MAYDAY or PAN-PAN?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAYDAY or PAN-PAN?
I did my LPC/OPC quite recently...during climbout right after V1 cut/eng.fail where I was PNF I did a MAYDAY call without confronting the Captain. The instructor was not very impressed and told me not to do so, because first of all it's the Captain's decision, but most importantly it wasn't a MAYDAY situation...That got me thinking. In real life, I would for sure have done the same thing even now, after being explained not to do so. After all, I can always downgrade it to a PAN-PAN later. I thought the purpose was to get ATC's attention and priority. Have I misunderstood completely? Any thoughts on the issue would be highly welcomed.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RYR-738-JOCKEY
I did my LPC/OPC quite recently...during climbout right after V1 cut/eng.fail where I was PNF I did a MAYDAY call without confronting the Captain.
How many engines does your aircraft have?
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a clue in the title!
I think shooting off a Mayday automatically for an engine failure does not quite fit the profile anymore for 'in grave and imminent danger'. If there is a fire warning, that most certainly does. With a twin, the instruction is 'land at nearest suitableairport'. With a fire, it is 'land at the nearest runway'. I remember firing off Maydays automatically on a twin in the simulator, but I believe it should be given a bit more consideration now.
I think shooting off a Mayday automatically for an engine failure does not quite fit the profile anymore for 'in grave and imminent danger'. If there is a fire warning, that most certainly does. With a twin, the instruction is 'land at nearest suitableairport'. With a fire, it is 'land at the nearest runway'. I remember firing off Maydays automatically on a twin in the simulator, but I believe it should be given a bit more consideration now.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would go the 'Mayday' route myself, especially when not in the UK, as many other countries air trafiic controllers do not even recognise the term 'Pan-Pan'. This should get their attention and make them immediately aware that you have a problem. They should then be clearing the airapce in front of you (remember you may well be departing from your cleared SID) and keeping the runway for you. I don't think having a discussion about the nature of the problem after having thought about whether or not the country you are taking off from recognises the Pan call or not is advisable. Nothing to stop you downgrading it to a Pan call once everything has been sorted.
It would be interesting to hear what an ATC officer would do if he had just seen an aircraft take-off and lose an engine (possibly with large amounts of smoke and flash of flames), if the crew didn't declare an emergency via use of the term "mayday". I have heard them say before that they will often make the call themselves and cover their proverbial @rses because their procedures require them to, so in my mind I can't see the advantage of initially NOT declaring the mayday, getting them to standby and then after the high workload situation has been completed considering again if the mayday is still appropriate.
As for the captain's decision, fair enough, but it is SOP in our airline for the PNF to put in the radio call after the crew have identified the failure and carried out any associated recall items, without adding a superfluous question "captain would you like me to make a mayday call?".
PP
It would be interesting to hear what an ATC officer would do if he had just seen an aircraft take-off and lose an engine (possibly with large amounts of smoke and flash of flames), if the crew didn't declare an emergency via use of the term "mayday". I have heard them say before that they will often make the call themselves and cover their proverbial @rses because their procedures require them to, so in my mind I can't see the advantage of initially NOT declaring the mayday, getting them to standby and then after the high workload situation has been completed considering again if the mayday is still appropriate.
As for the captain's decision, fair enough, but it is SOP in our airline for the PNF to put in the radio call after the crew have identified the failure and carried out any associated recall items, without adding a superfluous question "captain would you like me to make a mayday call?".
PP
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be interesting to hear what an ATC officer would do if he had just seen an aircraft take-off and lose an engine (possibly with large amounts of smoke and flash of flames),
during climbout right after V1 cut/eng.fail
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you intend to deviate from your clearance, eg: escape procedure/emergency turn, a MAYDAY will get immediate attention without the need for prolonged RT conversation. You would still be required to advise ATC what your emer turn consisted of, ours are quite scary and may result in an airshow as we return to the overhead at LHR!!
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny, at my last sim on a twin engine I called a Pan in the same situation, it was suggested afterwards that a Mayday call is more effective and can always be downgraded
Legally no right or wrong, just your luck who's testing I guess. Having thought it over, I guess the Mayday call saves any doubt. If the situation is worse than you thought you don't need to make another call to highlight the urgency, if the situation is better then downgrade at your leisure.
As for not making the call without consulting your Captain, as he is PF one would like to think he has more important things on his mind at that precise moment!
Legally no right or wrong, just your luck who's testing I guess. Having thought it over, I guess the Mayday call saves any doubt. If the situation is worse than you thought you don't need to make another call to highlight the urgency, if the situation is better then downgrade at your leisure.
As for not making the call without consulting your Captain, as he is PF one would like to think he has more important things on his mind at that precise moment!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A fairly passive engine failure was the question
during climbout right after V1 cut/eng.fail
You've not convinced me that a Pan is more appropriate yet, even for a fairly passive engine failure. Also, don't be convinced that the term Pan is widely known IN Europe. Our company have had several uses of it ignored by various controllers in Europe and had to use Mayday to get any attention.
PP
Guest
Posts: n/a
[quote]I have heard them [ATC] say before that they will often make the call themselves and cover their proverbial @rses because their procedures require them to[/qoute]This isn't quite correct. The difference is very subtle but can be important.
A pilot (and I think only a pilot) can make a MAYDAY or PAN call. The controller then responds by taking certain actions appropriate to the situation and has the option to declare one of six standard states of emergency (this is the UK situation, in some States - and ICAO - there are fewer) and possibly some local states of emergency. Examples are Full EMERGENCY and AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT. The stae of emergency declared by the controller determines the actions taken by emergency services and hospitals etc.
There is a lot of latitude in what the controller declares - it's often a matter of personal judgement although in many cases it is now set out in local procedures what you do in certain situations. It's actually the local procedures that is covering @rses.
A pilot (and I think only a pilot) can make a MAYDAY or PAN call. The controller then responds by taking certain actions appropriate to the situation and has the option to declare one of six standard states of emergency (this is the UK situation, in some States - and ICAO - there are fewer) and possibly some local states of emergency. Examples are Full EMERGENCY and AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT. The stae of emergency declared by the controller determines the actions taken by emergency services and hospitals etc.
There is a lot of latitude in what the controller declares - it's often a matter of personal judgement although in many cases it is now set out in local procedures what you do in certain situations. It's actually the local procedures that is covering @rses.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All true Spitoon, but ATC will go to a Full Emergency whether its a Mayday, Pan Pan or a mere hint of an engine out (twin or otherwise I expect); maybe thats why FAA are in a fuss about BA 74 flying LAX to MAN on 3, fire crews would have looked daft on US national TV waiting for an accident that never happened.
Personally I've never seen an AAI, several AA, mostly upgraded from FE, some just happen without much warning.
Personally I've never seen an AAI, several AA, mostly upgraded from FE, some just happen without much warning.
[QUOTE][QUOTE=Spitoon]
It may be of interest that I have actually heard ATC make a Mayday call. Back in the seventies, on the occasion of the Canberra PR9 crash on Huntingdon, I heard Alconbury Tower call Mayday on 243.0, reporting that they'd just seen an aircraft crash. I'm not sure what good it did, but I can understand the need to "do something".
I have heard them [ATC] say before that they will often make the call themselves and cover their proverbial @rses because their procedures require them to[/qoute]This isn't quite correct. The difference is very subtle but can be important.
A pilot (and I think only a pilot) can make a MAYDAY or PAN call.
A pilot (and I think only a pilot) can make a MAYDAY or PAN call.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When in the sim, you play the game exactly according to the rules. If your company's SOP's says you ask before a "Mayday" you do so. Simple. It's also quite reasonable not to do a "Mayday" with an EFATO (unless you only had the one to start with) as these things in modern aircraft are often just "Abnormals" rather than "Emergencies". However, the provisos mentioned above are relevant when a "Pan" call may be misinterpreted.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Everywhere the gear is up !
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fly A310...we consider that every Ecam with the "Land Asap" item is a mayday. So a engine failure is initially always a Mayday. Giving us priority help the Fp to manage his track as the Nfp is doing his Ecam/CL job. Once everything is quieter, then we switch to a Pan-pan if necessary. We say our training captains to act as they feel! If they feel a need of absolute help, well, go for a Mayday till the end ! If everything is under control, switch to Pan. But I confirm, initially, Engine fail, for us, is a mayday.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, mayday and pan, and altho mentioned in ICAO, it sure must be a European 'thing'.
Certainly unlikely to be heard in the USA, and if 'pan' was used there, I suspect most controllers would think of PAN American, or the frying pan!
And, oddly enough, in all the airlines that I have flown with (nearly all overseas), there was absolutely no such mayday or pan calls mentioned, with an engine failure after takeoff.
Some airlines I guess want crews to get all excited, and blurt out....something
Sitting on the taxiway at NRT one fine day, awaiting our turn at the runway, we watched a Northwest have quite a spectacular engine failure just at rotation.
Flames and all (briefly) out the back end.
The NFP just calmly asked to return, with a slight problem.
Now, it can't be all that difficult...I mean, airline flights are not exactly Apollo moon missions...
Certainly unlikely to be heard in the USA, and if 'pan' was used there, I suspect most controllers would think of PAN American, or the frying pan!
And, oddly enough, in all the airlines that I have flown with (nearly all overseas), there was absolutely no such mayday or pan calls mentioned, with an engine failure after takeoff.
Some airlines I guess want crews to get all excited, and blurt out....something
Sitting on the taxiway at NRT one fine day, awaiting our turn at the runway, we watched a Northwest have quite a spectacular engine failure just at rotation.
Flames and all (briefly) out the back end.
The NFP just calmly asked to return, with a slight problem.
Now, it can't be all that difficult...I mean, airline flights are not exactly Apollo moon missions...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seriously, I think most of us will get quite stressed out. After all this is what most of the recurrency checking is all about. That single incident that usually doesn't even occur once during the timespan of a pilot's career. I feel prepared if it was to happen, but I think a laid back attitude towards this can even cause a bigger problem because of the surprise factor, once it really happens. To me personally, after reading all of the responses I have settled on the conclusion that it is an emergency and a MAYDAY call is appropriate.
(And thanx Pilot Pete, you always put things in the right perspective
)
(And thanx Pilot Pete, you always put things in the right perspective
)
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>>I feel prepared if it was to happen, but I think a laid back attitude towards this can even cause a bigger problem because of the surprise factor, once it really happens.<<
On a knife edge, are we, RYR-738-Jockey?
Wound up like a cheap watch may be more appropriate...
Young guys are many times this way, but with a few more hours under their belt, usually abate.
Usually...but not always.
On a knife edge, are we, RYR-738-Jockey?
Wound up like a cheap watch may be more appropriate...
Young guys are many times this way, but with a few more hours under their belt, usually abate.
Usually...but not always.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Can't say I understand the relevance of your last post issi, but the point I wanted to make earlier is that whilst you may choose - or have local instructions that require you to - put on a full emergency 'at a mere hint of an engine out', other airports/controllers do not necessarily do the same. There is always going to be latitude because the instructions cannot list every event and tell you what to do - in my view, that's when controllers start earning their money!
A quick example to illustrate why even with rules it may not be obvious why some decisions are made, at one airport I worked at the rule - in the absence of any other problem - was loss of 50% or more power required a full emergency to be declared. So a B737 with an engine shutdown was met by the fire vehicles whereas a L1011 or DC10 with one engine out was not. (And I guess statements like that are beginning to date me!)
A quick example to illustrate why even with rules it may not be obvious why some decisions are made, at one airport I worked at the rule - in the absence of any other problem - was loss of 50% or more power required a full emergency to be declared. So a B737 with an engine shutdown was met by the fire vehicles whereas a L1011 or DC10 with one engine out was not. (And I guess statements like that are beginning to date me!)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just an infantile CRM class joke, the explanation of which would make it even less funny. apparently TRM still has some way to descend.
In my opinion, ATCO's were taught to over-react because pilots didn't react sufficiently well with regard to Emergencies.
Mayday and Pan calls were for years something you learned to pass an RT licence but not generally used in a commercial environment. There are numerous examples of aircraft in emergency failing to declare so on RT. Over the last 5-10 years the CAA/JAA and I guess the FAA have encouraged more use of standard phraseology during emergencies. Likewise NATS atco's got a bit of a drubbing over the BAW 1-11 windscreen failure and subsequent to that ATCO emergency training has been improved substantially.
That said, at an airfield FE is a cover all, I've seen it used for an ATP landing flap-less on 3000m (a non-event) and a very serious smoke in flight deck incident as well as engine out situations. Local Sby is deemed insufficient for most things except 1st solo, wx, royalty, and anything ATC have got wind of but the pilot has not declared. AAI is too high an alert because it assumes bad things are due and no-body wants to think that way. Obviously there are exceptions like Sioux City but I don't have info of what alert state was raised for that.
Well off the thread now, at LGW, I was once told the only fatality from an aircraft emergency was a pedestrian hit by a local authority fire vehicle attending a FE for an uneventful landing. Worse still it wasn't even going
to the airport it was positioning from a more distant Fire station to cover for appliances nearer the airport which had gone to the FE.
Might be urban myth but at some point ATC, pilots and authorities are going to have to sit down and really decide which alerts are raised and when, bearing in mind that most pilots will call a Mayday without any hesitation when they want emergency services standing by. Currently any time you have to speak to ATC regarding a ab-normal situation you generally cover your xxxx by a PA to pax stating that ATC automatically alert fire crews to all events and their presence all around us during the roll out does not indicate a need to panic or evacuation. What may be comforting to ATC and aircrew may be less so to those of a more nervous disposition.
If my assumption is true and ATCO's were taught to over-react to cover deficiencies in Pilot behaviour and that is now shown to be no longer the case then ATCO's need to more measured in their responce to incidents.
In my opinion, ATCO's were taught to over-react because pilots didn't react sufficiently well with regard to Emergencies.
Mayday and Pan calls were for years something you learned to pass an RT licence but not generally used in a commercial environment. There are numerous examples of aircraft in emergency failing to declare so on RT. Over the last 5-10 years the CAA/JAA and I guess the FAA have encouraged more use of standard phraseology during emergencies. Likewise NATS atco's got a bit of a drubbing over the BAW 1-11 windscreen failure and subsequent to that ATCO emergency training has been improved substantially.
That said, at an airfield FE is a cover all, I've seen it used for an ATP landing flap-less on 3000m (a non-event) and a very serious smoke in flight deck incident as well as engine out situations. Local Sby is deemed insufficient for most things except 1st solo, wx, royalty, and anything ATC have got wind of but the pilot has not declared. AAI is too high an alert because it assumes bad things are due and no-body wants to think that way. Obviously there are exceptions like Sioux City but I don't have info of what alert state was raised for that.
Well off the thread now, at LGW, I was once told the only fatality from an aircraft emergency was a pedestrian hit by a local authority fire vehicle attending a FE for an uneventful landing. Worse still it wasn't even going
to the airport it was positioning from a more distant Fire station to cover for appliances nearer the airport which had gone to the FE.
Might be urban myth but at some point ATC, pilots and authorities are going to have to sit down and really decide which alerts are raised and when, bearing in mind that most pilots will call a Mayday without any hesitation when they want emergency services standing by. Currently any time you have to speak to ATC regarding a ab-normal situation you generally cover your xxxx by a PA to pax stating that ATC automatically alert fire crews to all events and their presence all around us during the roll out does not indicate a need to panic or evacuation. What may be comforting to ATC and aircrew may be less so to those of a more nervous disposition.
If my assumption is true and ATCO's were taught to over-react to cover deficiencies in Pilot behaviour and that is now shown to be no longer the case then ATCO's need to more measured in their responce to incidents.
Just another number
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
411A
Perhaps the controllers should read FAA AIM 6-3-1 (c);
"The initial communication by an aircraft in distress should begin with the word MAYDAY, preferably repeated three times. The signal PAN-PAN should be used in the same manner for an urgency situation".
Airclues
Perhaps the controllers should read FAA AIM 6-3-1 (c);
"The initial communication by an aircraft in distress should begin with the word MAYDAY, preferably repeated three times. The signal PAN-PAN should be used in the same manner for an urgency situation".
Airclues