Pan Pan/mayday
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: ISZ - not the end of the world, but you can see it from here.
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mad Jock
If you want, you can post your flight plan details on this thread before you go flying, with detailed instructions on how you with any unforseen circumstances to be dealt with, then you may be able to get the type of service you want.
As many of my colleagues have said, and I'm sure you're well aware a small insignificant problem can quickly escalate to one where you might actually be glad we reacted when and how we did.
If you want your route charges to escalate further, then by all means demand that all ATCOs hold a PPL.
Oh, and is an engine that refuses to start in the air not a problem?
If you want, you can post your flight plan details on this thread before you go flying, with detailed instructions on how you with any unforseen circumstances to be dealt with, then you may be able to get the type of service you want.
As many of my colleagues have said, and I'm sure you're well aware a small insignificant problem can quickly escalate to one where you might actually be glad we reacted when and how we did.
If you want your route charges to escalate further, then by all means demand that all ATCOs hold a PPL.
Oh, and is an engine that refuses to start in the air not a problem?
This topic has been broached fairly recently. In the case of an engine failure in a twin, I would be inclined to call mayday and leave it at that, based on the fact that you have no redundancy. Also not all foreign ATC seem to know what a Pan call, including some parts of the US. My rules of thumb for calling an emergency is based on whether there is any system redundancy left, or if there are any questions re performance, be it affected landing distance, climb capability and so on. It seems to me following recent incidents that the onus is on the commander not to put ATC in a position where they have to make the decision. i.e. if you have a no 2 hydraulic failure in 747 and engineering want you to return to base as there is no spare at Barbados, don't tell ATC that you have a hydraulic failure, as that puts ATC in the unenviable position of covering the worst case scenario. In fact it is a minor system and more than covered by the 3 others. Instead its probably best to give the reason for returning as a "minor technical fault" that we want rectified at base.
Don't "bow out in shame", MJ. I hope I haven't arrived too late on this one, but as someone who has received emergency handling without declaring an emergency, I'm with you.
OK, military context, but having aborted the sortie for an electrical problem and returned to the circuit, my intention to do some practice circuits was queried by ATC "in view of your emergency". Now, the middle of the North Sea is no place to be flying around on one (generator? alternator? can't remember), but the visual circuit on a good day its no problem.
Another time, my conversation with my No.2 about a nosewheel red light was passed to ATC without my knowledge or consent and they told me I had an emergency!
Finally, on the point of downgrading a Mayday, I was always taught that it was good manners to downgrade if you could, in case someone else arrived with a more urgent problem.
MJ has a point, I think.
OK, military context, but having aborted the sortie for an electrical problem and returned to the circuit, my intention to do some practice circuits was queried by ATC "in view of your emergency". Now, the middle of the North Sea is no place to be flying around on one (generator? alternator? can't remember), but the visual circuit on a good day its no problem.
Another time, my conversation with my No.2 about a nosewheel red light was passed to ATC without my knowledge or consent and they told me I had an emergency!
Finally, on the point of downgrading a Mayday, I was always taught that it was good manners to downgrade if you could, in case someone else arrived with a more urgent problem.
MJ has a point, I think.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, please cancel your MAYDAY or change it to a PAN if you think it's appropriate, as that will indicate that the situation is not as urgent. However, don't assume that by doing that there will no longer be any (or less) emergency service response. That's the point I was trying to make.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: South East
Age: 56
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mad_Jock,
I think everybody here agrees that the pilot is the commander of the flight, and has overall control. But you are missing the point from the ATCO's side. Most controllers will er on the side of caution, it is not difficult to downgrade an incident. But dare I say it a certain amount of pilots don't give the full picture.
As ATCO's we have the responsibilty to ensure the rescue services are at a point where they can quickly react if the situation doe's deteriate.
I agree that sometimes a fleet of rescue appliances may seem over the top for some 'minor' situations. Perhaps this is partly a symptom of an increased liability in our industry. But this will not stop me from judging the seriousness of a problem and reacting in a way I see fit at the time.
I have no problem about a GA pilot 'walking' back to the club house and telling his mates that was OTT.
PS. Can I use this as part of TRUCE?
I think everybody here agrees that the pilot is the commander of the flight, and has overall control. But you are missing the point from the ATCO's side. Most controllers will er on the side of caution, it is not difficult to downgrade an incident. But dare I say it a certain amount of pilots don't give the full picture.
As ATCO's we have the responsibilty to ensure the rescue services are at a point where they can quickly react if the situation doe's deteriate.
I agree that sometimes a fleet of rescue appliances may seem over the top for some 'minor' situations. Perhaps this is partly a symptom of an increased liability in our industry. But this will not stop me from judging the seriousness of a problem and reacting in a way I see fit at the time.
I have no problem about a GA pilot 'walking' back to the club house and telling his mates that was OTT.
PS. Can I use this as part of TRUCE?
Ohcirrej
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no problem about a GA pilot 'walking' back to the club house and telling his mates that was OTT
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London FIR
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having come into this a little late, rather than reiterate things that have already been said, there are some additions which are relevant.
Firstly, the 50% or more loss of power 'rule' isn't one that's applied universally across all civil UK ATC units. It is however, applied (correct me if I'm wrong...) by all NATS units and is certainly considered to be 'best practice'. It applies equally to a B767 or A300 as to a Cessna 421 or a Beech 90 i.e. GA, although I can fully understand why an aircraft commander whose airline is approved for 240 mins ETOPS having shut down an engine just after on take-off as a precaution, might baulk at ATC's response...
Secondly, for situations other than an engine failure on a twin, a hydraulic failure, engine fire, etc., etc., where a Full Emergency will be the automatic minimum response by ATC, there's no requirement for ATC to be told the precise details provided that the flight crew can answer "yes" to the following three key questions (which in cases of doubt, should always be asked):
1."Can you maintain altitude?"
2. "Can you make a normal approach?"
3. "Can you make a normal landing?"
An answer of "no" to any of the above should be qualified with additional information and if it isn't (unlikely I know, but...) then ATC will need to ask some supplementary questions before deciding what response to initiate.
I can understand the flight crew's annoyance in cases where they've reassured the pax that all's well, only to find themselves assailed by blue lights and fire engines on arrival, and indeed I'm aware of a recent minor incident for which ATC simply instigated a 'Local Standby' that resulted in a formal complaint to the airport authority by the airline because the aerodrome fire service deployed its appliances with blue lights flashing and several passengers later accused the captain of lying as he had told them it was only a minor problem!!
Firstly, the 50% or more loss of power 'rule' isn't one that's applied universally across all civil UK ATC units. It is however, applied (correct me if I'm wrong...) by all NATS units and is certainly considered to be 'best practice'. It applies equally to a B767 or A300 as to a Cessna 421 or a Beech 90 i.e. GA, although I can fully understand why an aircraft commander whose airline is approved for 240 mins ETOPS having shut down an engine just after on take-off as a precaution, might baulk at ATC's response...
Secondly, for situations other than an engine failure on a twin, a hydraulic failure, engine fire, etc., etc., where a Full Emergency will be the automatic minimum response by ATC, there's no requirement for ATC to be told the precise details provided that the flight crew can answer "yes" to the following three key questions (which in cases of doubt, should always be asked):
1."Can you maintain altitude?"
2. "Can you make a normal approach?"
3. "Can you make a normal landing?"
An answer of "no" to any of the above should be qualified with additional information and if it isn't (unlikely I know, but...) then ATC will need to ask some supplementary questions before deciding what response to initiate.
I can understand the flight crew's annoyance in cases where they've reassured the pax that all's well, only to find themselves assailed by blue lights and fire engines on arrival, and indeed I'm aware of a recent minor incident for which ATC simply instigated a 'Local Standby' that resulted in a formal complaint to the airport authority by the airline because the aerodrome fire service deployed its appliances with blue lights flashing and several passengers later accused the captain of lying as he had told them it was only a minor problem!!
Ohcirrej
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An answer of "no" to any of the above should be qualified with additional information
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Near a hole in the fence
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MATS 1 opens by saying, "Nothing in this Manual prevents controllers from using their own discretion and initiative in any particular circumstance." Sorry, Mad Jock, but you have to respect the controller's judgement in any given situation.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not only do we have our own rules to follow in calling out emergencies , we also have to consider the Airports emergency orders.
An ATCO at a unit recently used their initiative in conjunction with the airport fire service dealing with a relatively minor emergency situation , to subsequently fall foul of the airport authority who said that the emergency response was not sufficient in accordance with the airports emergency orders.
Damned if you do damned if you don't.
An ATCO at a unit recently used their initiative in conjunction with the airport fire service dealing with a relatively minor emergency situation , to subsequently fall foul of the airport authority who said that the emergency response was not sufficient in accordance with the airports emergency orders.
Damned if you do damned if you don't.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Ashbourne Co Meath Ireland
Age: 73
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read this one with interest. Most of the points are valid, and relevant, the only one I want to pick up on is the one about the Alt being U/S so saving the battery. Understand clearly the why, and even the how, but it makes me nervous.
That's got the potential to put an unfair load on the controller. Yes, it may well be OK to fly in some airspace without radio on, the school I did my PPL at did it all the time, but then again, there was very little GA or anything else around, other than very low level MIL, which was so damn fast it didn't really matter.
Snag was, with some students, it encouraged a very lax attitude towards ATC, and in some cases, they then struggled big time when they did have to start to communicate with someone outside of the aircraft, as they were just not used to the extra workload. OK, that's a bit of drift, but relevant.
From the controller's point of view, to have an aircraft in and out of contanct could put the controller in a very difficult situation, in that if another aircraft comes on to channel, and it's clear that there's a potential conflict, if one of those potential conflict aircraft might or might not be in contact, what's he to do. Send the second one half way round the county just in case, or hope that both aircraft are truly VFR, and not doing anything that might make the situation tricky.
Maybe I'm being over fussy, but to me, it's better to have no contact at all, and know that's the case than to have a possible contact. Equally, if the aircraft is off air, then that's also adding to the situational awareness problems, if someone else comes up on channel with any sort of issue, the non radio aircraft is in the dark.
That's one of the things I hated about flying from the UK to the continent, in some areas, you lost the big picture because certain people insisted on using French instead of English. Fine for them, but very disconcerting for non French speakers, who were then placed in a position of not really knowing who was doing what.
So, while it's not illegal, or even an issue in some cases, it's (to me anyway) considerbly less than comfortable from an airmanship aspect, unless there's been a lot of preparation. To do something along the lines of "say nothing, that way there's no hassles" is not the sort of example I'd be comfortable about setting to a student if I was instructing.
That's got the potential to put an unfair load on the controller. Yes, it may well be OK to fly in some airspace without radio on, the school I did my PPL at did it all the time, but then again, there was very little GA or anything else around, other than very low level MIL, which was so damn fast it didn't really matter.
Snag was, with some students, it encouraged a very lax attitude towards ATC, and in some cases, they then struggled big time when they did have to start to communicate with someone outside of the aircraft, as they were just not used to the extra workload. OK, that's a bit of drift, but relevant.
From the controller's point of view, to have an aircraft in and out of contanct could put the controller in a very difficult situation, in that if another aircraft comes on to channel, and it's clear that there's a potential conflict, if one of those potential conflict aircraft might or might not be in contact, what's he to do. Send the second one half way round the county just in case, or hope that both aircraft are truly VFR, and not doing anything that might make the situation tricky.
Maybe I'm being over fussy, but to me, it's better to have no contact at all, and know that's the case than to have a possible contact. Equally, if the aircraft is off air, then that's also adding to the situational awareness problems, if someone else comes up on channel with any sort of issue, the non radio aircraft is in the dark.
That's one of the things I hated about flying from the UK to the continent, in some areas, you lost the big picture because certain people insisted on using French instead of English. Fine for them, but very disconcerting for non French speakers, who were then placed in a position of not really knowing who was doing what.
So, while it's not illegal, or even an issue in some cases, it's (to me anyway) considerbly less than comfortable from an airmanship aspect, unless there's been a lot of preparation. To do something along the lines of "say nothing, that way there's no hassles" is not the sort of example I'd be comfortable about setting to a student if I was instructing.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My understanding is that a MAYDAY is appropriate is the aircraft 'hull' is in imminent danger - eg total engine failure, on board fire, loss of flight control. Otherwise it is appropriate to declare an emergency . Not necessarily the same thing.
Also is PAN known outside the UK? I know it is an ICAO call but..........
Also is PAN known outside the UK? I know it is an ICAO call but..........
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Nashville TN. USA
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Topbug,
PAN PAN is used world wide, though I've never heard it on the frequency.
Mike
NATCA BNA
KPAX,
Personnally I feel that declaring an emergency because of an aborted take off is a bad procedure. You need to remember that when you declare an emergency that the tower may roll the emergency equipment which at every airport that I\'ve worked at CLOSES THE AIRPORT until the emergency is cancelled by the airport authority.
If you have a Hot Brake situation after an aborted takeoff, then here in the United States all you have to do is tell the controllers that you have Hot Brakes, and then let them know if you want a fire truck sent out to check. Upon your request the airfield fire department will dispatch a truck and they will check your brakes.
Mike
NATCA BNA
PAN PAN is used world wide, though I've never heard it on the frequency.
Mike
NATCA BNA
KPAX,
Personnally I feel that declaring an emergency because of an aborted take off is a bad procedure. You need to remember that when you declare an emergency that the tower may roll the emergency equipment which at every airport that I\'ve worked at CLOSES THE AIRPORT until the emergency is cancelled by the airport authority.
If you have a Hot Brake situation after an aborted takeoff, then here in the United States all you have to do is tell the controllers that you have Hot Brakes, and then let them know if you want a fire truck sent out to check. Upon your request the airfield fire department will dispatch a truck and they will check your brakes.
Mike
NATCA BNA
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Canberra Australia
Posts: 1,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What happened to that minor emergency call we used to have?
"SECURITE"
Then I am reminded of the pleas for assistance by a US Army pilot in the Korean war.
He was in a dogfight with several enemy aircraft who were getting the better of him and there was no one close enough to help.
Someone called him to suggest that if he had a Distinguished Flying Cross then he should do some distinguished flying.
"SECURITE"
Then I am reminded of the pleas for assistance by a US Army pilot in the Korean war.
He was in a dogfight with several enemy aircraft who were getting the better of him and there was no one close enough to help.
Someone called him to suggest that if he had a Distinguished Flying Cross then he should do some distinguished flying.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: 20deg N, 35deg C
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A similar thread appears on Dununda and Godzone reporting points 'Air Nelson Engine Shut down'. In this case the pilot specifically advised ATC that he did NOT require services
I asked the question (and still await an answer) why would the pilot not require a local standby at least? The bad PR that such an event can create?? and should a pilot in this case be afforded priority?
Cheers
TP
I asked the question (and still await an answer) why would the pilot not require a local standby at least? The bad PR that such an event can create?? and should a pilot in this case be afforded priority? Cheers
TP
