Delta engine failure-Prague

[Sailvi767]

https://youtu.be/1yFJHhHDPA4

[Atlantic Explorer]

Is it just me or are the DL 76s prone to engine problems in recent times? Seem to have heard of quite a few issues lately with them.

[Capn Bloggs]

What a ripper video.

[DaveReidUK]

Nicely shot and edited. Roughly 22 minutes elapsed time between the engine letting go and coming to a halt on the runway.

[esreverlluf]

Great vid - love the old 76' climb capability on one engine.

[Avman]

All handled very well, apart from the (initial) non-standard r/t from Delta :E

[India Four Two]

So even outside of the US, American pilots are reluctant to utter the word "Mayday"?

[stilton]

So even outside of the US, American pilots are reluctant to utter the word "Mayday"?


It was not the procedure for decades and to give this crew credit they didn’t get the chance, they were contacted by the tower before being able to make that call

They did a good job

[FUMR]

It was not the procedure for decades and to give this crew credit they didn’t get the chance, they were contacted by the tower before being able to make that call

They did a good job

You have misheard the r/t. Listen to it again and Delta refers to themselves as "emergency aircraft".

[spekesoftly]

So even outside of the US, American pilots are reluctant to utter the word "Mayday"?

It would be interesting to know what phaseology they use when practising emergencies in the simulator.

[ImbracableCrunk]

I was chastised on my last AQP ride for saying "Mayday."

ICAO RT is waaaaay down on the list of priorities in 'Merica.

[B2N2]

We are now beaten with a wet towel anytime we say anything but Mayday x3 in the sIm.
:ouch:

The times of :
Uh….mumble….declaring…mumble…’murhency….mumble…*profanities*


….are supposed to be over.

[FUMR]

We all know that the US of A have their own anything-goes phraseology which, I guess, is fine if you're flying domestically in that country. However, it might not be a bad idea for crews flying internationally to abide by ICAO standards when operating outside of the USA.

[Oasis]

We were taught eng fail is not a May Day call, simply ‘we are declaring an emergency’ or ‘pan pan’ (which some controllers don’t seem to understand)

[safetypee]

The point of having a pilot in the flight deck is that human judgement in the actual situation is better than any preconceived management idea or that taught in training.

Mayday is the international standard; a good starting point which can either be downgraded, or added to with additional information.

There is no standard engine failure, nor standard classification at the time of the event.

[Magplug]

A 'Mayday' is entirely appropriate anywhere in the world when losing 50% or more of your powerplant.

Pilots flying internationally should not have to tailor their R/T to suit local customs. The US does not adhere to ICAO standards on many things because, quite simply, it was 'not invented here'.

[Longtimer]

According to https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP413%20E23%20A1%2026Nov2020.pdf
States of Emergency 8.2 The states of emergency are classified as follows:
1. Distress A condition of being threatened by serious and/or imminent danger and of requiring immediate assistance.
2. Urgency A condition concerning the safety of an aircraft or other vehicle, or of some person on board or within sight, but does not require immediate assistance.
8.3 The pilot should start the emergency call with the appropriate international RTF prefix as follows: 1. Distress ‘MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY’
2. Urgency ‘PAN PAN, PAN PAN, PAN PAN’ UHF and VHF Emergency Service 8.4 The UK Distress and Diversion (D&D) Section is located at the London Control Centre. It is manned by RAF control staff who are assisted in the provision of an emergency service on the International Aeronautical Emergency Frequency 121.5 MHz and on 243.0 MHz by suitably equipped civil and military units and certain HM Coastguard stations. The service is available continuously to pilots flying within UK airspace who are in distress, in urgent need of assistance, or experiencing difficulties (i.e. temporarily unsure of position) which could lead to a state of emergency. The service may also be available for practices

[Consol]

Reassuring to know so many armchairs and MS sims are flown with the correct verbiage.
Well done DL crew.

[meleagertoo]

A 'Mayday' is entirely appropriate anywhere in the world when losing 50% or more of your powerplant.

"appropriate"?
I disagree.

It is mandatory.

[airspeed75]

Trust PPRuNe to get so excited over minutia such as phraseology which isn't standard where that crew come from during one of the more critical experiences the guys will face in their careers. They were also slightly rushed into the R/T by the transfer to radar pretty much at the moment the thing blew an engine.

They've had an engine fail at a critical phase of flight (and not your standard simulator V1 cut at that) and as far as I can see externally have flown the aircraft well (cue someone pointing out the slight downwind drift :rolleyes:) and made the appropriate decision to return expeditiously - they got the exact same response and service they've have got if they said the standard Mayday x 3 call.

Good job to them I say. :ok: Especially given it's Delta, so probably all done with quite the hangover. :E

[pattern_is_full]

It would be interesting to know what phaseology they use when practising emergencies in the simulator.

It would be interesting to know what phraseology they used in the cockpit of that flight - that didn't transmit on the RT. :oh:

"*^%$%^&*(!!"

[stilton]

You have misheard the r/t. Listen to it again and Delta refers to themselves as "emergency aircraft".


You have misunderstood my post, I heard what the crew said in their acknowledgment to the controller, it’s correct they referred to themselves as an emergency aircraft

My point was they didn’t get the chance to call Mayday as the controller called them first

[Capn Bloggs]

it’s correct they referred to themselves as an emergency aircraft
No it's not, the world over would call "PAN PAN PAN PAN PAN PAN, Tower, Delta XXX Engine Failure, Maintaining Runway Track, standby for further information". Done in the sim x 3 every 6 months. What do you guys do??

​​​​​​​My point was they didn’t get the chance to call Mayday as the controller called them first
The point is it doesn't matter what the controller says, you then immediately call Mayday (or Pan). ATC can then decide what to do with you; stay on Tower or go to Dep.

[Less Hair]

Mayday is a code word to get attention fast. What is the point to call for attention when the tower sees and knows what has happened already?

[Ascend Charlie]

Thought the tower would have said "You are trailing smoke from right engine."

[safetypee]

An internationally agreed term provides consistency in communication.
Calling (when able) cost nothing, but can avoid complacency or assumption about seeing or knowing - for either party in the communication.

We judge with hindsight, biased by outcome - success; but the important lessons are in the process, that communications can breakdown, mislead, misunderstood. The safety value is identifying the difference between 'good enough' and the striven for 'excellence' in our profession.

[Capn Bloggs]

What is the point to call for attention when the tower sees and knows what has happened already?
Well, it is clear that the tower did not know what had happened. There is certainly zero indication that TC saw it or realised the gravity of the situation. Do you really think they'd just say "Delta 79 contact radar goodbye" if they knew the aircraft had just suffered a major malfunction? More likely ATC were not even looking at the 767 as it climbed out and didn't see what was obviously an abnormal event.

​​​​​​​Mayday is a code word to get attention fast.
Where's that definition?? :rolleyes:

[RandomPerson8008]

I knew this would be the focal point of the discussion on pprune as soon as I heard the first part of the video. Pan or mayday is emphasized where I work (U.S. based carrier with a fleet of 100+ widebodies). Additionally it was recently added to the US / FAA aeronautical information manual publication as being the the appropriate phraseology.

As it is, many of the US long haul pilots are 60+ years old and quite set in their ways. I teach in the sim and trying to impart the need for this phraseology to my senior counterparts as a mere 50 year old youngster in a diplomatic way is a real struggle. When they are fighting a V1 cut they tend not to care and view any critique of r/t during debrief as nitpicking and minutia. I do my best, but the odds of this coming out of the transmitter properly, especially from the left seat are slim. Law of primacy and all, under stress they’re going to do things they way they were first learned.

[Cornish Jack]

Law of primacy and all, under stress they’re going to do things they way they were first learned.
Yes, of course, that may be so... BUT these people are not operating in a vacuum - the younger less experienced watch, listen and observe ,,, then copy ! and so it goes on.
From observation, It would seem that there is some sort of 'macho' induced reluctance, among (particularly) US pilots to declare an emergency (other than 'bullying' ATC into giving them a preferred runway ! !) What tends to be missed from these discussions are the procedures (external to the aircraft) which are activated by the 'Mayday' or 'Pan' declaration - in particular the priority radar indication which makes inter-control coordination so much more simple. The correct procedure is simple ... not using it can lead to unnecessary problems ... and worse ! :ugh:

[FlyingStone]

One of the safety recommendations following the Tenerife disaster was:

3.2. Use of standard, concise and unequivocal aeronautical language.

Quite a shame that part of our industry hasn't adopted standardised R/T in a case of an emergency nearly half a century later, despite the countless opportunities to practice it in a simulator every 6 months.

[1southernman]

Even with comm failure I believe the results would have been about the same with this crew...Hard to argue with success...:)

[FUMR]

Even with comm failure I believe the results would have been about the same with this crew...Hard to argue with success...:)

Nonsensical statement. There's been no argument that the crew didn't do their job handling the emergency. That was never the issue. The issue is that using non-standard phraseology in countries where controllers' mother tonque is not English carries the potential for misunderstandings. Hence the need to abide by standard ICAO phraseology. It doesn't detract from a good job done by the crew. The words MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY will immediately put ATC on alert.

[ATC Watcher]

Excellent handling by everyone , no question , now the R/T question of course. Using non ICAO standard phraseology has caused so many incidents and accidents over the last decades, so why the resistance to accept it ? I fail to understand what some of the best trained and best paid pilots , like now here the Delta ones , still do not get this basic safety rule. . We all in the rest of the world have to get tested for English minimum level 4 and get refreshers on using the correct phraseology, while some pilots get automatically level 6 without even having to do a test. Especially those pilots should set the example, but in fact they are often the worst. All the US incidents we have been debating in the other forum recently have all one thing in common : confusing non standard phraseology.

[moosepileit]

Bernoulli, Magellan,Marconi (nee Tesla). Aviate, navigate, communicate. (Yes, in scripted AQP one expects a quick, accurate Pan declaration and description of the engine failure procedure routing to inform ATC of which tin to push).

Law of primacy- ATC handed off to departure having not seen the black smoke trail of #2. No shock when US parlance, not ICAO phrases squirt out.

Exactly when Marconi/Tesla were third place runners after Beurnoulli and Magellan- one gets a pass.


I teach part 121 and grew up Intl ICAO- sure, debrief the Pan R/T- but no one that has been there give **** #1 if the context was conveyed.

Not even the CAAC would assign a point against the operator's certificate on this one

[CHfour]

"appropriate"?
I disagree.

It is mandatory.
A mayday is not necessary if there are no additional issues. A triple pan is sufficient. If that isn't understood by ATC then a mayday would do the trick. From what could be seen and heard on the video, it looked well handled to me and I particularly liked the way they planted it on the runway!

[LTCTerry]

...8.3 The pilot should start the emergency call with the appropriate international RTF prefix as follows: 1. Distress ‘MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY’...

Words mean things, and "should" does not mean must or shall...

The French pilot understood it was an emergency and asked about vacating the runway.

The pilot explained what the emergency was faster than he could have said "mayday, mayday, mayday." And everyone was safely on the ground a few minutes later. What did he do wrong?

[Cornish Jack]

The pilot explained what the emergency was faster than he could have said "mayday, mayday, mayday." And everyone was safely on the ground a few minutes later. What did he do wrong?

...and they still don't get it !
Are these people so self-centred and unaware of the variation in operating conditions that they feel no need to accommodate them ? Let's just slob around with R/T based on "Hi Joe, mebbe got a bummer heah !", or some individual variation thereof ... I expect everyone involved will (eventually) work out what is meant ! While the United States may well have a preponderance of aviation in all its forms, operating outside their own little bubble requires INTERNATIONAL understanding and cooperation. :ugh:

[Uplinker]

We were taught eng fail is not a May Day call, simply ‘we are declaring an emergency’ or ‘pan pan’ (which some controllers don’t seem to understand)

The terminology is not strictly relevant here, but that (in bold), would be 10 syllables, whereas "MAYDAY x3" is just 6 syllables, and everybody - ATC, and all the other airborne aircraft instantly recognise the word and understand what it means, and will react accordingly. So it is very simple, very clear, and gets immediate attention and assistance. It is also much quicker to say, allowing the aircrew to get back to concentrating on the cockpit emergency. Surely much simpler and easier to use it ?

Trust PPRuNe to get so excited over minutia such as phraseology which isn't standard where that crew come from during one of the more critical experiences..........Good job to them I say. :ok: Especially given it's Delta, so probably all done with quite the hangover. :E

Yes, and I agree; an emergency well handled, but then you went and spoilt it by implying that the crew might have been flying after drinking too much...... :bored: :confused:

[FlyingStone]

The pilot explained what the emergency was faster than he could have said "mayday, mayday, mayday." And everyone was safely on the ground a few minutes later. What did he do wrong?

Works every time until it doesn't.

How many "declaring an emergency" calls did it take for those 737-200 guys in Hawaii a while ago for (native-speaking) ATC and other traffic to get the message?

[ATC Watcher]

Words mean things, and "should" does not mean must or shall

And everyone was safely on the ground a few minutes later. What did he do wrong?
The end does not justifies the means in our business . It is not because there was a successful outcome that it justifies everything like by passing basic rules such as not using standard phraseology .

For info Mayday 3x is much more than “ declaring emergency” it implies immediate assistance , priority and radio silence from everyone else on the same frequency, also to avoid cross transmissions .
It goes back to basic training .

as to the “ should “ in ICAO docs , i hope you know how to read PANS OPS and not part of this group of pilots that read “ Resolution Advisory” as just an advice . Quite a lot still out there unfortunately .

[Uplinker]

Thank you, ATC Watcher.

In addition, we must all remember that radio telecommunications are not high fidelity, nor are they necessarily clear of interference or distortion. Microphones are not always placed in the correct position, and can be half full of food and spit, so voices can be indistinct.

So "....callsign, we have a problem and are declaring an emergency", if subject to distortion or interference, might NOT be received clearly or unambiguously; potentially requiring the ATCO to ask "Callsign, Say again?", taking up precious pilot processing and time.

Whereas "MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY" Is short, simple, unambiguous and distinctive. Anyone hearing it, or part of it, will know what it is.

[J.O.]

I simply don't understand the resistance to change from "declaring an emergency" to standard aviation phraseology (PAN PAN or MAYDAY). Defending an unwillingness to change among crusty senior citizens like me doesn't wash either. I don't care how old I am; if the CP sends down an SOP change which requires me to say "Positive Climb" instead of "Positive Rate" or similar, I'm damn well going to change what I say so that anyone sitting beside me (or listening to my radio call) will understand what I mean. Change is the only constant in life - even for pilots. Time to get over ourselves and stop rowing upstream.

[Lake1952]

Words mean things, and "should" does not mean must or shall...

The French pilot understood it was an emergency and asked about vacating the runway.

The pilot explained what the emergency was faster than he could have said "mayday, mayday, mayday." And everyone was safely on the ground a few minutes later. What did he do wrong?

I wonder if the AF pilot also considered the possibility of there being debris on the runway from the malfunctioning engine that just departed.

And why is the immediate response to a Mayday call an inane request for number of souls on board and fuel remaining?

[bean]

I have noticed that American Airlines pilots do now call mayday or pan in numerous events where ATC recordings are published on Youtube

[bean]

I wonder if the AF pilot also considered the possibility of there being debris on the runway from the malfunctioning engine that just departed.

And why is the immediate response to a Mayday call an inane request for number of souls on board and fuel remaining?
Full video of the incident from start to finish No immediate inane request from this controller. It is US controllers who are the most guilty in that regard https://youtu.be/zVhFLARbCDI

[stilton]

No it's not, the world over would call "PAN PAN PAN PAN PAN PAN, Tower, Delta XXX Engine Failure, Maintaining Runway Track, standby for further information". Done in the sim x 3 every 6 months. What do you guys do??


The point is it doesn't matter what the controller says, you then immediately call Mayday (or Pan). ATC can then decide what to do with you; stay on Tower or go to Dep.


If only you could stay as calm as this crew did

The problem was handled competently and with a minimum of fuss

[Cornish Jack]

If only you could stay as calm as this crew did

The problem was handled competently and with a minimum of fuss

... really ? ... so calm that they failed to use correct international procedures ! As to competence and minimum of fuss, I haven't heard the CVR ... have you ?
Aviation is an INTERNATIONAL activity - derogation from internationally agreed procedures to satisfy individualism or false bravado is to be expected from rebellious teenagers ... the aviation community claims a much more responsible attitude ! :ugh:

[PEI_3721]

Success brings with it the danger of complacency.

Judging the outcome (safe, success) could range from 'good enough' to 'could be better'; this judgement can influence behaviour in future situations.

In our currently safe industry we must continue to learn, particularly from success. Learning relates to how we choose to frame 'success'; good enough, or could be better.

Those who believe 'good enough', at a given time, in context, can suffer surprise over time: cf regulator viewpoint - 737Max.

Todays good enough will not be sufficient Tomorrow.

Uplink, ATC, CJ, :ok:

[172_driver]

I think the Brits have soon chased every American pilot away from this forum... :hmm: Whenever an ATC recording is posted you just know what the discussion will be about.

[BFSGrad]

Works every time until it doesn't.

How many "declaring an emergency" calls did it take for those 737-200 guys in Hawaii a while ago for (native-speaking) ATC and other traffic to get the message?

Using MAYDAY vs emergency in the Transair 810 accident would have made no difference. According to the ATC transcript, ATC factual report, and ATC interviews from the docket, the initial and subsequent transmissions from 810 to ATC using the word “emergency” were either garbled or not received. Contributing to the communications logjam were (1) bad luck of simultaneous transmissions, (2) Transair 809 also on approach for landing, (3) combining ATC positions (all tower and approach) into a single controller (local controller).

BTW, at the time of the 810 accident, the local controller had nearly 30 years experience as an FAA air traffic controller.

[biigD]

I simply don't understand the resistance to change from "declaring an emergency" to standard aviation phraseology (PAN PAN or MAYDAY). Defending an unwillingness to change among crusty senior citizens like me doesn't wash either. I don't care how old I am; if the CP sends down an SOP change which requires me to say "Positive Climb" instead of "Positive Rate" or similar, I'm damn well going to change what I say so that anyone sitting beside me (or listening to my radio call) will understand what I mean. Change is the only constant in life - even for pilots. Time to get over ourselves and stop rowing upstream.

I don't think it's necessarily an intentional disregard for change - it's very common to inadvertently revert to old procedures in times of stress.

All the big carriers in the US (that I'm aware of, at least) now beat us over the head to use MAYDAY in these situations - including domestically - and we certainly now say it in the sim every time.

Why this crew didn't use it here I don't know, but it's not necessarily intentional noncompliance.

[stilton]

All this hot air from the nation which allows ‘practice pans’ on active frequencies

[moosepileit]

All this hot air from the nation which allows ‘practice pans’ on active frequencies

Beautious Saturday AM, coasting into UK- practice PAN on 121.5 by a student. Our ATC was also the steer. Nearby Lufthansa comes unglued about it with ATC for minutes. No answer sufficed. ATC was a patient peach about it- I chuckle knowing the update steer request now looms... On cue, update practice pan steer request, more rough Luft gripes, so I key up, "Luft, from Reach, if you could win a bloody war, we'd all do this your way, auf Deutsch"!

That restored the quiet, if not the peace.

Aviate, navigate, communicate. Bernoulli, Magellan, Marconi/Tesla- in that order- wannabes griping comms means we had a good day...

[Cornish Jack]

Aviate, navigate, communicate.

... "E......N** descend two four zero zero" Crew receiving that (on a non-precision approach !) descended to 400' !. They died in the 747, of which, they were in charge. Which of the 3 basic aviation tenets would have "meant that they had a better day" :ugh:
As one of those who started aviation comms using ABLE, BAKER etc. with 'PATCASATNI' being the distress imperative, I am at a loss to understand the seeming inability/reluctance/ bloody-mindedness which makes today's simplicity of 'MAYDAY' or, even fewer syllables, 'PAN', so difficult for one particular section of the industry to cope with !
An easily arranged visit to the D&D cell or its equivalent would possibly offer better professional value than vain attempts to lower one's handicap ! :rolleyes:

[moosepileit]

Aviate, navigate, communicate.

... "E......N** descend two four zero zero" Crew receiving that (on a non-precision approach !) descended to 400' !. They died in the 747, of which, they were in charge. Which of the 3 basic aviation tenets would have "meant that they had a better day" :ugh:
As one of those who started aviation comms using ABLE, BAKER etc. with 'PATCASATNI' being the distress imperative, I am at a loss to understand the seeming inability/reluctance/ bloody-mindedness which makes today's simplicity of 'MAYDAY' or, even fewer syllables, 'PAN', so difficult for one particular section of the industry to cope with !
An easily arranged visit to the D&D cell or its equivalent would possibly offer better professional value than vain attempts to lower one's handicap ! :rolleyes:

They blundered navigation Magellan, then R/T weakness in Marconi/Tesla helped seal their fate- because they had lost SA and descended, not climbed, confirmed, held or diverted. Someone was not debate team material... ATC cannot help with readback/hearback if you go off script- non-sequitor.

State rules in US/FAA are not mayday/pan based. Law of primacy makes us ESL when ICAO and the chit hits the fan.

Simple planetwide ICAO ATC phrase concept in one breath- Mayday if outcome in doubt and it closes the airspace for just lil old you, Pan Pan for what you know you need. Upgrade/Downgrade as needed, normal ops can be restored for all but hijack. This is also for Asia weather diverts if ATC is "unable" and CBs tower hail over your route.. Don't use to or too, just two. Dont use for, just four. Descending, Climbing, maintaining, always. Don't use left or right in Asia, just cardinals and avoid degrees heading requests, find waypoints downrange or use offsets and cardinals from cleared route. ATC can say left or right, their choice. Always know the FIR boundary names on your route for the current controller, and the next far FIR boundary name and eta when checking in. Sometimes you check in early for air defense/country clearance, sometimes you check out behind you- mind the enroute chart "ball" notes.

How's that? Mind the states with low transtion altitudes and layers- miss it in low wx with low pressure and chit happens. Forgetting the altimetry, rules, being tired or stressed and setting the wrong qnh will get you close to a record tie flor low alt, sloppy radios won't help.

Flying Tiger's flt 66 1989 KL accident had a dozen links in the chain, R/T being far down the list. More recently and appropriate to this diversion is the CDG french to English qnh blunder- 23 May 2022, D8-4311 ARN - CDG.

[moosepileit]

Works every time until it doesn't.

How many "declaring an emergency" calls did it take for those 737-200 guys in Hawaii a while ago for (native-speaking) ATC and other traffic to get the message?

ATC was a mess, however, that accident was an "aviate" error chain. Not Communicaton based.

Nice try.

[FlightDetent]

‘we are declaring an emergency’ or ‘pan pan’ (which some controllers don’t seem to understand) Guess which one is the international ICAO standard, for almost a hundred years and a mandatory knowledge for any ICAO ELP, worldwide?

Thus, the controllers who apparently don't understand live:
a) in your mind
b) in the USoA
c) both a+b.

Can be a crowded place. :E

[FlightDetent]

"appropriate"?
I disagree.

It is mandatory. Apart from losing an engine on an ETOPS twin, or any twin with Perf-A certified ops. ..., oh wait.

[FlightDetent]

I wonder if the AF pilot also considered the possibility of there being debris on the runway from the malfunctioning engine that just departed. As if a engine spat on a runway did kill a French airplane ever before?

[FlightDetent]

Sorry for the bitchy posts above, just listened to the whole video above and the sadness is deep. Off for a bucketload of icecream.

[Cornish Jack]

The aviation world has become a very strange place when hoping that its practitioners would operate to internationally agreed procedures is considered to be insulting :ugh:

[FUMR]

Perhaps the Brits need to change theirs to "I think we have a spot of bother"! :)

[Moonraker4]

"appropriate"?
I disagree.

It is mandatory.

Says who?

I can assure you it’s not mandatory. Perhaps in your operator but not across all or even by ICAO standards.

[ATC Watcher]

Says who?

I can assure you it’s not mandatory. Perhaps in your operator but not across all or even by ICAO standards.
Can you provide the references? curious .
Standard phraseology is not an option in the European countries I fly into, and it is not an operator option either, afaik the State you fly into defines the rules, not the Operator.

[parkfell]

Can you provide the references? curious .
Standard phraseology is not an option in the European countries I fly into, and it is not an operator option either, afaik the State you fly into defines the rules, not the Operator.

If you wish to hear even more non standard emergency R/T listen to SWA1380 : uncontained engine failure/fire with rapid decompression & emergency descent

”…engine fire, descending…”

Again all worked out in the end, but the verbose ATC (radar) was something else

Another point for the arm chair aviators: where does it say that you can downgrade a MAYDAY call to say a PAN? Cancel distress YES but no downgrade in UK CAP413….😉 Does another document say otherwise?
Why would you want to downgrade anyway for a mechanical fault/failure. You don’t know what is going to develop / happen next?
The exception would be a Boeing/Airbus flight test engineer..

[PEI_3721]

Some of the alternative views relate to mindset: https://www.psychologytoday.com/nz/blog/seeing-what-others-dont/201605/mindsets

'If we have a fixed mindset and think that our ability is innate, then a failure can be unsettling because it makes us doubt how good we are. In contrast, if we have a growth mindset, then we expect that we can improve our ability—and a failure, therefore, shows us what we need to work on.

People with a fixed mindset are out to prove themselves, and may get very defensive when someone suggests they made a mistake—in other words, they measure themselves by their failures.

People with a growth mindset, on the other hand, often show perseverance and resilience when they’ve committed errors—they become more motivated to work harder.'

[Moonraker4]

Can you provide the references? curious .
Standard phraseology is not an option in the European countries I fly into, and it is not an operator option either, afaik the State you fly into defines the rules, not the Operator.

So tell me this, following an engine flameout/failure (NOT fire/severe damage/separation), do you consider the aircraft to be in grave or imminent danger???

[ATC Watcher]

So tell me this, following an engine flameout/failure (NOT fire/severe damage/separation), do you consider the aircraft to be in grave or imminent danger???
That is not for me on the ground to determine I am not in the aircraft ,this is the PIC job. MAYDAY is about giving priority and getting the frequency quiet. . The degree of the emergency is not immediately relevant , this can be done in" free text" afterwards,
PAN will not give you any priority, just indicating to ATC you have problem which might be elevated to a MAYDAY later.
Am surprised we are even discussing this , this is basic stuff. everyone should know.

For those that need to refresh their memory, or just want to learn something , the ICAO phraseology guide can be found here : https://skybrary.aero/sites/default/files/bookshelf/115.pdf
go to p[age 19 .

[hunbet]

"For those that need to refresh their memory, or just want to learn something , the ICAO phraseology guide can be found here :"

Where you can find the following statement:

The distress/urgency message shall contain (at least) the name of the station addressed, the call-sign, nature of the emergency, fuel endurance and persons on board; and any supporting information such as position, level, (descending), speed and heading, and pilot’s intentions.

Are you kidding. You've got an engine failure that you're trying to handle and you are expected to come up with all of that ? You should also note that it's a guide and nowhere does it state it's mandatory.

[EDLB]

Aviate, navigate, communicate. After aviate best to focus about not shutting down the healthy engine... The tower controller got enough information that he ordered the equipment after the first call.

[B2N2]

So tell me this, following an engine flameout/failure (NOT fire/severe damage/separation), do you consider the aircraft to be in grave or imminent danger???

Yes.
Do you know the reason for the failure?
This could still be a time critical event vs. a non time critical event.

[moosepileit]

Yes.
Do you know the reason for the failure?
This could still be a time critical event vs. a non time critical event.

Reason doesn't matter- could be a compressor stall with or without temp exceedance. Could be a failure, with or without fire, with or without complications. Could be a "simple" fire, still producing thrust and climb performance is near normal, but- you must fly the engine failure procedure routing, unknown to ATC until declared to ATC

My teaching and flying mindset for anything near a V1 cut- it's a Mayday (FAA Emergency word used) until we are cleaned up, on the front side of the curve, ATC knows our engine failure procedure route and terrain/obstacles are not a factor.

Mayday stops most airport operations so CFR can be focused on you. You don't want to hold and dump for an hour as a mayday- that will get your company in trouble with the host nation- Downgrade to PAN when appropriate.

You can go back up to Mayday. You can go down to Normal Ops- still with paperwork required and unlikely except in cases of weather avoidance with an intact aircraft. ATC can also treat you at the level they wish, as can dispatch.

Max weight, v1 cut, it's likely 3-4 minutes of Mayday, and IF a quick VMC or IMC ASAP return is required due to a truly bad day, CFR has a heads up. Company had a jet's fire on initial climbout turn into non extinguishing fire, turned into a Airworthiness Directive- so a hustle to CFR with an overweight landing vs. hold and dump changed their pacing.

Anything on/over a runway, after the Concorde loss especially, the airfield mgmt has to FOD check before allowing operations from that surface.

The real issue balance with a "simple" V1 cut is everyone wants to drill perfectly- but ATC needs to be in the loop as soon as Aviate and Navigate are squared away because the engine failure procedure routing is not likely your ATC cleared routing- ATC may have to push tin quickly away.

This is prior to the emergency procedure, often below 1000' AFE and the initiation of memory items.

When debriefing, it's rewarding noting the complex made simple vs. the reverse. I just know both when I see it and prefer to model the former.

[BraceBrace]

That is not for me on the ground to determine I am not in the aircraft ,this is the PIC job. MAYDAY is about giving priority and getting the frequency quiet. . The degree of the emergency is not immediately relevant , this can be done in" free text" afterwards,
PAN will not give you any priority, just indicating to ATC you have problem which might be elevated to a MAYDAY later.
Am surprised we are even discussing this , this is basic stuff. everyone should know.

For those that need to refresh their memory, or just want to learn something , the ICAO phraseology guide can be found here : https://skybrary.aero/sites/default/files/bookshelf/115.pdf
go to p[age 19 .

Completely agree.

The world of pilots is focused too much on their flightdeck, and the mayday in many pilot's heads is only focused on the technical side of the failure.

In reality we move in a very dynamic world. The mayday is nothing more than a quick resetting of priorities, a call that you as a crew are not able anymore to do what the world expects you to do. And since there is a technical side to the story, you might better keep it quick and short aka standard. Of course we are all trained to add a simple indication of our _intentions_. But they are what they are: intentions. And because of the technical side of the issue (we still need to fly) the words used are short & concise. No proza. No yada yada yada slang. We don't need to go poetic when flying single engine close to the ground. ATC immediatly understands they need to keep people away from you, jus keeping an eye on your path along the way as well.

Once everything is under control, the flight path and aircraft systems are "controlled" again, you are certain you can navigate and control the aircraft according to given instructions by ATC (with some "restrictions" of course), there is a possibility to go back to a pan situation.

[Fewdoom]

So even outside of the US, American pilots are reluctant to utter the word "Mayday"?
Wow, post #7, you guys are slipping.

[hans brinker]

You don't want to hold and dump for an hour as a mayday- that will get your company in trouble with the host nation- Downgrade to PAN when appropriate.

If I am single engine in a twin it's an emergency. If I need time to set up I will stay an emergency aircraft. If for whatever reason, like flight control issues I need an hour to figure it out, I will maintain emergency. ATC can figure out if they can get other aircraft around me, and I will definitely not care about the stern letter the host nation could send to my company. Emergency does not mean that everyone else is shut off and the airport is closed, it will just guarantee me priority when I might need it. Have had 2 full engine failures, 1 partial engine failure (2/3 with smoke in the cockpit), 1 low oil pressure, 2 alternate gear extensions, 1 total main brake failure and 2 cargo smoke indications. Declared emergency from start to finish every time, even for the engine failure followed by successful relight, and knowing the cargo fire indication was prone to false positives. Never have I seen that letter...

[B2N2]

Reason doesn't matter- could be a compressor stall with or without temp exceedance. Could be a failure, with or without fire, with or without complications. Could be a "simple" fire, still producing thrust and climb performance is near normal, but- you must fly the engine failure procedure routing, unknown to ATC until declared to ATC

My teaching and flying mindset for anything near a V1 cut- it's a Mayday (FAA Emergency word used) until we are cleaned up, on the front side of the curve, ATC knows our engine failure procedure route and terrain/obstacles are not a factor.

Mayday stops most airport operations so CFR can be focused on you. You don't want to hold and dump for an hour as a mayday- that will get your company in trouble with the host nation- Downgrade to PAN when appropriate.

You can go back up to Mayday. You can go down to Normal Ops- still with paperwork required and unlikely except in cases of weather avoidance with an intact aircraft. ATC can also treat you at the level they wish, as can dispatch.

Max weight, v1 cut, it's likely 3-4 minutes of Mayday, and IF a quick VMC or IMC ASAP return is required due to a truly bad day, CFR has a heads up. Company had a jet's fire on initial climbout turn into non extinguishing fire, turned into a Airworthiness Directive- so a hustle to CFR with an overweight landing vs. hold and dump changed their pacing.

Anything on/over a runway, after the Concorde loss especially, the airfield mgmt has to FOD check before allowing operations from that surface.

The real issue balance with a "simple" V1 cut is everyone wants to drill perfectly- but ATC needs to be in the loop as soon as Aviate and Navigate are squared away because the engine failure procedure routing is not likely your ATC cleared routing- ATC may have to push tin quickly away.

This is prior to the emergency procedure, often below 1000' AFE and the initiation of memory items.

When debriefing, it's rewarding noting the complex made simple vs. the reverse. I just know both when I see it and prefer to model the former.

You and I are trying to preach the same thing, just using different words.
Its a Mayday until it’s something else.
That was my point in my reply.

[moosepileit]

You and I are trying to preach the same thing, just using different words.
Its a Mayday until it’s something else.
That was my point in my reply.

Cheers!

[Zombywoof]

There's a dead horse in here.

[hans brinker]

There's a dead horse in here.

we will keep beating it until morale improves.

[tdracer]

Maybe the Mods could create a new heading for "Bitching about the USA" rather than continuously polluting (previously) productive discussions with this stuff.

[stilton]

Maybe the Mods could create a new heading for "Bitching about the USA" rather than continuously polluting (previously) productive discussions with this stuff.


Not a bad idea of course there’d be more than a few whining about the terminology used

[ATC Watcher]

Maybe the Mods could create a new heading for "Bitching about the USA" rather than continuously polluting (previously) productive discussions with this stuff.
It is not bitching about the USA, it is about making your own rules or phraseology that will bite you one day. And the US is not the worst , try the French and especially Air France , especially when flying domestically or in a Country that uses French in the R/T. Same thing. And I would bet Russians are doing the same domestically, etc.. Human nature with Alpha males I guess. We have a standard, not perfect, but it is a standard so that everyone understand what it has to do.
" Declaring emergency" might work with controller X in country Z, but in another part of the world it might not, with the local controller not reacting as you would expect because the magic word " Mayday" was not used.

That said I agree we have beaten the horse enough by now. Those that do not see the problem are not going to change anyway. .

[20driver]

Any news of what the engine problem was ?

[tdracer]

It is not bitching about the USA, it is about making your own rules or phraseology that will bite you one day.

ATC, it's not the merit of the discussion - it's the sidetracking of the thread (as demonstrated by the post immediately after yours - many of us want to know what the engine problem was).
Same thing as whenever there is an evacuation, the thread inevitably gets sidetracked into discussions about people taking their carry-ons with them during the evacuation and what to do to prevent it. The discussion may have merit, but it's a complete sidetrack to the original issue of whatever happened that resulted in the evacuation. Like many of those on the forum, I'm far more interested in the original issue (and what could be done to prevent/correct it), but am forced to sort through seemingly endless discussions that are completely unrelated.
And this is far from a one-off - it happens on a very regular basis (I managed to earn a 10 day suspension with a somewhat verbose request that those wishing to discuss carry-ons during an evacuation create their own thread several years back).

[ATC Watcher]

ATC, it's not the merit of the discussion - it's the sidetracking of the thread ....... Like many of those on the forum, I'm far more interested in the original issue .
tdacer, , you are right . I should not have taken the bait. Always those same red herrings coming back, the carry-ons, French on the Frequency, US procedures, attacking ICAO, etc, always coming back year after year , I can't help myself jumping in , but I should have known better ,(Always appreciate your comments by the way ..)