Pan Mayday

[bond2002]

Dear Friends can any one with a reference advise if a single engine failure in a twin engine is a Pan call or Mayday call.
Thanks.

[High_Expect]

Pan... Mayday is imminent danger. As you're now flying a single engine aircraft like most others it's hardly life threatening. I do appreciate its harder to fly asymmetric but you will have been trained. I would suggest it's a land ASAP though rather than a Land as soon as practicable. :-)

[High_Expect]

Sorry - no reference just common sense.

[bond2002]

As fare as my information gose there is a ICAO document stating if there is a loss of 50% aircraft thrust we need to give a pan call.

[too_much]

Thomson 757 Birdstrike - YouTube

[gorter]

From dark and distant memory of ATPL air law. If you lose more than 33% of your power sources then it is a mandatory mayday call. I'll try to find the reference to post. So basically engine failure on a 2 or 3 engine aircraft a mayday, engine failure on a 4 engine a/c it is not a requirement (assuming that is the only fault).

[Denti]

It's the commanders decision in my outfit, however every deviation from a clearance due to system malfunctions is initially a mayday, since pretty much all EOSIDS deviate from the cleared SID it is a mandatory mayday to start with. Same during cruise, since maintaining altitude is impossible.

In my opinion, start with a mayday, you can always downgrade it to a PAN state once everything is secured.

[Superpilot]

At a previous employer, it was a pan but a crew incapacitation was a mayday... never understood the logic.

I'm of the school of thought that you can never know for certain why an engine just quit so why risk a pan call? (Recall BA038 and the way in which both donkeys died within a few minutes/seconds of each other). Make it a mayday but manage the situation and fly the plane like you made a pan call if that, practically speaking, is the better or safer thing to do.

An old CRM instructor told me he had a dear friend who declared a pan for a guy who reporting breathing difficulties. Prior to landing, the guy died of a heart attack. Victim's family tried to sue the airline / skipper for not declaring a mayday, claiming the few minutes saved would've made all the difference (absolute rubbish, obviously). Moral of the story, in this stupidly litigious world, don't settle for second best.

Controversial point of view? maybe.

[A Squared]

Pan... Mayday is imminent danger. As you're now flying a single engine aircraft like most others it's hardly life threatening.

There are some airplanes unable to maintain altitude on one engine. I'd consider that imminent danger


FWIW, it's not necessarily considered an emergency at my company if one engine fails. However it's mandatory to declare an emergency on failure of a second engine (4 engine airplane). That's more of a company policy thing, I don't ever recall reading any regulation which specified that.

[OhNoCB]

For me I think it would depend. During cruise over the UK with airports all around I would be tempted to call a PAN (knowing that ATC in the UK would understand this). During t/o or cruise somewhere remote I would say mayday.

About Superpilot's CRM instructor's story; In the back of my head something says that only a PAN should be used whenever it is not your own vessel in danger (regardless of the level of danger). Anyone know if I have actually read that somewhere proper or if I am just making it up?

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Pan... Mayday is imminent danger. As you're now flying a single engine aircraft like most others it's hardly life threatening. I do appreciate its harder to fly asymmetric but you will have been trained. I would suggest it's a land ASAP though rather than a Land as soon as practicable. :-)

Why did it fail?

It could well be imminent danger depending on the reason.

[FlyingStone]

In my opinion, start with a mayday, you can always downgrade it to a PAN state once everything is secured.

Exactly. With the added bonus that if you fly outside of West-influenced civilization, ATC usually have no sense of what's their job, let alone what somebody saying Pancakes or something similar wants from them.

[Mach E Avelli]

In the sim we often get crews who want to launch into a Mayday or Pan speech about 10 seconds after the failure is introduced.
I tell 'em the guy on the ground is of no immediate use, so fly the :mad: aircraft first, do the memory items next and then decide what they need to tell ATC and the cabin crew. What is the problem? No performance or systems issues? Say very little and choose you words carefully......see below.
Fire, now under control? Say more - Pan or Mayday, whatever you think fits the occasion.
Fire not under control or serious degradation of flight control or flight path? Mayday.
In the grand scheme of things either a Pan or Mayday gets a similar response from ATC. They call out the emergency services and set you up for priority in the approach sequence.
The anoraks on the perimeter fence hear every word and relay all to the media. The airline's name is up there on the TV screens before the aircraft has landed.


If the subsequent enquiry reckons you over-reacted, tea and bickies time.

[RTN11]

Depends on your performance category really.

The turboprop I fly has some pretty obscure emergency turn procedures to ensure terrain clearance (which ATC may not even be aware we plan to do), so in the event of an engine failure at V1, it would be mayday as soon as practical to advise our immediate intentions with standby at the end to give us time to sort ourselves out.

Engine failure at altitude would likely be a Pan.

[Bealzebub]

You're the captain/pilot, you decide! There is no particular right or wrong. You are advising ATC of the priority required, as you assess it.

I tell 'em the guy on the ground is of no immediate use, so fly the aircraft first, do the memory items next and then decide what they need to tell ATC and the cabin crew.
Whilst I agree that there is a priority of requirements, ATC might be glad to know quickly that you possibly shed bits of your motor all over the runway before he/she clears the aircraft that was waiting behind you at the holding point to take off, or the inbound to land, into a potential debris field.

An early call of Mayday (or Pan if you really feel that is more appropriate) should fit easily into the time available after the problem has been initially identified.

[glendalegoon]

HIGH EXPECT

I disagree with your view that a two engine plane now on one engine, is just being a single engine plane.

A two engine plane that has lost one engine is a crippled aircraft and in an emergency situation.

Would you declare an emergency in a light single engine plane if the engine could only develop 50percent power?

The use of mayday vs pan is an odd question. I understand that in countries where multiple languages are used that standard radio phrases are important.

I can think of times that emergency should have been declared (using mayday). And that differences in language can make things even more confusing. I can think of a 707 inbound to KJFK that ran out of fuel after much trouble along the way. And ATC not really understanding how bad things had gotten.

The pan vs mayday question is one that is easily covered in the USA> I daresay most pilots would never use PANPAN. Its either an emergency or it isn't.

[con-pilot]

I can think of a 707 inbound to KJFK that ran out of fuel after much trouble along the way. And ATC not really understanding how bad things had gotten.


That was one of the accidents we studied at NTSB school. In additional to a communication problem, it was a cultural problem as well. The captain was not listening to the ATC communication, the First Officer was handling ATC.

When it became quite evident to the captain that they were in a critical fuel situation, he told the FO to declare a Mayday.

The First Officer did not.

Three times (so I recall) the captain asked the FO if he had done so*, the FO lied and told the captain he did.

By the time ATC realized that things were heading south, it was too late.

* The captain could not understand why they had not been immediately vectored toward the final approach path after declaring a Mayday, not knowing of course that no Mayday had been declared by the First Officer. If the First Officer had declared a Mayday when the captain ordered him to do so, it was determined that the aircraft would have landed safely. The fact that the captain was not monitoring the ATC communications was a contributing cause of the accident.

[ACMS]

It's whatever the COMMANDER deems appropriate given the circumstances of the failure and it's effect on the safe outcome of the flight.

[tom775257]

I was chatting to a UK atc trainer about this, UK ATC will treat an engine failure on a twin engined aircraft as a mayday no matter what you declare, not sure about the rest of the world.

[casablanca]

There may be some discretion involved.....and landing a modern jet safely on one engine is a very doable thing.....but the QRH will say land at nearest suitable airport, as it is definitely a serious incident.
As opinions are free, I'll give you mine......there are very few major incidents like this in one's career, and personally I would take advantage of every resource available, and a mayday call opens lots of doors.
I have flown 3 and 4 engine jets, and our manual clearly said the loss of one engine did not constitute an emergency, ( and you can legally continue to airport chosen by commander- look at BA flight that flew from LAX to London after engine failure on takeoff in 747), I would still declare emergency/mayday and get it back on ground safely.
I have never heard of the Caa/ FAA ever chastising someone because they have declared emergency, but I have seen them question pilots who had a potentially serious problem and failed to declare emmergency.

[Piltdown Man]

As far as I am concerned, it is my choice. If PAN doesn't give me what I want, I'll shout Mayday. An engine failure in a twin is an inconvenience rather than a dire emergency, but you will have to land at the "nearest suitable" (which us not necessarily the closest). What you are doing with your call is to let then know of your plight, reserve tracks, levels and resources due to your problem; things you are going to take disregard less of what ATC say. My experience of ATC in Europe is such that they are extremely accommodating to any aircraft with even minor faults that declaring any emergency status is pointless. They will give you want you need anyway. With one exception - LHR. To a diverting aircraft low on fuel "LHR are only diverting accepting aircraft with an emergency. Do you have an emergency?" "Not yet, but if you keep me on this heading I will be." Five minutes later "Mayday, mayday..."

[safelife]

No further redundancy? Another failure a certain crash? May day...

[bond2002]

Do we have any document to support our reasoning to support PAN or MAYDAY.
Any FAA/ JAA or ICAO Document.
Thanks.

[BN2A]

Last engine, last hydraulic system, last electrical generator... Last chance...

Guidance is clear!!

:eek:

[halfofrho]

Keep it simple. Mayday. You can always downgrade to a Pan later on.

[BOAC]

Not forgetting that some of the countries you might overfly are 'rumoured' to not 'understand' 'PAN'.......

[BeCareful]

Here is some guidance:

http://www.b737mrg.net/downloads/b737mrg_panpan-mayday.pdf

Not a bad list, but...

Engine failure to me will always be a mayday, at least initially... unless maybe it's a controlled shutdown at altitude.

[Skyjob]

Three calls of "pan-pan" in radiotelephone communications, is used to signify that there is an urgency on board but that, for the time being at least, there is no immediate danger to anyone's life or to the vessel itself. This is referred to as a state of urgency.
Three calls of "Mayday" means that there is imminent danger to life or to the continued viability of the vessel itself.

Thus "pan-pan" informs potential rescuers (including emergency services and other craft in the area) that a safety problem exists whereas "Mayday" will call upon them to drop all other activities and immediately initiate a rescue attempt.

Any failure of multiple systems rendering the aircraft in a single system state should thus be considered a potential Mayday

[Exascot]

Mayday. You may as well get yourself some priority and attention. It is unlikely that there will be another one in the same airspace so no one else is going to be put into danger.

As most here I have had many problems but never felt they required a Mayday. Four engines do help of course.

[HPSOV L]

Pan Pan or Mayday depending on the circumstances. By some poster's logic pilots of single engine aircraft should include Mayday in their taxi call. The definitions are in Annex (10?) to the Chicago Convention.



The radiotelephone distress signal to indicate grave and/or imminent danger requiring immediate assistance is

MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY.

The radiotelephone urgency signal to indicate a condition concerning the safety of an aircraft, vehicle or of some person on board which does not require immediate assistance is

PAN PAN, PAN PAN, PAN PAN.

To anyone with a grasp of English either might be appropriate depending on the nature of the failure and performance.

Both are acceptable means of declaring an emergency. And, contrary to what many will tell you, all ICAO countries have a similar radio licence syllabus and Pan/Mayday calls are an easy mark, right after the phonetic alphabet! Ask any Air Trafficker from Lagos to Tokyo. Even my wife knows that after doing a day boating course.

HOWEVER; a generation of simulator instructors seem to have succumbed to the view that perceived conservatism equals increased safety. Perhaps some were indoctrinated by previous companies SOPs, or by that habit in aviation of adding margins to margins, or simply by peers strong opinions.

Whatever the cause, just like any language changes over the years, so has aviation language. Particularly in Asian countries; when you are doing a check Mayday has become the default call for engine fail on a twin. You won't get a 5 if you use PAN.

I don't like to see aviation phraseology diminished by 'ghost' procedures but this is the reality. The PAN call is slowly being eroded out of use.

[BN2A]

See BOAC's extremely diplomatic (and correct) post further up.........

:=

[BOAC]

Glad you noticed....:) I know how I would 'start'!

[pattern_is_full]

To anyone with a grasp of English either might be appropriate depending on the nature of the failure and performance.

Or French, since both phrases come from that language. ;)

m'aidez = help me!
en panne = broken/failed/not functioning. "Houston, ahhh - We have a problem!"

There are, of course, single-engine failures, and single-engine failures.

An uncontained failure that sprays shrapnel through the wing and cabin and lights up the EICAS like a Christmas tree is a Mayday, even with 4 engines (Qantas A380).

Definitely commander's call. And as the saying goes - if there is doubt, there is no doubt.

[pattern_is_full]

Ahh, the proverbial British understatement....Glad you're around to tell the tale. :D

[safelife]

Then there are countries in which "MAYDAY" isn't understood.
Been there, done that...

[HPSOV L]

Actually the Qantas 380 Captain out of SIN used a PAN call. Later stating "at no time did I feel our lives were in danger".

Can we agree that whatever our opinions are, there is no right or wrong answer?

[cosmo kramer]

You can't "declare" a pan - there is no such thing. A pan call is just an urgent message, nothing more.

You CAN, however, declare an emergency, using mayday.


Should you declare an emergency with an engine failure?

Answer, a couple of reasons to declare an emergency at all:
- When you can't adhere to the clearances given by air traffic control
- When you immediately need to do something different that what you were cleared.

E.g. emergency descent. You call mayday to let the air traffic controller know, that you will be descending no matter what. He will the be able to assist your decent by getting other traffic out of your way (hopefully).

Same for an engine failure during departure. Most likely you will fly a contingency procedure instead of your originally cleared SID. A mayday call, will let the controller know that he needs to keep other traffic clear of your way. Good communication will ease the work of the controller (see Thomson on youtube for a well executed example - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KhZwsYtNDE).

Calling pan will not give you anything at all. Pan is just a message that takes priority over other radio calls. You don't get any priority over other traffic, and it doesn't allow you to deviate from your present clearance.

Since the misunderstanding about what a pan call really is and means, is so ingrained, calling "pan" and anything the controllers will interpret as an emergency will give you the same privileges as calling mayday - still doesn't make it correct.

[Skyjob]

HPSOV L:
Actually the Qantas 380 Captain out of SIN used a PAN call. Later stating "at no time did I feel our lives were in danger".

But you are providing an example of a quad loosing an engine, not a twin.
In the example you provide multiple systems of each type remain functioning.
In the twin scenario, 50% of some systems are gone, a single source remains, hence the MayDay is warranted whereas in the case of a quad a simple PAN will suffice

[HPSOV L]

Sky job:
Sorry, should have made it clear I was responding to a previous post. Relevant as it challenges preconceptions. Also could I suggest an ETOPs twin on one engine has as much redundancy as, say, a Pilatus PC12. This is not to deny it is a serious situation, however you can't say it's mandatory to make a MAYDAY call. That is just opinion.

Cosmo:
I think you're a bit off with your understanding of phraseology. Read the ICAO annex.

[cosmo kramer]

No I am not. And I would recommend using official sources, like ICAO Annex 10 vol 2, for definitions rather that wikipedia (Skyjob).

5.3.1.2
The radiotelephony distress signal MAYDAY and the radiotelephony urgency signal PAN PAN shall be used at the commencement of the first distress and urgency communication respectively.

If you are not in distress you are not allowed to deviate from your clearance.

[HPSOV L]

I thought for a moment you might have had a point on a technicality there Cosmo. However I can't find any specific reference to "distress" in the context of PIC emergency authority. Both FAA and ICAO refer to "emergency". Now I will grant you that ICAO annex 10 does lack some specifity, but taken in it's apparent intended context bith MAYDAY and PAN PAN are recognized methods of declaring an emergency. I believe your interpretation is flawed.


U.S. FAA and ICAO pilot in command regulations[edit]
Serving as pilot in command[edit]
Under U.S. FAA FAR 91.3, "Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command", the FAA declares:[4]

The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.
In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.
Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under paragraph (b) of this section shall, upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.
ICAO and other countries equivalent rules are similar. In Annex 2, "Rules of the Air", under par. "2.3.1 Responsibility of pilot-in-command", ICAO declares:[1]

The pilot-in-command of an aircraft shall, whether manipulating the controls or not, be responsible for the operation of the aircraft in accordance with the rules of the air, except that the pilot-in-command may depart from these rules in circumstances that render such departure absolutely necessary in the interests of safety.

In Annex 2, par. "2.4 Authority of pilot-in-command of an aircraft", ICAO adds:[1]

The pilot-in-command of an aircraft shall have final authority as to the disposition of the aircraft while in command.

Both FAR 91.3(b) and ICAO Annex 2, par. 2.3.1, specifically empower the PIC to override any other regulation in an emergency, and to take the safest course of action at his/her sole discretion. This provision mirrors the authority given to the captains of ships at sea, with similar justifications. It essentially gives the PIC the final authority in any situation involving the safety of a flight, irrespective of any other law or regulation.

[cosmo kramer]

I thought for a moment you might have had a point on a technicality there Cosmo. However I can't find any specific reference to "distress" in the context of PIC emergency authority.

For PIC to take provisions under emergency authority, there has to be imminent danger - would you not agree?


5.3.1.1 Distress and urgency traffic shall comprise all radiotelephony messages relative to the distress and urgency conditions respectively. Distress and urgency conditions are defined as:
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 which does not require immediate assistance.

Mayday = imminent danger = emergency = PIC can do whatever he deems necessary.

E.g. if not deviating from the cleared SID, single engine, it would cause a crash into a mountain.

Or

E.g. if not descending immediately, following a rapid decompression, it would mean the occupants onboard the aircraft would die from oxygen deprivation.

[HPSOV L]

[QUOTE]Mayday = imminent danger = emergency = PIC can do whatever he deems necessary./QUOTE]

I understand you are tying captains emergency authority to the concept of "imminent danger" and hence to MAYDAY on the basis of the inclusion of this phrase in the annex definition, and therefore any deviation from a clearance is a mandatory MAYDAY. I think you are extrapolating across two rules in a manner not necessarily intended by the writers. However it is not a bad interpretation in principle.

Your original post stated that you cannot declare an emergency with a PAN call. Allowing you the benefit of the doubt in the deviation from clearance case, there is nothing in the PAN call definition which would exclude it from being used to declare an emergency in other situations.


I don't suggest I wouldn't use a MAYDAY without the slightest hesitation. My point is that pilots should not feel any inhibition in using whichever phrase they think is most appropriate for their situation. After all an engine failure on a twin does not necessarily mean you will have to deviate from a clearance. In that case the preceding arguments would not be relevant.

[pattern_is_full]

Actually the Qantas 380 Captain out of SIN used a PAN call. Later stating "at no time did I feel our lives were in danger".

I stand corrected. And I am not about to question that captain or crew's abilities and judgement.

Interesting that, in that case, they did deviate from their flight plan (leveled off instead of continuing assigned climb) without seeing a need for a Mayday call.

[peekay4]

Aviate!
Navigate!
Communicate!

In that order!

In an emergency situation you as PIC may do whatever you need to do to ensure safety, including deviating from flight plans if required.

You are NOT required to first "declare an emergency", say "MAYDAY" or "PAN PAN", etc., to exercise your authority as PIC. That comes later (if ever).

[Level Attitude]

Well said peekay4
Indeed in some emergencies (ie ones which result in complete radio failure) it may not be possible to 'declare' an emergency at all - even though one exists.

[Not Long Now]

cosmo kramer, actually a PAN call WILL get priority over other traffic, whereas "we've a bit of a problem" "we're a bit tight on fuel" etc will NOT. In London FIR anyway.

[cosmo kramer]

Your original post stated that you cannot declare an emergency with a PAN call. Allowing you the benefit of the doubt in the deviation from clearance case, there is nothing in the PAN call definition which would exclude it from being used to declare an emergency in other situations.

Yes, the very definition of what a pan call is:

ICAO Annex 10 vol 2, 5.3.1.2
The radiotelephony distress signal MAYDAY and the radiotelephony urgency signal PAN PAN shall be used at the commencement of the first distress and urgency communication respectively.
Keyword "respectively":

distress signal MAYDAY = at the commencement of the first distress communication
urgency signal PAN PAN = at the commencement of urgency communication

So you can't "declare an emergency" (distress) using PAN PAN...

After all an engine failure on a twin does not necessarily mean you will have to deviate from a clearance. In that case the preceding arguments would not be relevant.
Yes, say you can stick with your departure route initially, no need for a MAYDAY call. But:
- Would you like vectors ahead of the arriving traffic?
- Can you give ATC "2000 fpm or greater", due to inbound traffic?
- Can you accept to join a hold for 45 mins until an approach slot is ready for you?
- Would you like to have fire brigade on standby (perhaps hot brakes due to approach speed)?
- Etc.

So basically you might not be able to accept a later request: "Please enter holding for the next 45 min", "unable", "are you declaring an emergency?", "ahhh, yes, MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY". Of course you can postpone the mayday call, until necessary. I see it a courteous to ATC to give them advance warning. And in the end of the day, a firetruck would still be nice?

You want priority right? :) An urgent messages doesn't give you any priority (in theory), though:

Not Long Now,
I am aware that UK handles it differently (non ICAO standard). And in practice, I am sure you will get priority in most parts of the world too, when combining a PAN+"technical problem" (no guaranties though). But it still doesn't make it correct. If ATC will treat you as en emergency trafic anyway, why use the wrong call, when it can be done right? What is the big problem about calling MAYDAY?

My philosophy is:
If I wan't/need something out of the ordinary from ATC = MAYDAY
If I don't, I keep quiet.

For an engine failure, I for sure want full co-operation and HELP (m'aidez) from ATC.

P.s.
peekay4
Of course the mayday call should be done when things are under control, I am not suggesting you have to give a mayday call before deviating - thought that was obvious. But thereafter as soon as possible... anyway ATC will probably enquire if you forget, when you miss the turn on the SID for you company contingency procedure.

[HPSOV L]

Cosmo - is there an occasion you'd actually use a PAN call?!;)

The fact is that "Emergency" is not referred to in the ICAO document. It simply refers to two conditions: Distress and urgency.

This lack of precision is unfortunate because it leaves a degree of interpretation, and leads to these circular arguments that pop up on forums regularly.. one can make inferences and extrapolate meanings from adjacent definitions, and you can assert opinions about the most prudent course of action. But at the end of the day none of it is absolute, because the people who wrote the rules didn't finish the job. How you interpret it is not necessarily down to the specifics of the wording but as much your own background and conditioning.


To go back to the original question: Engine failure on a twin: PAN or MAYDAY?

Answer: The rules are debatable,it depends on the circumstances, but PAN is going out of fashion.

[cosmo kramer]

Cosmo - is there an occasion you'd actually use a PAN call?! ;)

Yes:
"PAN PAN x3, we just saw a ship on fire at position x,y"
"PAN PAN x3, we picked up a mayday call on 121.5, didn't seem anyone copied, I will relay:.."

Basically, stuff that doesn't have anything to do we me. But is an urgent message and can't wait in cue to be transmitted.

If it has to do with me, I can either call MAYDAY or if no assistance required explain in plain word what my problem is.

[cosmo kramer]

As for the question about priority. Here officially:

PANS-ATM Doc 4444:
15.1.2 Priority
An aircraft known or believed to be in a state of emergency, including being subjected to unlawful interference, shall be given priority over other aircraft.

Since a PAN call is not a distress call, you can't expect priority (again real ATC may threat you as an emergency anyway).

[cosmo kramer]

Interesting read. Here an example of a PAN call from Doc 4444:

15.2.3 Weather deviation procedures
15.2.3.1.1 When the pilot initiates communications with ATC, a rapid response may be obtained by stating “WEATHER DEVIATION REQUIRED” to indicate that priority is desired on the frequency and for ATC response. When necessary, the pilot should initiate the communications using the urgency call “PAN PAN” (preferably spoken three times).

Another good example of an "urgent message" that needs to be passed, concerning safety of own craft.

[peekay4]

It's not that black and white, Cosmo.

Consider a twin just took off, and the tower hears any of these three calls from the aircraft:

a. "Mayday. ABC123 one engine out, can't maintain altitude!"
b. "Pan Pan. ABC123 one engine out, can't maintain altitude!"
c. "ABC123 one engine out, can't maintain altitude!"

Which of the three must be treated as an emergency?

Under ICAO rules, all three.

[cosmo kramer]

peekay4,
Yes that was never the question. But which one in your example made the correct transmission (question of original poster)?

Besides it may (in other more ambiguous situations), lead to confusion:
a. MAYDAYx3, fuel
b. PAN PANx3, fuel (Note: PAN calls for fuel are no longer allowed)
c. ehhh we are getting quite low on fuel

Another (real life example), which I overheard recently, west of Cairo during cruise:

1) Cairo cairo, Austrian XXX, PAN PAN PAN PAN PAN PAN, we need to divert to Cairo due to a medical emergency
C) Station calling?
1) It's Austrian XXX
C) Ehh Austrian XXX?
1) Yes
C) Confirm you wish to divert to Cairo?
1) Affirm
C) Ehhh standby
C) Egyptair XXX descent and maintain FL190
2) Cairo goodmorning Reach XXX, overhead ANTAR FL 350
3) Transavia XXX, request descend
4) Descending FL190, Egyptair XXX
1) AUSTRIAN XXX, WE NEED TO DIVERT TO CAIRO NOW!
C) Standby!!
2) Cairo goodmorning Reach XXX, overhead ANTAR FL 350
?) XYYYSSSSSXXX
?) Blocked!
etc.

We got a frequency change before those guys got a diversion to Cairo!

I was cringing in embarrassment, there is a passenger possibly DYING, and these guys don't have MAYDAY in their vocabulary. How hard can it be:

"MAYDAY x3 Austrian XXX, medical emergency, request diversion to Cairo"

and second call, with no clearance obtained:

"MAYDAY x3 Austrian XXX, medical emergency, turning inbound Cairo VOR. Require diversion to Cairo. Standing by for descent..."

[peekay4]

If we're going to be pedantic, a passenger "medical emergency" is normally not a MAYDAY call. PAN PAN would suffice.

A distressed aircraft in grave and imminent danger (MAYDAY) receives immediate assistance at the highest ATC priority (priority 1). The aircraft will be marked DETRESFA ("distress phase") and emergency procedures are activated. The definition of distress phase can be found in PANS-ATM (ICAO Doc. 4444). An aircraft in distress has right of way over all other traffic.

A distressed passenger with medical illness may receive priority 2 service, as necessary, if the pilot declares PAN PAN or formally declares an emergency. This is a higher level of priority than normal traffic, but does not meet the distressed aircraft criteria. Heavy traffic may preclude controllers from providing immediate assistance. This is similar to priority given to MEDEVAC flights, for example.

[cosmo kramer]

A medical may be either...

1) In case it is not that serious, that you don't need to divert, I would call PAN too. Like taking place at the end of a flight, PAN call to have medical personal available after arriving. Or maybe even it can be handled directly with the handling agent, without informing ATC.

2) A passenger is having a heart attack and DYING and a matter of minutes of touching down may make the difference between life and death:

a) Distress: a condition of being threatened by serious and/or IMMINENT danger and of requiring IMMEDIATE assistance.
= MAYDAY


You are making a classical mistake and mixing up phases of an emergency (uncertainty, alert and distress phases), with when a pilot should use emergency communication and which. Those 2 things are not connected. These phases has not necessarily to do with how ATC will handle emergency traffic, but rather the things surrounding it (when to launch SAR, roll fire brigade etc.).

[peekay4]

No, it has to do with Operational Priority.

An aircraft with a sick passenger on board, even one nearing death, does not get unlimited operational priority (meaning, right of way over all other traffic).

So in your Cairo example, even if the pilot had said PAN PAN or even MAYDAY, the nature of the emergency does not rise to the level where the ATC must drop everything else to handle the flight.

See for example FAA 7110.65V, specifically 2-1-4 (a) and (b).

[cosmo kramer]

I do not fly in FAA land, neither is Egypt.

I sure hope that an aircraft, that experiences a medical emergency will get communication priority over routine stuff like frequency handoffs etc... even in the great North America.

Can you provide a link to this local regulation of yours?

[cosmo kramer]

ICAO Doc 4444:
6.5.6.1.1 The approach sequence shall be established in a manner which will facilitate arrival of the maximum number of aircraft with the least average delay. Priority shall be given to:
a) an aircraft which anticipates being compelled to land because of factors affecting the safe operation of the aircraft (engine failure, shortage of fuel, etc.);
b) hospital aircraft or aircraft carrying any sick or seriously injured person requiring urgent medical attention;
c) aircraft engaged in search and rescue operations; and
d) other aircraft as may be determined by the appropriate authority.
Note.— An aircraft which has encountered an emergency is handled as outlined in Chapter 15, Section 15.1

I recommend reading Chapter 15, it's an interesting read.

[peekay4]

The rules are essentially same whether FAA or ICAO.


FAA Order 7110.65V Air Traffic Control

2−1−4. OPERATIONAL PRIORITY

Provide air traffic control service to aircraft on a “first come, first served” basis as circumstances permit, except the following:

a. An aircraft in distress has the right of way over all other air traffic. 14 CFR Section 91.113(c).

b. Provide priority to civilian air ambulance flights (call sign “MEDEVAC”). Use of the MEDEVAC call sign indicates that operational priority is requested. When verbally requested, provide priority to AIR EVAC, HOSP, and scheduled air carrier/air taxi flights. Assist the pilots of MEDEVAC, AIR EVAC, and HOSP aircraft to avoid areas of significant weather and turbulent conditions. When requested by a pilot, provide notifications to expedite ground handling of patients, vital organs, or urgently needed medical materials.

NOTE−
It is recognized that heavy traffic flow may affect the controller’s ability to provide priority handling. However, without compromising safety, good judgment must be used in each situation to facilitate the most expeditious movement of a MEDEVAC aircraft.

c. Provide maximum assistance to SAR aircraft performing a SAR mission. ...


You seem to view things in black & white and think that just because you used the word "MAYDAY" on a passenger medical emergency, that gives you the right to ignore ATC instructions, bust clearances, deviate your flightpath, and do whatever you want.

Sorry, but doing so would be exceeding your authority as PIC, putting others at risk, and might even delay care for the passenger in distress.

Not all emergencies are equal. Consider:

- Aircraft A calls ATC with "MAYDAY, passenger medical emergency, request immediate diversion to Cairo"

- Aircraft B also calls ATC with "MAYDAY, fire on board, losing power on both engines, request immediate diversion to Cairo"

By law, which aircraft has priority? Which pilot may deviate from ATC clearances?

PIC authority to deviate under emergencies are limited by statutes only "to the extent required to meet that emergency".

The pilot of Aircraft B would be well within his rights immediately "turn inbound Cairo VOR" and do whatever it takes to get his aircraft safely on the ground, ATC clearances be damned.

But the pilot of Aircraft A would NOT have the same right to also bust clearances, turn into the Cairo VOR, and do "whatever" to land at Cairo without permission. Such actions would be out of the norm for an in flight medical emergency, and might be considered well in excess of what is required given the nature of the emergency.

[cosmo kramer]

Your text you are quoting is dealing with ambulance flight... i.e. flights where the passenger was ill and a risk is being taken transporting him or her from the start of the flight. The text you are quoting is just saying that such flights are being giver higher priority than regular flights. These flights are not in distress per se and equipped/staffed to handle the patient during flight.

An in-flight medical emergency, where a healthy passenger boarded the flight, but is experiencing medial problem during the flight is, however, an emergency.

ICAO Annex 2 Rules of the air:
3.6.2 Adherence to flight plan
3.6.2.1 Except as provided for in 3.6.2.2 and 3.6.2.4, an aircraft shall adhere to the current flight plan or the applicable portion of a current flight plan submitted for a controlled flight unless a request for a change has been made and clearance obtained from the appropriate air traffic control unit, or unless an emergency situation arises which necessitates immediate action by the aircraft, in which event as soon as circumstances permit, after such emergency authority is exercised, the appropriate air traffic services unit shall be notified of the action taken and that this action has been taken under emergency authority.
The potential death of another human being, in my opinion, warrants deviating from my clearance.

I can accept to land as no 2, behind the guys with the cabin fire, as the death of more human beings is worse than the death of one. But I am not waiting for the controller to do his routing radio transmissions. I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree on that. My passenger hopefully lives to see another day. Yours? :)

P.s.
MAYDAY is according to my OM-A mandatory in case of a medical emergency. Of course the PIC deems when it's a medical incident and when it's a full blown emergency. A precautionary diversion, like the Austrian example above, is in my opinion definitely an emergency.

[peekay4]

You text you are quoting is dealing with ambulance flight... i.e. flights where the passenger was ill and a risk is being taken transporting him or her from the start of the flight.
No, read the part underlined in that section. It covers dealing with verbal requests (i.e., in air) from scheduled air carriers.

[cosmo kramer]

No, read the part underlined in that section. It covers dealing with verbal (i.e., in air) requests from scheduled air carriers.
"scheduled air carriers" doing what?? ;)

Carrying a patient? Like a stretcher? Yes, turbulence is probably nasty for the guy with the broken leg, being transported home from skiing holiday. It would probably be great to get priority for the level where no turbulence was reported.

But it doesn't mention scheduled air carriers having an in-flight medical emergency.

Anyway, it's still just a local FAA document. Irrelevant to the rest of the world, no matter how it is interpreted.

[glendalegoon]

WHAT A LOAD!

PILOT DECLARES EMERGENCY or uses word MAYDAY (3). PILOT may deviate from all rules as needed to take care of emergency.

ONCE upon the ground, he may have to explain things.

IF you have a passenger who is in medical need (not something like, oops, my finger nail broke on this can of soda) declare an emergency and get to where YOU decide ( you can consult with others)>

I declared a MEDICAL emergency, requested and rec'd vectors direct to airport and was made number one on the apch and for landing and had medical help waiting.

Granted if another plane had been overhead the airport with all engines out, we could easily have gone to another of the 4 runways. BUT IF AIR FORCE ONE was in our way, they would have gotten OUT of the way.


Some people are so into the regulations that they don't use common sense.

FLIGHT ATTENDANT: Captain, a little boy is dying and the doctor who happens to be on board says we must get him to a hospital ASAP.

CAPTAIN: Oh, tell the doctor and the little boy's parents that their situation does not qualify for a full blown emergency according to BITE MY SHORTS REGULATION .


shave and a haircut, six bits.