The term "Souls on board"

[Otto Nove Due]

Anybody share my irritation at hearing the term "souls on board" being used in emergency situations? Why not just use something less melodramatic like persons on board? Maybe I'm being too pedantic but let me explain...

I've just been listening to an ATC recording of a BMI emergency at Dublin a while back and the controller came on and asked if they could give the "souls on board". It was only a minute or two into the emergency (smoke in the cockpit - returning to land at EIDW) so I would have thought giving that info was the least of the crew's worries. As it happens the controller got no response and even several minutes later a rescue vehicle asked Ground the same question to which the reply was "we're still trying to ascertain that". Obviously the crew was busy flying the plane from a smoky cockpit and rightly thought this request way down their list of priorities.

I don't know where and when this term originated - probably in a Hollywood movie by the sounds of it - but I felt after hearing that recording that the professionality of the flight crew was being undermined by the people on the grounds' doom-impending attitude in referring to the passengers and crew already being condemmed to a certain death. I know it's a global term so I don't mean to criticise the Dublin ATC personally - it's just a gripe I have hearing that and reading accident reports. Why not just use some term like "persons on board" and leave the rest to Hollywood :rolleyes:

[hit_the_deck]

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at there, first you make the arguement that it shouldn't have been asked at all and then you finish by saying they should say persons on board instead of souls on board, is it the terminology or the fact that it was used during an emergency that you're objecting to?

Also, I thought ATC could get the amount of seats sold for a particular flight off the ops department anyway, wouldn't that give them a max number of people that would be on board anyway?

[Rule3]

Google and all will be revealed.:ugh: Try a little :}'professionalism' whilst you are at it.:ok:

[west lakes]

Search is wonderful

http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/324012-definition-soul.html

[Spitoon]

You'll hear some discussions about interpretation of POB - some will tell you that it refers to the number of people excluding crew members. Souls appears universally to be understood as every body irrespective of their status or operating capacity. There is some interesting debate about whether a body that was already known to be dead on departure should be included in the total.....

Whilst it may seem unimportant, the number on board is requested so that if the worst comes to the worst the emergency services know when to stop looking for bodies.

The fact that Dublin ATC did not hassle the crew for an answer suggests that they recognised that the crew may have had other more important things going on = both crew and ATC were doing their respective jobs, very professionally, and with the best outcome.

Maybe melodramatic to your ears but I doubt that the crew thought much about it.


PS - agree with other posters - Google is a handy thing to use.

[Otto Nove Due]

It's the term "souls" I find irritating. Hearing it used by ATC made it all the more so. If they really need to ask then they should use "persons" etc - but they didn't need to ask, as you say that info is readily obtained elsewhere.

[vespasia]

If "souls" irritates you personally, then so be it. I don't really care whether we use "souls" or "persons" However,

as you say that info is readily obtained elsewhere.

Have to take issue with that, because it's [I]not[I] always readily available. It depends on being able to get in touch with the company, on a landline or mobile phone, and they may not be able to obtain that info instantly. In the above case, as has already been said, both crew and ATC dealt professionally with the situation - ATC asked for S/POB, and did not press the crew when the answer wasn't forthcoming.

[Rule3]

Sorry OTTO, You just do not understand. :ugh:Read the:mad: posts. :{

[fisbangwollop]

Talking as I do to my little puddle jumpers its one thing I often ask as they coast out over the sea...report souls on board....better to find out now whilst all is calm and collective rather than hasle the gou as he calls Mayday with engine failure over the water.....at least the Rescue services will know how many folk they are looking for.............never had a complaint yet about putting the fear of God into anyone!!!!

[pulse1]

Am I right in thinking that the military always use POB? Perhaps they think that military aviators do not have souls.

I recently heard my local civil Radar advise a 737 that there was a low level Navy Lynx in the area with 3 POB. Why would Ryanair crews be interested in how many people were aboard the Lynx?

[Loxley]

I remember when I was training at the college one of the instructors (and I honestly can't remember which one! :) ) tried to make us all use 'Persons on Board' as opposed to 'Souls on Board'. His logic was that 'Souls on Board' would suggest that everyone was already dead in an emergency situation and that it might un-nerve the pilots........ :D :}

[spekesoftly]

Why would Ryanair crews be interested in how many people were aboard the Lynx?Ryanair are always interested in load factors! ;)

[ZeBedie]

Aren't body and soul separated at death?

Are human remains necessarily anything more than fragments, or ash?

Why the f@*k can't ATC ask the handling agent - they have a copy of the loadsheet - if I've called mayday, I may be too busy to be involved in admin :rolleyes:

[terrain safe]

Because we don't know who your handling agent is e.g. you may be diverting into an unusual airport, so we need to know as the previous posts have stated. If you refuse to say, and some firemen are killed going into your plane to rescue some non existant pax, won't you feel a bit of a ****?

Just answer the question when able. Thank you.

[fireflybob]

Not a big issue for the operator I fly for - loadsheet right in front of us and box shows THOB = Total Heads on Board (= POB)

Reminds me of a regular who used to fly his C150 at EMA when they always asked for souls on board - his reply was always "Just me and the dog!" He always flew with his black labrador.

[Union Jack]

Anybody share my irritation at hearing the term "souls on board" being used in emergency situations? Why not just use something less melodramatic like persons on board? Maybe I'm being too pedantic but let me explain...

Well, Otto, if you want to be pedantic about dispensing with the use of such a time-honoured expression, derived like so many from life at sea, maybe you should start calling yourself something other than a "pilot" with its nautical origins - a "driver" perhaps ......:)

PS Incidentally, souls in the context at issue means living souls.

[Flintstone]

As Union Jack says, it's living souls hence when I used to fly the occasional coffin out to Arnhemland for a funeral would confirm something like "Four POB, three souls" if only to spare the emergency services wasting their time trying to revive a week-old corpse in the event of a 'happening' :E.

[Ten West]

I've been on aircraft where the 'Souls on board' would have been more accurately described if prefixed with an 'R'. :E

When I did my Marine VHF course we were taught to use "Persons on board". No-one ever used the term "Souls". :bored:

[MacTrim]

bumping a 'NeverGo' around SW QLD over 25yr ago , this sexy,silky siren from CV FSU would always made sure I had mentioned PoB with taxi/airbourne Tx. So, OK,Im sure u r all dying to ask ,YES I Did find the 'need' to divert east to CV for fuel, AND to wonder over to the FSU, AND YES, you got it in ONE :}:}:}:yuk::yuk::yuk::yuk: ...the voice on the reply of Cancel SAR never seemed as sexy&silky as I had ONCE imagined...:ok:

[Roots Radical]

Unfortunately I've heard the term souls and persons used together.
An RAF Herc was repatriating the bodies of a downed RN Heli, I asked for his POB and he replied " 7 persons, 11 souls"

I was informed by an older and wiser controller that this was information for us and the firecrews in case of a further accident.

[Odi]

As the Information Assistant at Shawbury, I once asked the pilot of a Hercules what his pob was; to be told "11 plus an orangutan". I was dying to ask if he always called the loadie that....!

The Hercules was transporting the orangutan from Dudley Zoo to Jersey Zoo.

[normally right blank]

"Roots Radical": "Unfortunately I've heard the term souls and persons used together.
An RAF Herc was repatriating the bodies of a downed RN Heli, I asked for his POB and he replied " 7 persons, 11 souls"

Excactly! I also heard it at Kabul. For the firemen to sort out the bits after a crash. Grim - but practical! :(

[NudgingSteel]

In the situation you quote (smoke in cockpit), unfortunately POB is something the Airport Fire Service do need to know, and it might literally be a matter of life and death. There have been too many tragic accidents over the years, when the aircraft has landed and stopped intact, yet people have died in the ensuing/continuing fire. As much as we all hope it never happens again, the AFS have to know how many they're looking for if they have to go in.
I've yet to work at an airport when I could be confident that the handling company could be contacted and give me, within a couple of minutes, the exact and final POB figure.
I know nothing of the DUB incident, but strongly doubt the controller was either trying to p*** the crew off or make idle conversation!

[Otto Nove Due]

I know nothing of the DUB incident, but strongly doubt the controller was either trying to p*** the crew off or make idle conversation!

Of course he wasn't, I never meant that he was. It was just this incident that got me wondering how can it be that in such a professional field like aviation, where every i has to be dotted and every t crossed, an ambiguous term like soul can make it in there as an industry-wide term, when its only real meaning takes its origins from religion......which we all know is THE root of all confusion in the world! why even the replies to this thread can't agree on when its meaning and when/if it should be used.....7 persons/11 souls on board....wtf does that mean???! The flightplan form only has a space for POB...why not SOB then too?

[Rule3]

:ugh: If you carefully read the replies, you wouldn't have made your last :mad: post:ugh::ouch::ok:

[Dop]

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the old joke:
Q:How many souls on board?
A:None, we're atheists!

[Lady-ATC]

Don"t like it either!:=I"d rather say Persons on Board."Souls"sounds like everyone "s gonna be dead in a moment.:E

[Mister Geezer]

Otto Nove Due

For an aircraft that has a deceased person in the hold being repatriated, then Souls on Board will differ to Persons on Board.

The deceased is still a person but one could argue that their soul has departed. So in this case, Souls on Board is the correct term since if the correct Persons on Board figure was given, then the fire and rescue crew would be waiting a very long time at the bottom of the slide for the last 'Pax' to be accounted for!

Its a simple and long standing tradition and one that was drummed into me during my early PPL days.

[Ex Cargo Clown]

I believe it's the reason that a NOTOC has to declare HUM (Human remains) on it. That said, I've known of people put ashes down as HUM. Would take a quick skipper to spot that one !!!

Not actually sure what ICAO have to say on that one.

[cheakymunkie]

Otto - I'm with you. It's a load of crap. This thread proves that there is confusion over whether it includes corpses. And just from a personal point of view the use of the word annoys me a bit - me and my main man Richard Dawkins think is sucks.

[FantomZorbin]

Many moons ago, I had an pilot report that his aircraft had "120+1+1 POB", I subsequently asked the Fire Section to explain. The immediate reply was "120 people plus one infant plus one corpse". Having said that, I've never seen the breakdown of POB in the manuals.

I always understood SOB to be an Americanism.

[moony]

How about "15 POB and 1 coffin". Would that not make it easier for everyone to understand?

[Pierre Argh]

I understood "Souls onboard" to originally have come from seagoing... e.g. "Sunk all souls lost"... OK, its use today may have some religious overtones(?) but cannot see why this fuss about terminology.

The issues around asking for POB (or souls) are equally diverse. I was told under training that it was so the Crash Teams knew how many to rescue... going back into the blazing inferno etc. Logical, except if you've ever witnessed a crash, tell me if the passengers stand around waiting to be counted... I don't think so? If POB is more than twenty the chances of this working IMHO are slim.

HOWEVER... there is a very sad story of a Dutch military transport catching fire. There was confusion over the numbers onboard and it was assumed to be carrying cargo so no efforts were made to check the back of the aircraft until it was too late and the large number of passengers - who might have been rescued - perished (there's another word to debate if you like?) SO... whether you ask for POB, Souls, check with the Operator... I guess its always going to be better to have that information than not... it might save someone's life. (and to my mind asking the pilot is he best option... OK (s)he might be busy, but the lives of their passengers are THEIR responsibility so I wouldn't expect a professional to mind that question)

[snips]

Just another twist

POB
PAX on Board or Persons on Board??

Always prefered Souls on Board

:8

[VinRouge]

Correct. All flights carrying deceased NEED to record and pass persons and souls; the reason being, if you stack it off the end of the runway and the fire trucks come to cut you out, its only fair to them to pass the number of living souls on the aircraft. No point of them entering a burning aircraft if the only people on the aircraft were dead when the frame rolled.

[anotherthing]

IMHO Vin Rouge has got it right, as has Roots radical.

If the AFS needs to enter an aircraft to rescue people, they will do so until impractical, often risking their own lives. Obviously if they know there are 3 living people on board and 2 dead bodies, they will stop putting their lives at risk once they have the 3 living people rescued!

Snips

POB is Persons, not PAX - there are many aircraft round that do not carry pax!

[Coast]

by all means let's tie up frequencies with

"well there's 15 pax, 5 crew, 1 monkey, a corpse oh....and 3 atheists"

sob so much easier and quicker even if a bit morbid

[moony]

Coast,

If atheists don't believe in God, why should they think they have a soul. Don't agree with you at all. The crash crews go into the wreckage to try and rescue the number of living people that were reported to be on the ac. Would you risk your life to save to save a bird or pull a coffin from the crash site when there are higher priorities. P(persons not PAX)OB is the proper way to descibe the number of people that is aboard the ac.

[Spitoon]

and to my mind asking the pilot is he best option... OK (s)he might be busy, but the lives of their passengers are THEIR responsibility so I wouldn't expect a professional to mind that question:ok::ok::ok:

[Acer101]

This is what can happen when there is confusion regarding the number of persons on board:

SUMMARY of the reports compiled after the air crash involving the Lockheed C-130 Hercules, registration number CH-06 at Eindhoven Air Base on 15 July 1996
(The Hague, 25 September 1996)

NBDC - Summary of the Hercules Crash (http://www.nbdc.nl/cms/show/id=140411)

[radarman]

Most of the posts so far seem to assume a 'simple' crash in the middle of an empty airfield, with the airframe sufficiently intact that the bodies/souls inside are whole bodies that can be counted, instead of a gruesome collection of parts.

How about a Citation carrying 5 P/SOB that comes down in an urban area. The fire crew search the wreckage and surrounding area and find 12 bodies. Is that all 5 from the aircraft plus 7 innocent bystanders? Or is it 7bystanders, 2 from the aircraft, with 3 still trapped inside? Or some other combination? My feeling is that the rescue services will continue to search the wreckage until they are convinced there is nobody left.

Looks like most of the posters are ATC or pilots arguing their own point of view. It would be very interesting to hear some ideas on the subject from professional firemen.

[The quiet man]

Even worse, what if it goes down in a cementery!!!:confused:

[ATCO Fred]

This has been done before :bored: here: http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/324012-definition-soul.html

My view remains the same

Personally - I only ever refer to POB. Souls on board is just another gash ambiguous Americanism!

CAP 694


Quote:
ITEM 19: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
NOTE: This information is not normally included in transmission of flight plan
message. It is retained, however, at location of the filing of the FPL.
ENDURANCE:
After E/ INSERT a 4-figure group giving the fuel endurance in hours and minutes.
PERSONS ON BOARD:
After P/ INSERT the total number of persons (passengers and crew) on board, when
required by the appropriate ATS authority.
INSERT "TBN" (to be notified) if the total number of persons is not known
at the time of filing.

It don't exist and shouldn't be used!

Just my two peneth.

Wait a minute, cars pulled up........****, the phraseology police....

ref the Eindhoven C130 Birdstrike accident:

A quick cut and paste from google

Quote:
In the business of risk management, we frequently discuss abstract concepts such as active failures, latent conditions, causal effects as well as links in the chain of events that contribute to an accident. On July 15, 1996, a Belgian Air Force C-130 Hercules crashed at Eindhoven Air Base in the Netherlands, resulting in 34 fatalities and 7 serious injuries. The tragic circumstances surrounding this accident provide a poignant message that dramatically shifts abstract concepts into gut-wrenching reality.

The Hercules departed Melsbroek, Belgium, for Eindhoven Air Base via Villafranca and Rimini in Italy. On board were 37 passengers and 4 crew members. Of the 37 passengers, 36 were armed forces musicians who had given several performances in Italy.

The Hercules arrived ahead of schedule at Eindhoven, and was cleared for a visual approach to Runway 04. The bird control officer and ATC staff failed to detect that a large, mixed flock of lapwings and starlings was sitting near the runway in grass, which had recently been mowed but had not been raked.
Just prior to touchdown, approximately 500 to 600 of these small birds were observed by the flight crew, who elected to carry out a missed approach. During the overshoot, the No. 1 and No. 2 engines were severely damaged by bird ingestion. The crew also feathered the No. 3 engine, likely believing that this engine was also damaged. With only the No. 4 engine producing power, the aircraft yawed approximately 70 degrees to the left, banked approximately 35 degrees to the left, lost altitude and crashed into the ground. The fuel tanks ruptured and flames engulfed the aircraft.
While the aircraft was still airborne, ATC staff activated the crash alarm, and emergency response staff reacted immediately. A misunderstanding during the initial calls resulted in the assumption that only the flight crew was on board the aircraft, with the result that backup fire fighters did not respond. A further assumption that the flight crew could not have survived the fire led to the decision not to enter the severely damaged aircraft (see photo). Because of these assumptions, more than 25 min were lost in the rescue effort. Meanwhile, survivors were unable to evacuate the aircraft because the doors had been damaged in the crash. Survivors were evacuated to the local hospitals 40 min after the accident.

Had more effective communications taken place during the initial calls, especially regarding the number of people on board, the fire fighters would have responded accordingly and possibly reduced the number of casualties.

Okay - I've edited out some data but the upshot was that ATC were aware of the Pob but didn't pass it on. The Fire crew thought the crew had died and didn't enter the aircraft. The bandsman in the back couldn't get out and subsequent post mortem examination revealed they died of smoke inhalation. HAD the pob been passed and had the Fire crew been aware and entered the aircraft post accident those in the back would have survived. That's why we nag for POB.

I remain to be corrected on some of the finer details of the case as it's some years since I used to lecture on Aircraft Accident Management - but the gist of the case is about right.

GA, Business or Charter we always ask for POB before arrival and before departure. You'll be surprised how many times the POB actually differs from that on the flight plan (assuming it's not VFR and NOT filled a plan!)

How about a Citation carrying 5 P/SOB that comes down in an urban area. The fire crew search the wreckage and surrounding area and find 12 bodies. Is that all 5 from the aircraft plus 7 innocent bystanders? Or is it 7bystanders, 2 from the aircraft, with 3 still trapped inside? Or some other combination? My feeling is that the rescue services will continue to search the wreckage until they are convinced there is nobody left.


Radarman - I can put you in touch with the man from the CIV POl Major Disaster Team who used to specialise in body part recovery. A twin that went in vertically near Humberside many years ago created circa 1240 different parts!! Allegedly the dispersal of remains is normally a good indication if it was a survivable event.

Nevertheless - depending upon the nationality of the crew the response to the simple "Confirm total number of persons on board?" question can elicit numerous permutations of answers. Personally I'll nag until I get the answer I NEED in order to ensure when said aircraft has a gravity induced event I don't end up in prison like the controller did at Eindhoven. It’s a self preservation thing.........:uhoh:

[Spitoon]

Personally I'll nag until I get the answer I NEED in order to ensure when said aircraft has a gravity induced event I don't end up in prison like the controller did at Eindhoven. So much for TRM....

[student88]

This is such a ridiculous thread. I'm off to bed, gonna go get angry over something really not that worth while like why Jif changed its name to Cif. WTF IS CIF!? I'm really going to have a good stew over that for a millisecond.

[ATCO Fred]

Quote:
Personally I'll nag until I get the answer I NEED in order to ensure when said aircraft has a gravity induced event I don't end up in prison like the controller did at Eindhoven.

So much for TRM....

How do you construe eliciting a response from an aircraft (e.g. confirming POB or getting an acknowledgement of a change in QNH) as bad TRM?