East Midlands incident.

[G-CPTN]

M1 closed near East Midlands Airport for Jet2 emergency (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-39172427).

[runway30]

Move on, nothing to see here.

[edi_local]

Why that was even reported is beyond me, but to mention the Kegworth crash in this article is just beyond ridiculous.

[Ancient-Mariner]

And, from the BBC link above, "Highways England, which manages the motorway, tweeted to alert motorists (https://twitter.com/HighwaysEMIDS/status/838142079519850499) to the "aircraft emergency" and motorway closure." Beggars belief with tougher penalties announced just 5 days ago...

[DaveReidUK]

Why that was even reported is beyond me

Possibly because closing a motorway in response to an aircraft emergency isn't an everyday occurrence ?

but to mention the Kegworth crash in this article is just beyond ridiculous.Well yes, had the Jet2 come down on a running motorway maybe drivers would have been equally lucky on this occasion ...

There's a different between a non-event and an event that concluded safely. :O

[Chesty Morgan]

Except it wasn't an emergency.

[Jonty]

Can you elaborate?

[Nige321]

So what was it...??

[Chesty Morgan]

It was the police and the wombles who used the term emergency.

[G-CPTN]

A spokesman for East Midlands Airport (http://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/why-m1-was-closed-due-to-aircraft-emergency-at-east-midlands-airport/story-30181013-detail/story.html) said:
"It was a Jet2 aircraft - the pilot called for emergency services because of a problem with the fuel box. Emergency services were called as a precaution."

[DaveReidUK]

Clearly he was squawking 7700 for the last 30 minutes of the flight just to test his transponder. :ugh:

[Chesty Morgan]

Or was he asked to by ATC?

[hoss183]

Anyone have any more info on this?
M1 closed near East Midlands Airport for Jet2 emergency - BBC News (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-derbyshire-39172427)

[DaveReidUK]

http://www.pprune.org/spectators-balcony-spotters-corner/591814-east-midlands-incident.html

[Johnny F@rt Pants]

because of a problem with the fuel box A what????

[Piltdown Man]

The whole story is a load of :mad: about a ridiculous over-reaction. Since when does any Perf. A aircraft "fault indication" require a motorway to be shut down? But the phraseology is the typical guff I expect a from a bunch of limp-wristed, progressive arts graduates employed by civic amenities: "a clear flight path" - my arse. Exactly how low does this dross expect an aircraft to fly? Were ATC told to calculate a flight path such that if any catastrophic failure took place Derby and Nottingham would be safe? What other precautions took place? And as AM stated, what **** for brains thought tweeting motorists would be a good idea? How exactly were they meant to read the bloody thing?

All of those involved in this over-reaction should be publicly drowned in a bucket of water - either that or used for medical experiments. Our world will be better off without them.

[DaveReidUK]

Like it or not, we're living in an increasingly litigious age.

I'd guess that there are some at Leics Police and/or EMA ATC who have longer memories than most.

Over-reaction ? Almost certainly, yes.

But that's a sign of the times we're living in, and not just in matters relating to aviation.

[fireflybob]

Were they thinking of the Hunter accident at Shoreham? Maybe some bureaucrat somewhere has issued an advisory to all the constabulary?

Good grief if there's much more of this nonsense there's not much hope for us!

[trinnydriver]

This sort of bevaviour shouldn't be normalised - whoever thought this through should stick to writing stories with the imagination they must have.

[DaveReidUK]

We may as well get used to it, it's unlikely to be the last instance of this kind.

To be fair to the police, they were between a rock and a hard place. As soon as they were informed (presumably by ATC or EMA/EXS ops) that there was flight with a declared emergency inbound on 27, doing nothing wasn't an option and closing the motorway was inevitable..

We can't expect the police to be aviation technical experts able to distinguish between various flavours of emergency. Even without the shadow of Shoreham, they weren't to know whether they might be looking at another potential BD92.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing ...

[hoss183]

Agree with Dave, it was not the fault of the Police, rather the advice they received from the 'expert'.
One might possibly consider if it was coming in 09 and had some fault that affected stopping distance, it 'could' be warranted. As it was it came in on 27, if there was something that suggested it coming in short such as dual engine failure or bingo fuel a-la Heathrow 777... it could perhaps be justified. But as we have no real information on the 'fuel box' fault it might be worth waiting for more information before hanging anyone...

[Flying Wild]

Is the M25 & M4 closed if an aircraft comes into LHR with a problem?
What about the M9 at EDI, or the M8 at GLA, or the M42 at BHX, or the M23 at LGW?

Someone added 2+2 and got 10. What a ridiculous overreaction.

[c52]

It's the same mentality that imposes a 50 limit on six miles of motorway because there's a car stopped on the hard shoulder.

[Expatrick]

Have seen the M27 closed for aircraft reporting an issue.

[Doors to Automatic]

It's the same mentality that imposes a 50 limit on six miles of motorway because there's a car stopped on the hard shoulder.

Or 4 miles of enforced 40mph after an incident!! :mad:

[Jonty]

I imagine its standard procedure for any aircraft declaring an emergency, probably put in place after the Kegworth accident.

Does anyone know what the problem was? preferably with out using the words "fuel box"!

[Johnny F@rt Pants]

Does anyone know what the problem was? - yes, and it had nothing to do with the fuel box

[DaveReidUK]

Looks like we'll never know. :ugh:

[Richard J.]

If the reported fuel-related problem was a suspected fuel leak, perhaps the police didn't want it poured over a working M1.

[ATNotts]

A logical extension of this kind of "policy" is surely that when there are heavy crosswinds making landings difficult we might wind up with "level crossing gates" on motorways that will be closed as every arriving aircraft comes in - just in case something goes pear shaped.

At some stage this country has got to get a grip, accept that we don't live in a risk free environment, and that restore some rationality to assessing risk, and managing said risk.

It remains to be seen whether the Jet2 incident last weekend was serious, hopefully if it was it will be properly reported through the usual channels.

Motorways lane / complete closures are another example highlighted above. Drive on the continent as see how few km of cones there are ahead on roadworks or lane closure ahead of an incident. 1000m is normal for road works, often less for incidents, and curiously people cope by driving accordingly - as they would in UK.

[DaveReidUK]

A logical extension of this kind of "policy" is surely that when there are heavy crosswinds making landings difficult we might wind up with "level crossing gates" on motorways that will be closed as every arriving aircraft comes in - just in case something goes pear shaped.

That's not really a logical extension.

The criterion that appears to have been applied here (though we can't be sure) is that an aircraft that has declared an emergency (which we know is the case as it was squawking 7700) is presumed to represent a potential danger to traffic on a busy motorway that it is intending to overfly at low level.

We can argue till the cows come home about how realistic the prospect was of the aircraft falling out of the sky (though of course there have been aircraft declaring fuel-related emergencies that have done exactly that in the past), but it's hard to fault the police who are, after all, programmed to react to the word "emergency" in the public interest.

[fireflybob]

I met someone today who was a passenger on the aircraft in question. He advised me that passengers were told that an engine was shutdown as a precautionary measure due to reducing oil pressure. He is an experienced retired air force pilot who still keeps his hand in on light aircraft.

[fotheringay]

I met someone today who was a passenger on the aircraft in question. He advised me that passengers were told that an engine was shutdown as a precautionary measure due to reducing oil pressure. He is an experienced retired air force pilot who still keeps his hand in on light aircraft.

And bearing in mind that the Kegworth accident was caused by a B737 with engine problems, some 28 years ago, crashing on the western side of the M1, in a cutting, with fatalities, you can perhaps understand the reason why the emergency procedures were carried out as they were. No vehicles were affected on that occasion but easily could have been.
I am sure the Shoreham accident, although not directly comparable, have sharpened the minds of those agencies responsible for emergency action.

[Piltdown Man]

Fotheringay - I can understand their little person logic but it is not based on science. Modern airliners fly well with one engine, they are designed to do so. The pilots are generally trained to make a mayday call to declare an emergency, if only to make the point that they do not want to be messed around. That call, is then extrapolated by ignorant idiots that there is going to be a crash. And the M1 gets shut. It takes a fair while to close a motorway. In the process, there is a very reasonable chance that others will be injured due to the unusual activity of the closing process. Re-routed motorway traffic will then be jeopardising others by travelling on roads not designed for such traffic loads. So in the process, thousands will be inconvenienced, several crashes will have occurred and many people's lives will have unnecessarily be put at risk. All because of a bloody idiot who doesn't understand risk management.

And is it OK to call mayday or do we have to give prior notice? And why aren't other major roads and railways shut when there are emergencies? Should we maybe stop flying? Or should we stop driving because we kill a few thousand people on the roads every year?

PM

[MATELO]

I can understand their little person logic but it is not based on science.

Science has proven, unequivocally, that jet airliners can't fly with out power.

[DaveReidUK]

Modern airliners fly well with one engine, they are designed to do so.

Indeed they do.

Provided you've shut down the right one, that is.

[Chesty Morgan]

Correct one!

[Mr Angry from Purley]

Man the noise coming out of the Midland 737 as it lurched into Kegworth
(I can only describe as horrendous cranking) I can recall it even now.
Sad

[Harry Wayfarers]

pilots are generally trained to make a mayday call to declare an emergency, if only to make the point that they do not want to be messed around

Well then they've been trained incorrectly.

A emergency, or a problem such as this, is a PAN, a MAYDAY is supposed to be only used when a loss of life is imminent, as a recent example the Swiss B777 in to Frobisher made a PAN call when they found themselves reduced to one engine.

[Denti]

I guess that is a matter of opinion. In dense middle european airspace i would always go to mayday, and be it only for the reason that i will deviate from ATC clearances and minimum separation is no longer assured. And i won't get any RAs either. A mayday state can allways be downgraded to PAN PAN later on when the initial actions are done.

And of course, remember that PAN PAN is not recognized everywhere, try it in spain for example...

[Harry Wayfarers]

A mayday state can allways be downgraded

So the crew over-reacted declaring that the aircraft and passengers were in an imminent life threatening situation and people wonder why the authorities went shutting down a motorway etc. :ugh:

[Piltdown Man]

No, the crew did not necessarily over react. I'm sure they did what they were trained to do. The over-reaction was on the ground. Whenever I have declared an emergency I have always let ATC know what our problem is, the implications of that problem, what I want from them and what I don't. How they deal with things is up to them. I'm sure this crew will have done the same.

[Avitor]

Perhaps the police practice for when they have good reason to shut the roads to traffic. Shutting roads gives a greater hue to their yellow coats.

[DaveReidUK]

Whenever I have declared an emergency I have always let ATC know what our problem is, the implications of that problem, what I want from them and what I don't. How they deal with things is up to them. I'm sure this crew will have done the same.

That's very likely the case in this instance, too.

The problem would appear to be that by the time the message got through to the police it had become the aeronautical equivalent of "send three and fourpence, we're going to a dance". :O

[Harry Wayfarers]

No, the crew did not necessarily over react. I'm sure they did what they were trained to do. The over-reaction was on the ground.

In one of my previous lives I did Air Traffic Control:

If an aircraft declared a PAN our reaction was "OK, we've got a problem"

If an aircraft declared a MAYDAY then "Holy Sh1t" and people would run around with heads up butts.

In this instance, it seems, the crew declared a MAYDAY and people on the ground ran around with heads up butts inconveniencing all users of the M1 motorway in the process.

So why the criticism of the authorities on the ground when it was the aircraft commander that instigated any over-reaction?

[Piltdown Man]

So who is the guilty party them? Harry, you are a panic merchant. ATC have the benefit of being in a nice warm room that doesn't move too much, tea that won't shake itself into your lap and with colleagues around who they can turn to for advice. And when they hear "Mayday", it's not them who will be in the smoking hole. That should (and normally does) put them leagues ahead of us. They can think about things in their nice dark rooms (or bright an airy - I honestly haven't a clue) that we haven't thought about. Whether the term used is Mayday or Pan Pan, it shouldn't really matter. The message is that it ain't "Ops normal". That doesn't mean draw out your life savings from an ATM in case the plane crashes into your bank's head office or close the bloody M1. It's just a statement that your help is required.

[Harry Wayfarers]

Whether the term used is Mayday or Pan Pan, it shouldn't really matter.

It's just a statement that your help is required.

That's a very one sided, and somewhat ignorant, statement.

Flight Crew are not the only ones to have training and procedures to adhere to as best they can, air traffic control too have their procedures, particularly emergency procedures, and if they have hit the emergency button then, pretty much, all hell breaks loose, the fire service, ambulance service, police etc. etc. etc., they all want answers and they want them now, it can be pandemonium in a tower when "an imminent loss of life" has just been broadcast to them and get it wrong then serious and legal repercussions could follow.

Sure it can be more nerve-racking in a flight deck than in a tower but you applied for your job and I applied for mine!

[KelvinD]

I am just the same as all the posters on this thread; I really don't have a clue what happened as I wasn't there!
However, I can imagine the following scenario post the British Midland incident all those years ago:
Big post mortem meeting between all affected services, organisations etc.
How effective were various responses?
What can and should be done in the event this happens again in future?
Set out conclusions and recommendations in a series of pre-ordained procedures in the event of scenarios X,Y or Z happening.
And this time, the procedures were followed.
What would have been the response if it all went bad this time without any such procedures and an aircraft ended up on top of 20 cars, 12 lorries and a school bus?
I would wager the same people currently condemning and criticising all and sundry on this forum would be doing exactly the same, only louder!
Why not give it a break and wait for the inevitable inquiry publishes its findings?

[Harry Wayfarers]

KelvinD,

If single engine approaches over motorways are to, standardly, close the motorway then LGW and the M23, LHR and the M25, SOU and the M27, STN and the M11, to name but four and as for Duxford and the M11, well does Duxford get much traffic with more than one engine? :)

Whether it be a PAN or a MAYDAY it's still a '7700' squawk that warns all others to stay away, it's been suggested that a MAYDAY can always be downgraded at a later time, yes and a PAN can always be upgraded at a later time.

It might be discretionary upon the aircraft commander whether he declares a PAN or a MAYDAY but, on the ground, not everything in life is discretionary, procedures are in place for specific scenarios, ... Emergency service to ATC "Did he declare a PAN or a MAYDAY?", ATC to emergency service "He declared a MAYDAY", emergency service to ATC "Holy ****"!

[KelvinD]

Harry W: I wasn't suggesting a standard procedure, merely speculating what may have happened in the Kegworth incident.

[Chesty Morgan]

SOU and the M27 happens...there's history there too though.

[DaveReidUK]

I suspect that the fallout from BA38 (different circumstances, but could easily have ended up as another Kegworth) has also changed for ever the attitude of the civil authorities.

I don't think we will in future see an airliner with a reported fuel-related emergency making an approach over a live motorway.