reason to shut an engine down due to an indication of zero oil quantity IF oil pressure and oil temperature remains within limits. One would have to suppose that the operating crew would have been well aware of that and only reported loss of oil quantity to ATC. Whether a MAYDAY or PAN is declared is purely up to the crew and their assessment of the situation.

[TheGorrilla]

Why not? Any excuse for a bit of single engine practise. The guys probably had a sim coming up. :}

[Say again s l o w l y]

I don't understand why anyone would question a mayday call if you had to shut one engine down in a twin.

Skippers decision, Engine dead. Mayday please. You can always downgrade it if needs be.

[ATCO Two]

oneowl,

For an aircraft operating with 50% power, it is an automatic Full Emergency for ATC - NOT an automatic MAYDAY. Only the commander can declare a MAYDAY or PAN. Suggest you consult your LCE.

[Final 3 Greens]

PPL here, so please be gentle.

Isn't one difference between pan and mayday the runway state, as in pan doesn't guarantee a sterile runway and mayday does?

My personal experience only extends to light twins and I realise that these are very different to 757s, but were I on one engine, I would wish for a sterile runway, as I wouldn't fancy a one engined go around and diversion in the event of a runway incident.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Final 3 greens. At major airports, emergencies will be given priority but, inevitably, there will be traffic ahead; you simply cannot close a runway for an indefinite period. ATC will provide more separation to ensure a landing clearance but there is no instruction I was ever aware of which specified what you have described..

I think a good few people on here don't understand that Mayday and PAN are simply communication codes to indicate to ATC that a problem exists. Subsequent action taken by ATC to alert emergency services then depends on what the crew tell them about the problem.

I don't think any pilot would be criticised for calling a Mayday which was later found to be inappropriate. Better to be safe than sorry.

[TheGorrilla]

Mayday ensures radio silence from all other traffic (or it should), pan doesn't require this. Or at least it did when I studied for my atpl.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Surely radio silence does not happen unless ATC specifically advise, or maybe the rules have changed?

My CAP413 states: The aircraft in distress or the station in control of a distress incident may impose silence either on all stations in the area or on any particular station that interferes with distress transmissions. In either case, the message should take the following form....

To me that means radio silence is not automatic..

[TheGorrilla]

By radio silence i mean, all other aircraft on freq should not transmit unless spoken to by ATC. Sorry, should have made that clearer. So if you're a pilot and you hear someone declare a mayday, shut up!

[remoak]

This whole thread is just a giant "so what".

Nothing much happened, obviously, as it didn't make the news.

ATC and pilots operated according to SOPs, as they are trained to do. Why is anyone surprised about that?

Definitions of PAN and MAYDAY are freely available on the web, so no debate there. It's really very simple:

1.2 States of Emergency
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.
1.2.2 The pilot should make the appropriate emergency call as follows:
a) Distress ‘MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY’
b) Urgency ‘PAN PAN, PAN PAN, PAN PAN’

(http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP413.PDF)

Just parse the above according to your company SOPs...

[Final 3 Greens]

HD

Thanks for your comment.

With your background, you obviously know a lot more about this than I do.

There was a comment on the famous '3 engined 744" thread that implied the runway was "assured" for a mayday aircraft before it began it's approach, as no departing traffic would be allowed.

Possibly I misunderstood that comment, so now I am englightened, thanks for that.

[oneowl]

ATCO Two

Thank you for your kind words. Let's not get too technical between Full Emergencies and Maydays, my actions would have been no different regardless of what the pilot "declared" based on the information presented to me. For the record it was the pilot who declared the Mayday. Without being too blunt I will consult my LCE, may I suggest you Fu*k right off and we'll see how you cope in a similar situation:ok:

[A37575]

In the case of an engine failure / shut-down I don't think I would have a problem putting out a Mayday

It is called Crying Wolf. Sending out a Mayday for an engine shut down immediately denigrates the original true purpose of the call which is to advise all those listening on the frequency in use that the aircraft is in imminent danger of crashing/ditching and help is needed. Clearly the aircraft was not in a Mayday situation. A PAN call is quite sufficient unless you are a drama queen.

[Say again s l o w l y]

Rubbish. Coming out with comments like that are nonsense. Why did it fail? Is there a chance to other one is about to go? Have you got a fire? etc.etc.

Saying that all engine failures should only be a PAN is nonsense. It is the commanders decision at the time and none of us should second guess it. You do what is appropriate at that time. If that means you chuck in a MAYDAY, then so be it.

[in my last airline]

I wouldn't have shut the engine down unless other parameters confirmed the engine was cooking. Idle it, take the best bits of the Engine Failure/shutown checklist and the best bits of the One Engine Inop landing checklist and divert to nearest suitable airport. Pan call is sufficient according to my companies part A. I remember that a Boeing test flight crew had to shut an engine down whilst etops certing the 737ng (700). The engineer in the back requested the shutdown. They limped back to Boeing Field for nearly 3 hours on the remaining. They didn't tell atc anything just that they were operating at reduced speed. Obviously they could have cranked up the cooked engine again if needed. I really hope the kestrel engine was completely cooked and that other parameters were out of limits before they shutdown, or I believe they unneccesarily risked a lot of lives.

[4dogs]

Yes, the commander gets to decide what state of operations is notified - either, I am in a state of operations that is currently safe but requires expedited handling to minimise the exposure to further risk (Pan Pan), or, I am in immediate danger of losing control of my aircraft or the situation (mayday). It is possible that an engine failure may lead to the second operational state, but in most situations it should not - if it did, then the whole certification bases and training requirements would be based on a false premise.

I think that you carefully analyse what situation you face and make an appropriate and relevant call. I have severe reservations about this theory that a Mayday call is the universal call of first choice - I think that approach is as silly as that where people refuse to declare their situation at all!

[lomapaseo]

I am drawn to the continued arguments year after year on this board about the use of PAN vs MAYDAY.

I mean the arguments are endless and for what purpose?

If it is a subjective call then why argue about the actions of a specfic Captain after each event.

If it shouldn't be a subjective call then where is it so written?

Does something need to be changed? if so where?

[San Expiry]

4 dogs/A37575......Completely agree.

If the 'MAYDAY first' school (of which there are many) doesn't like the definition which is 100% clear, then (internationally) redefine it. Otherwise, using MAYDAY for less than MAYDAY (as per) definition devalues its meaning.

An twin-engined aircraft that is certified to operate on 1 engine, unless there are additional threatening circumstances, is not 'threatened by serious and/or imminent danger'. It's a PAN, IMHO :D I

[Silent Jumpseater]

If you are down to any one major system, (ie engine, hydraulics, electrics etc) on the Boeing then its a Mayday..period

[misd-agin]

In my last airline - how do other gauges tell you if the engines "cooking"?

Indication of oil pressure loss with normal oil pressure/temp is most likely a gauge/transmitter failure. If oil pressure/temp are not normal it indicates loss of oil quantity.

Are you saying with loss of oil pressure and high temperature you'd continue running the engine? And that you'd run the engine until it was "completely cooked" before shutting it down?

[Spitoon]

The business of any particular situation being an 'automatic mayday' or whatever, in both ATC and on the flightdeck, is a result of what might be called corporate nervousness. We are moving toward an environment where everything has a procedure - if the procedure is followed then all is OK (almost irrespective of the outcome).

In the old days we trained professionals with skills to assess a situation and to make appropriate decisions - admittedly the outcome wasn't always ideal but that's life. Nowdays there is so much pressure to shorten training that we are training people what to if X or Y or Z happens rather than giving them professional skills to understand what is happening and deal with it. But at least it doesn't take so long to train them.

In years gone by I recall being faced with a beautiful summer's day, a gentle warm breeze along the runway, and the pilot of a twin-engined aircraft reporting, "just for my information really, a precautionary engine shutdown as it joined the visual circuit downwind. I put a local standby on. No drama.

A rather different situation to another that I recall on a stormy night with a wet runway and stonking crosswind and a hint in the pilot's voice that he was working hard. That one got a full emergency.

Either way I was poised to assess any further information that came to light and upgrade the category of emergency (and corresponding actions that were taken on the airfield and elsewhere) if I believed it was necessary. I always thought that was one of the things I was paid for.

Today I don't have the ability to make such choices. 50% or more power loss and I have to put on a full emergency. I guess that's progress.

[lomapaseo]

Indication of oil pressure loss with normal oil pressure/temp is most likely a gauge/transmitter failure. If oil pressure/temp are not normal it indicates loss of oil quantity.

Are you saying with loss of oil pressure and high temperature you'd continue running the engine? And that you'd run the engine until it was "completely cooked" before shutting it down?



Oil starved bearings are very unlikely to lead to a severe engine damage at idle.

Oil pressure needs oil quantity, a properly sealed system and a working pump. Oil temperature needs a proper balance between internal friction and the oil cooling. I agree that too little oil is likely to affect the temperature It is readily corrected by reducing the RPM (friction) to idle. All are appropriate thoughts for a single flight. However be aware that continued faults over multiple flights may be an indicator of the oil seals allowing hot air into a bearing compartment and should be treated as likely to lead to an internal oil fire which can be very serious.

[in my last airline]

Agree totally. By 'cooked' I mean more than two parameters exceeding operating limits. If by idling the engine these values are exceeded then I would most probably shut it down.

On a slightly different note, does anyone think that crews sometimes act in a manner that they believe they are 'protecting' themselves and their licences but end up creating a riskier situation than they previusly had? You know, trying so hard to comply with all the rules, regs and SOP that theyvactually miss the woods for the trees.

[Tarisio]

With regard to mayday/pan, is there a difference in the extent that external local emergency services are alerted by ATC eg fire service, A&E departments?

[Spitoon]

With regard to mayday/pan, is there a difference in the extent that external local emergency services are alerted by ATC eg fire service, A&E departments? In the UK, yes, the category of emergency declared by the controller will affect the response outside the airport. But it varies between different airports depending on the type of operations that go on. For an airport with commercial operations the most significant difference is likely to be that if a full emergency is declared a significant number of ambulances wioll be dispatched to the airport and A&E departments may stop accepting patients and wards may be cleared. Unfortunately the scale of response is nat always scaled to the size of the aircraft so a BN3 may get the same response as a B767.

This is the downside of going for a mayday because it can always be downgraded. And there is at least one instance where a fire vehicle killed a pedestrian (or someone waiting at a bus stop, I think) whilst on its way to the airport for a minor event.

[BOAC]

With regard to mayday/pan, is there a difference in the extent that external local emergency services are alerted by ATC eg fire service, A&E departments? - did you read posts #13, 24 and 26?:ugh:

[airbus.skydriver]

The Kestrel Ops Manual states that if an engine is shut down then the crew are to declare a MAYDAY.

[chiglet]

Ref "Mayday" ....
As a Manch Tower ATSA, I have personally been invoved in three + 1..
A321, on departure "Smoke in the cockpit"...Masks ON....Circuit, and Land
Emergency svcs alerted ASAP
Dash8, Engine fail on T/O...Clear the circuit [Virgin B747 broken off apr...amongst others]
DC3 overflight...double engine fail at FL090...glide apr
C172, lost in snow...landed on R/w 28 at Manch, Xwind, and "dinged" a wingtip...and a proptip :mad: cost about £3K...crew OK :ok:
ALL ended Safely
ALL were {almost} routine. WE and ATC] are trained to handle these problems.........Sooo....
If the PIC calls Mayday, or Pan, His call..our job is to help him/her FULL STOP.

[TheGorrilla]

I've heard that a few countries don't understand the meaning of "PAN" therefore... Guess what i'll be saying if I have an engine quit on my twin engine aeroplane.

[A37575]

So if I am in a light twin and advise ATC that I am executing a practice landing with one engine feathered, I call Mayday and transponder to 7700 - right? After all, I am on one engine...

Or do I say "Practice Mayday and sqawk 7700? After all, if the live engine quits on final I won't have time to attempt a restart of the previously feathered engine.

[Kiltie]

remoak talks sense.

A precautionary shutdown, unless accompanied with further nasty problems, does not place the aircraft in a "condition of being threatened by serious and/or imminent danger." Perhaps in this case the commander was aware of some catastrophic hydraulic / fuel leak or fire etc of which we are unaware?

In the three in-flight precautionary shutdowns in two engined aeroplanes I have made, I have declared a PAN because the situation warranted what was effectively the definition of PAN. MATS states ATC should consider 50% of remaining power units to be a full emergency. This definition does not exist in any pilot publication I have ever read so the perspective is not uniformly shared.

In the event of an unexpected failure, I would almost certainly use Mayday since there may be underlying, further unknown damage that puts me in a "condition of being threatened by serious and/or imminent danger."

The definition of both terms are published widely as remoak describes. I've never understood why some try to create their own definitions or assumptions of their meaning.

As an aside, I would always use Mayday when on one remaining power unit outwith the UK, simply because PAN is not often recognised there and there is no definitive alternative I have ever found.

As another poster mentioned, the Kestrel pilots have it easy in this regard. They have a printed SOP that demands they use Mayday. Here lies the Captain's privilege.

Silent Jumpseater -

I have not seen that written in any Boeing manual. Can you give me a reference? Are you perhaps confusing it with the requirement to "land immediately." That is not the same as putting out a Mayday.........

[Wellington Bomber]

So if I am in a light twin and advise ATC that I am executing a practice landing with one engine feathered, I call Mayday and transponder to 7700 - right? After all, I am on one engine...


You should not be in control of any a/c if you practice landings in a light twin with one engine feathered full stop

[anotherthing]

A37575

There is no such thing as practice Mayday.

[Herod]

Have to agree with Wellington Bomber. That practice has killed too many people.

[Carl Rawson]

Well thanks everyone!
As usual the thread has drifted a little.
AVMAN's cynicism is unfounded I'm afraid as my access to the internet here is ..err.. variable to say the least. Hence the delay.
As for the reason for the MAYDAY then it could have many things not least of all an incapacitated fellow aviator and my concern was genuine for all concerned.
Can I just finish by saying that I have been aware of other MAYDAY flights coming into control zones in the past but this was the first time I had a chance to listen to a large amount of the service provided by ATC and I'd just like to say that I thought it was first class. Heaven forbid that I ever have to declare but if I do I can at least rest assured that the service I get from the ground will be top notch.

[False Capture]

airbus.skydriver has the definitive answer - you do what it says in your company's Ops Manual.

Then you go to the pub and reward yourself a beer whilst the management deal with the aftermath.

[Kiltie]

....not totally definitive however!

One can only do what is printed in the company Ops manual if it is printed there in the first place! None of the companies I have worked for provided company SOP for the radiotelephony use of PAN or Mayday. The pilot must therefore revert to ICAO / EU Ops standard and the definitions therein.

[TheGorrilla]

Whether using a company ops manual or not, standard rt is required from the rt manual and not operator specific. Otherwise that would confuse the heck out of everyone. Within the rt manual there is latitude to apply company policy though. Our company policy also allows an amount of discretion on the captains part.

I would not expect critisism for declaring a mayday for an engine failure (given that this is something we regularly do in the sim!). I would expect critisism for NOT declaring an emergency though.

[airfoilmod]

From a subwatch to its Greenland base, Captain finds himself 0/0 flying up the last of several fjords he's tried. Co-pilot asks, "This the one?" Capt. replies "definitely". "how can you be so sure?" "It has to be, we're outta gas." Mayday?

[JW411]

There is a very simple answer to all of this. Don't fly for a company who only have aeroplanes with two engines!

I managed that for 46 years and never flew a commercial twin.

Therefore an engine failure was but a mere annoyance and a Pan would suffice on most occasions.

However, had I been put in the unfortunate position of having to make do with just two engines, I think a Mayday would at least have been on my horizon if one of them failed.

(Come to think of it, just getting airborne on two engines might have been getting close to an emergency!)

In my last company the SOPs called for a Pan with the loss of one engine and a Mayday with the loss of two engines.

[False Capture]

Great reply grandad, always really interesting hearing about the good old days when engines used to fail.:zzz:

[411A]

Lets face facts here.
In a twin engined aeroplane, the failure of one engine constitutes an emergency situation, hence a 'Mayday' is certainly appropriate.
FAA....yup, with them, too.
Mandatory.

[TheGorrilla]

So other than that abortion of an A340 and that pile of sh@ite A380 how many decent commercial jets are being designed with 4 engines these days?

[Litebulbs]

The most worrying part of this thread, is that you Sky Gods can't agree on which was the correct course of action. One of the underlying opinions of most of the threads you read on Pprune, is that the captains decision is final.

What happens if you have a a less senior captain in the left seat, when two capt's are operating? What happens if you have a 56 year old x captain Zeus in the R/H seat and a 38 year old Apollo in the left? Which ego wins there?

[BYALPHAINDIA]

Looks like the flight was a 'maintainance flight'?
Just for the record.

16:43 11/01/09
ACARS mode: 1 Aircraft reg: G-JMAA [Boeing B753]
Message label: ** Block id: @ Msg no: 120f
Flight id: MT753M [] [Thomas Cook]
Message content:-
SBS-1 Callsign: TCX753M

[CR2]

Litebulbs, one of them will be designated "commander" on the flight plan.

[Spitoon]

Litebulbs, putting to one side for a moment your great knowledge of Greek Godology, you are demonstrating perfectly what worries me far more that the fact that two pilots may have differing opinions about the situation under discussion. As I said in in an earlier post
The business of any particular situation being an 'automatic mayday' or whatever, in both ATC and on the flightdeck, is a result of what might be called corporate nervousness. We are moving toward an environment where everything has a procedure - if the procedure is followed then all is OK (almost irrespective of the outcome).

In the old days we trained professionals with skills to assess a situation and to make appropriate decisions ....You seem to want a one-size fits all answer to the question when there isn't one.The thread doesn't present all of the information that was available to the flight crew so what you see is a discussion about individual opinions and slightly differing company procedures. I'm a great believer in having (and following) procedures but I don't think you can writew a manual that covers every eventuality - so I would like to feel that the driver of an aircraft that I am on is able to make an appropriate judgement based on the available information, operating procedures and guidance. What you are seeing here is a discussion of some of the thought processes that will go on in a pilot's mind when faced with an engine failure.

As for Captains Zeus and Apollo, well I hope that all the money spent on CRM training in the last few years will help them to do what's best for the aircraft and everyone on it whilst letting them each make their optimum contribution to handling the situation.

PS - I see your profile says you are an avionics engineer. Have you had a bad experience with some Greek pilots? Oh, and let's hope they never roster Zeus and Artemis together!

[Old Fella]

If one follows the logic of 411A's point of view no one would ever take-off in a single engine airplane, or is that considered a Mayday situation from take-off to touchdown?

[411A]

If one follows the logic of 411A's point of view no one would ever take-off in a single engine airplane, or is that considered a Mayday situation from take-off to touchdown?

We are discussing public transport ops with twin engine transport aeroplanes, Old Fella, not private pleasure flying....and certainly not with a F/E to muck up the program.:}

[anotherthing]

Old Fella

you are lookng at things entirely the wrong way. A single engined aircraft is designed to fly on... one engine.

A twin is designed to fly on two, but can continue on one in an emergency situation.

A Mayday can always be downgraded - the fact is ATC will be more concerned with the info you give them about the emergency than what prefix you use. ATC will then tailor the response to fit the scenario.

If a twin has a single engine failure, it doesn't matter to ATC if you call PAN or MAYDAY - the airfield emergency services response will be the same - based on the symptoms that the crew gives.

As far as ATC (certainly in the UK) is concerned, a PAN will give you priority and a no delay approach.

A MAYDAY will give you the same, but also allows the use of the non-operating runway.

As for someone who earlier said that unlike a PAN, a MAYDAY will mean that everyone else on frequency will say nothing unless called by ATC, that is wrong.

Normal service continues for other aircraft on the frequency, even if a MAYDAY is taking place. If ATC want you to be radio silent, they will tell you.

Although obviously affording an emergency aircraft priority, I always work on the basis that it is just another flight - to do otherwise is inviting myself to have an incident elsewhere in my sector because I am maybe getting too drawn in to one aircraft.

[verticalhold]

Our company SOPs are MAYDAY for a power unit failure, downgraded at our discretion when we are sure there are no further problems.

VH

[airfoilmod]

The safety record for engine out light twins is historically poorer than many think. Loss of one engine in a light twin does not mean (generally) that one has ample time to continue the flight to exercise more choice in a landing site. It means, Mayday and land immediately.

Also, the first thing ATC will do (generally, assuming the problem is not comm. related) is assign a new and discrete freq to the troubled a/c.
It isn't good procedure to focus attention on one a/c when the main frequency cares for many, neither does it serve the emer. a/c.

[flyinthesky]

For Gods sake. He declared an emergency. Be it a Pan or a Mayday. Who cares! One engine operative on a two engine aircraft IS an emergency. He may not fall out of the sky but he did want some assistance. Captains choice. None of you were there, so you are not well placed to comment.

If anyone on this site did know anything, they would know that he had been in constant contact through maintrol and between them, they had taken the best course of action to protect a very valuable piece of kit.

I think if we were to analyse how many engine failures declare a Mayday or a Pan, I know where I would put my money. Yet again, too many folks postulating without knowing all the facts.

They put the machine on the ground, all happy, all safe, JOB DONE!

[anotherthing]

airfoilmod

If you read my post properly, I never said that a aingle engine failure in a twin should not be a MAYDAY. I was replying to (and disagreeing with) Old Fella who inferred that a single engine failure in a twin was the same as flying in a single engine aircraft!!

As for a seperate frequency for the Mayday aircraft, not always the best option (and is not a general rule for ATC to do, as you allude to) - each case needs to be looked at in isolation. If the frequency is busy, then yes a good idea, if it is only moderately busy, the drawbacks of having two controllers working aircraft on different frequencies in one piece of airspace often outweighs the advantages.

[Eff Oh]

This nonsense thread is a prime example of how PPRuNe has gone down the tubes. Remember the days when this site was informative and not full of cr@p threads like this? Four pages of arguing over a pan or a mayday for an engine shutdown? Honestly. It's sad.

[HairyYellowButt]

Eff Off, Eff Oh.:}

[Eff Oh]

Nice one! :ok: :D :rolleyes:

[bucket_and_spade]

Fully agree with Eff Oh.

Painful to read...so I won't.

B&S :ok:

[Say again s l o w l y]

I wouldn't bother reading it. This thread proves to me why I read Pprune less and less. Arguing about a Commanders decision without any of the facts. Yeah, nice one.

[TheGorrilla]

Pprune is something I do when there's sod all on telly but I still want to watch girls having a good b&tch fight.

[Old Fella]

411A, again you jumped in "hook, line and sinker". I said nothing about aircraft categories. You obviously could not resist showing, again, your disdain for Flight Engineers. Please refer to item #21 to see what I believe, if you can lower yourself to do so. :ok:

anotherthing, I was not looking at things in the wrong way, just giving 411A the opportunity to do what he did, i.e. put down Flight Engineers as he has done on many previous occasions.

[False Capture]

Gorrilla,
Pprune is something I do when there's sod all on telly ...... and you're favourite porn site is down.:ok:

[TheGorrilla]

yeah! be:mad:sti&li:{ty.cOm!!!

that flight engineers fav! :ok:

[411A]

....your disdain for Flight Engineers.

Not at all, just the very few who seem unable to get along with the folks that have a window seat.:rolleyes:

[Final 3 Greens]

Old fella

If one follows the logic of 411A's point of view no one would ever take-off in a single engine airplane, or is that considered a Mayday situation from take-off to touchdown?

I believe that the UK CAA do not allow public transport flights on single engine aircraft, so maybe they agree with 411A? ;)

[Old Fella]

Final 3 Greens. Because the UK CAA does not permit Single Engine Aircraft to operate in the Public Transport category does not mean that every other authority does not also, or that these countries are right or wrong. The USA, Canada, Australia, South Africa and New Zealand all allow passengers to be carried in single engine turbine powered aircraft in the Public Transport category in IMC and have done for over ten years. Many others including France, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Norway, Spain and Sweden all permit these aircraft to conduct freight operations in IMC.

That the UK CAA and 411A are in agreement is no surprise, they are both having trouble getting into the 21st century way of doing things.

Incoming Incoming.