AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE - RADIO CALLS advice please
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE - RADIO CALLS advice please
Accepting that most aircraft engineers that use aircraft radios during maintenance do not hold radio licences they loosely follow correct radio procedures. We had a debate at work on what is the correct call to ATC if an emergency arises during an engine ground run: ENGINE FIRE for example.
CAP 413 states all users of RT in the UK should follow the procedures of the manual.
Therefore I say it should follow the PAN PAN PAN format as this is what ATC would expect as it is an urgency message. The established trainer says no and he would call FIRE FIRE FIRE and pass the details.
Any advice on what is expected or acceptable.
CAP 413 states all users of RT in the UK should follow the procedures of the manual.
Therefore I say it should follow the PAN PAN PAN format as this is what ATC would expect as it is an urgency message. The established trainer says no and he would call FIRE FIRE FIRE and pass the details.
Any advice on what is expected or acceptable.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the heat of the moment nobody in ATC would delay in responding to any such call, regardless of the call's prefix.
What might be worthwhile discussing is that controllers tend to 'tune' their ears to the words MAYDAY or PAN so that in the unlucky event that an R/T transmission crossed with another, they may well be able to pick out that word and respond slightly quicker.
If an engine fire breaks out on an occupied aircraft, would you not call MAYDAY instead of PAN?
What might be worthwhile discussing is that controllers tend to 'tune' their ears to the words MAYDAY or PAN so that in the unlucky event that an R/T transmission crossed with another, they may well be able to pick out that word and respond slightly quicker.
If an engine fire breaks out on an occupied aircraft, would you not call MAYDAY instead of PAN?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by turbroprop
The established trainer says no and he would call FIRE FIRE FIRE and pass the details
A pilot should start an emergency call with the appropriate international RTF prefix (MAYDAY x3 or PAN-PAN x 3). 'FIRE FIRE FIRE' might work in a hangar but an engineer on the flight deck doing an engine run and in communication with ATS would be expected to use standard prefixes. 'FIRE FIRE FIRE' could be mis-heard as 'FOUR FOUR FOUR'.
MAYDAY if immediate assistance is required, PAN if immediate assistance not required. Simple as that. Chap 8 Page 1 refers.
If ENGINE FIRE it sounds like immediate assistance from RFFS would be required therefore call MAYDAY.
Never be afraid to over-state an emergency. It is easier to downgrade response than upgrade response. Don't pussy-foot about, and avoid using non-standard prefixes.
Thinks - why aren't the engineers trained and licenced to use radios?
It seems to be one of those things that the CAA seem to turn a blind eye to, until something goes wrong I guess.
When I was an RT examiner I did do a course and exams for a few engineers, TNT were one that got all their engineers licensed, as did Irvin Parachutes for their guys on the ground while they were testing at Henlow.
It seems to be one of those things that the CAA seem to turn a blind eye to, until something goes wrong I guess.
When I was an RT examiner I did do a course and exams for a few engineers, TNT were one that got all their engineers licensed, as did Irvin Parachutes for their guys on the ground while they were testing at Henlow.
R/T training is probably useful, as I assume that anyone talking to me on a frequency will understand the phraseology i'll use. Obviously if the message isn't getting through, i'll say things in plain language, but sometimes things are just read back without understanding I think.
At the place I used to work, we'd tell aircraft doing an engine run to 'maintain a listening watch'. Often, on completion, they'd call and say 'xxx complete - thanks for the listening watch'. That to me suggests a bit of misunderstanding about what that instruction is asking for. This was highlighted when an aircraft doing a high power run suddenly started pouring out thick smoke. After a couple of attempts to alert the engineers with no response, the fire service were called. The engineers only started responding on the frequency when they realised that their aircraft was surrounded by fire vehicles.
Apparently it was a new engine, so they expected that to happen. If they'd been listening out, they could have told me that and prevented an unnecessary call out. The point of all this is that I believe it is more important for engineers on frequency to know why ATC ask for certain things and why it's important, than to know exactly how to compose an emergency message.
At the place I used to work, we'd tell aircraft doing an engine run to 'maintain a listening watch'. Often, on completion, they'd call and say 'xxx complete - thanks for the listening watch'. That to me suggests a bit of misunderstanding about what that instruction is asking for. This was highlighted when an aircraft doing a high power run suddenly started pouring out thick smoke. After a couple of attempts to alert the engineers with no response, the fire service were called. The engineers only started responding on the frequency when they realised that their aircraft was surrounded by fire vehicles.
Apparently it was a new engine, so they expected that to happen. If they'd been listening out, they could have told me that and prevented an unnecessary call out. The point of all this is that I believe it is more important for engineers on frequency to know why ATC ask for certain things and why it's important, than to know exactly how to compose an emergency message.
Last edited by Gingerbread Man; 20th Oct 2013 at 11:52. Reason: Because it required editing, OK?! Jeez...
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Or-E-Gun, USA
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In this kind of emergency, I don't think the format of the radio call is important. What IS important is to tell the tower (Ground Control?) WHO you are, WHERE you are and the NATURE of the emergency. ATC's ground controllers are not complete idiots. If the calling party (Monitoring mechanic on board, a ground-based supervisor or whomever has the presence to give only the LOCATION and NATURE of the problem, ATC's Ground will roll the equipment as requested without a second thought. If questions need to be asked, it will happen after the response is completed. Fire and Rescue folks would always like to know more, but, if they know where they are going, they will NEVER hold their run while waiting for more details. Even if the radio procedure is imperfect, F&R will respond. If additional training is necessary,,,,,, we'll talk about it - after the event. I almost don't believe this question... Fires during non-pilot taxi event are possible, so that's #1. The "Where are you?" and "What is your problem must be stated. Anything else can wait for the in-house or official inquiry. PERIOD. The more one can tell them, the better, but never push your luck. Geez!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: etha
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I missing something or am I correct saying that ANYONE who transmits MUST be licensed to do so? Surely all the engineers should be licensed if they listen out with the intention of broadcasting in the event of an emergency?
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I missing something or am I correct saying that ANYONE who transmits MUST be licensed to do so?
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 80
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diving Duck
Pilots do not get called in to do engine runs for maintenance - companies will train personnel for both run - up and taxi. I was qualified B747 and Tristar. Be aware that a maintenance engine run is a completely different animal to an aircrew operation of an engine.Special procedures such as engine trim run,vigv trim or vibration monitoring are unknown to aircrew and are performed by qualified engineers.
Pilots do not get called in to do engine runs for maintenance - companies will train personnel for both run - up and taxi. I was qualified B747 and Tristar. Be aware that a maintenance engine run is a completely different animal to an aircrew operation of an engine.Special procedures such as engine trim run,vigv trim or vibration monitoring are unknown to aircrew and are performed by qualified engineers.
I have found that with the handful of legitimate urgent emergencies I have been involved with, plain language has been used. 'ABC, taxiway A1, we are on fire' would get the trucks rolling. One guy conducting a forced landing on a beach responded to my request for a mobile phone number with just the didgets, no call sign! Oh the humanity, I can't believe he would have violated standard RT like that. Some of you dudes have far too much time to worry about this stuff
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's interesting that in the heat of the moment calls can revert to simulator practice eg. Speedbird zero three eight declared the emergency as 'Speedbird Nine Five' which, I am told, was a simulator exercise callsign. As pilot I suffered an engine failure resulting in, oddly enough, a 'Speedbird 038'-type incident, yet instead of calling Mayday I unwittingly reverted to day-job ATCO-mode and transmitted 'Aircraft Accident, zero eight undershoot'. Nevertheless it had the desired effect.
