To PAN or not to PAN that is the question!

[Lookleft]

Heard on Melbourne Centre an aircraft requiring emergency services on standby for its arrival into Tulla because it might have suffered a blown tyre on departure. The crew were adamant that they were not declaring anything but they were not sure how the aircraft would handle on landing. ATC went through the process of asking for POB and DGs and if the aircraft would be vacating the runway on landing.

In this situation why would you not just declare a PAN call? For ATC it would make it easier as they have a set of procedures they could follow, the aircraft gets priority and emergency services are put on standby automatically.

I am wondering whether flight management is being influenced by media coverage or the potential for a Flt Ops bollocking because of the attention it will bring to the organisation? Or does it stem from sim checks where CC will consider that a PAN call was inappropriate for certain scenarios?

IMHO there is no trigger point for a PAN call but if you are requiring emergency services on standby then you might as well use all the available resources.

[Jetstarpilot]

*YAWN*. Must be a slow news days trol:zzz:

Nothin to c here.. who want to fill in all the paperwork for somthing so small, not this little black duck

[allthecoolnamesarego]

A bit tired there J* pilot are we?
Yawning during a post, geez you guys really need to call in fatigued sometimes :)
As for putting the possible saftey of your crew (I hope you're not a captain with an attitude like that) and passengers at risk because 'you couldn't be stuffed filling out paper work' blows my mind.
A Pan cost you nothing (except a few minutes paper work - I know, you'd rather sleep) but could have the RFF ready just in case.
I didn't realuse LCC. Included LCP (Low Care Pilots)
;)

[Keg]

I've often heard it commented that RAAF pilots declare a Pan at the drop of a hat- I have no first hand experience of it, it's just been an idiom handed down to me over the years. Perhaps the real issue is that RPT pilots don't declare Pan often enough.

Personally, if it's enough to want the fire trucks out, it's enough to declare a Pan. Wanting the trucks but not declaring a Pan is a bit like being half pregnant. Concerned about controlability on landing? Sounds like a Pan. Think you may need to stop on the runway if youn actually do have tyre damage? Sounds like a Pan. Land and nothing untoward occurs? Thank everyone for their efforts and spend the 5 minutes writing up the ASIR.

Concerned about the potential media attention? You're in the wrong seat or the wrong job. Concerned about the questions from management on Monday morning? Ditto.

Given the increase in air traffic in Australia over the next decade and the growth estimates, we're going to be hearing more Pans as the years progress. I hope that we can reach a stage whereby they're seen as a conservative, safe, reasonable response to a safety issue rather than the media, other crew, etc considering them to be a split second short of a catastrophic hull loss.

Anyway, those are my thoughts from the cheap seats. Have a good week everyone.

[Jabawocky]

A wise old man taught me once...........

Ya better looking at it than looking for it!

Applies to lots of things, fire services, fuel policy.....etc.:ok:

[lilflyboy262...2]

Couldn't agree with you more Keg.

I rather be saying "Sorry guys, its a non event."
Than "Holy crap, I'm on fire now, I need you all here NOW, I wish I had called sooner."

[bigbrother]

I think I may offer some insight here. As a Military ATCO, the attitudes toward PAN's is somewhat different due to the ingraining of it as being part of the Flight Crew training from day 1. G.A training is different as attitudes of 'pay for service' became part of the fabric of the new world order. Operators who ultimately payed for any such service, put downward pressure on often junior instructors and pilots, and so the seeds were sown where such a call was frowned apon.

ATCO's have the right to initiate bringing emergency services to Immediate Standby when deemed appropriate. Aircrew may not even be aware of such a raising of services, other than by requests for DG, POB etc.....

INCERFA/ALERFA are often initiated when an ATCO has some concern as to the safety, or otherwise of an aircraft. This is effectively the same response on an aircraft as a PAN. Now I dont want anyone to start picking the technical differences but the overall effect is the same.

I agree that "better to see it and not want it, than want it and not see it"

From a Flight Crew perspective, if you call a PAN and the PAX all walk off safely, then we have all done our jobs, and AFS/Firies get to excersize real time. So we all win. :)

[teresa green]

At TAA is was simple. If you need a new set of reg grundies, you need to PAN. Simple, never failed.

[nitpicker330]

This isn't really a big issue in Oz using English as our first language because at the end of the day ATC and the Crew will work it out ok. However in other countries we should declare a Pan, Mayday or "declaring an Emergency" to make sure ATC understand our situation clearly and therefore our needs after landing. :ok:

[Dixons Cider]

declare a Pan, Mayday or "declaring an Emergency" to make sure ATC understand

Sorry to nit pick there nitpicker - but I'm afraid there is no such beast as "declaring an Emergency"
You declare Mayday, or a Pan Pan, as the situation dictates.
End of story.

[Capn Bloggs]

Ridiculous. If you need the services, declare a PAN. Besides, if you're worried about what is said on the radio, having a good old ramble about what you need, probably a few times, is much more liekly to get the scanner's attention than a quick PP PP PP (you know, under your breath like Basil Fawlty's "Fire!".

As for trigger-happy Pans in the RAAF, absolutely. Any press was good press, and besides, who gave a stuff about what the PR consequences were?!

[nitpicker330]

Ok, fair point but our "bible" says this

Although “PAN-PAN” is a recognised ICAO urgency call, it is not always used or clearly understood by ATC in many countries. When the term does not immediately achieve the desired ATC response, the use of plain language “I AM DECLARING AN EMERGENCY” may be more appropriate to achieve the required response.

:ok:

[allthecoolnamesarego]

Capt Bloggs,
If you have ever declared a PAN in the US, you will be met with question after question, and finally when they give up trying to understand, ATC will simply ask "XXX are you declaring an emergency?"
PAN calls are not really understood in the US, so the quickest way to get your message across is simply state "XXX we are declaring an emergency"
:)

[Capn Bloggs]

If you have ever declared a PAN in the US, you will be met with question after question
Understand, but the topic is in Oz. Don't forget "roll the trucks". :)

[Capn Bloggs]

OK, I couldn't resist...thread drift alert!

mMjOzi-8tao

[Sunfish]

Ever seen a tire tread beat the crap out of all that stuff in the wheel bay or the flaps on landing? Declare an emergency.

[toolish]

This is my take on it

Pan according to Jepps is a urgency message, when would I use it -- If my message needs to get thru urgently ie eng fail and need to descend or escape proceedure turn.

In the cruise and advised by ATC that we MIGHT have blown a tyre (but we felt nothing unusual on T'OFF, I dont see any problem in asking for emmergency services to be on standby and give POB and DG because I know I will be asked.
The next question I will be ready to answer from ATC local standby or the full monty.

[Lookleft]

So what is your understanding of "the full monty"? As a PAN call gives you emergency services on local standby why would you not simply declare it? This comes back to the original question-why the reluctance to actually transmit the PAN call? One call gives ATC all the info they need and it gives you all the services you would like to have available.

[teresa green]

I did not have to declare a PAN when my 9 decided to digest her own tyre though the port donk, the ATC did it for me. TGA,"Mate you have a roman candle coming out of your left engine" I could see what they meant by a change of reg grundies, as my F/O and I decided it was back to the CBR Hyatt for a beer, forget the SYD Hilton.

[Nautilus Blue]

Doesn't matter if you declare emergency, call PAN or just tell us the problem, ATC will declare an Alert Phase, and then ask the usual about POB, dangerous cargo, what services required, and my personal favourite, do you expect a normal approach and landing :ugh:

[glekichi]

Whilst I would certainly not criticise if they had declared a 'PAN PAN', I don't see any particular need for it in this case.

The emergency services were on standby, were they not? ATC were fully informed of the situation.

What else are you hoping for from a PAN?

[Icarus53]

There's another element that I think is largely ignored in this often re-asked question.

Human beings (and perhaps especially pilots) have an incredibly strong tendency try to keep things operating normally, even when faced with significant evidence to the contrary. I could reel off any number of events where pilots facing abnormal operations due to failures/medical etc do not "declare emergency" in any way, nor even in some cases advise ATC that there is a problem.

The opinion of several here along the "better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it" line is good enough reasoning for me, but I add this: verbalising that you have an abnormal operation is one of the most effective ways of making sure that every crew member is thinking of it as abnormal. Crew members who remain in the mindset of "but it's not really that bad" at the start of a problem are substantially more likely to remain in that mindset long after the situation has progressed to be more serious.

I'm not advocating an alarmist approach that calls "Pan" for every caution or advisory, but whenever an abnormal requires me to fly differently, a clear unambiguous communication that the situation is not normal and requires urgency/attention is the best way of preventing crew and ATC from being drawn down the "it's not really that bad" mindset. "Pan" fits that bill.

Icarus (- 0.02c)

[Basil]

I can back up Sunfish and teresa green re unknown damage.
B747 inbound FRA - tyre went on t/o - gnd. eng. noticed shadow on windmilling engine - 3 bent fanblades - then we saw the skidmarks on the wing and engine intake.