MAYDAY MAYDAY require advice on the use of the word MAYDAY!
Guest
Posts: n/a
MAYDAY MAYDAY require advice on the use of the word MAYDAY!
Hi
I passed my R/T practical last week.
However, a point was raised about MAYDAY calls.
I made my initial call as per CAP 413 but in any subsequent call I was continually stepped on by the controller(examiner) until I figured out to prefix my callsign with the word MAYDAY.
eg. G-ABCD can I..? would result in being told to stay off frequency
whereas
MAYDAY G-ABCD can I ? would reslt in a response.
This is not detailed in CAP 413.
I was wondering if any high time pilots or controllers could comment on this?
Is it just good practice or unneccesary chat?
Gaz
Edited for spelling
[This message has been edited by Gazeem (edited 21 April 2001).]
I passed my R/T practical last week.
However, a point was raised about MAYDAY calls.
I made my initial call as per CAP 413 but in any subsequent call I was continually stepped on by the controller(examiner) until I figured out to prefix my callsign with the word MAYDAY.
eg. G-ABCD can I..? would result in being told to stay off frequency
whereas
MAYDAY G-ABCD can I ? would reslt in a response.
This is not detailed in CAP 413.
I was wondering if any high time pilots or controllers could comment on this?
Is it just good practice or unneccesary chat?
Gaz
Edited for spelling
[This message has been edited by Gazeem (edited 21 April 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sorry - I don't quite understand what the procedure was that you were being tested on.
In the simulation, did you have an emergency in progress? If not, you should NEVER use the word "Mayday". Sure, it will get the controller's attention, but unless you are in dire need of urgent assistance, misuse will result in a later phone call to explain your actions.
If you did not have an emergency, then perhaps the controller (examiner) was trying to hint that you were on the wrong frequency? Or maybe he was just being difficult to see how you handled it? Or maybe he's an idiot who doesn't know what he's doing (unlikely)?
But use of the word "Mayday" is detailed in CAP 413:-
"Mayday, mayday, mayday
[Station called] If appropriate - leave out if calling on 121.5
[Callsign]
[Nature of the emergency]
[Intentions]
[Position]
[Pilot's qualifications] Particularly if a tyro or student
[Souls on board] So they know how many bodies to look for!"
Any later calls, you would leave out the word "Mayday" and make calls as per normal procedure. It is down to ATC to keep the frequency free for you, or they may offer you another frequency if that is difficult for them. You are, of course, entitled to refuse if your brain is full and you're working hard enough without the extra bother. Remember that, in an emergency, it is YOU calling the shots - they're there to give you anything you need.
In the simulation, did you have an emergency in progress? If not, you should NEVER use the word "Mayday". Sure, it will get the controller's attention, but unless you are in dire need of urgent assistance, misuse will result in a later phone call to explain your actions.
If you did not have an emergency, then perhaps the controller (examiner) was trying to hint that you were on the wrong frequency? Or maybe he was just being difficult to see how you handled it? Or maybe he's an idiot who doesn't know what he's doing (unlikely)?
But use of the word "Mayday" is detailed in CAP 413:-
"Mayday, mayday, mayday
[Station called] If appropriate - leave out if calling on 121.5
[Callsign]
[Nature of the emergency]
[Intentions]
[Position]
[Pilot's qualifications] Particularly if a tyro or student
[Souls on board] So they know how many bodies to look for!"
Any later calls, you would leave out the word "Mayday" and make calls as per normal procedure. It is down to ATC to keep the frequency free for you, or they may offer you another frequency if that is difficult for them. You are, of course, entitled to refuse if your brain is full and you're working hard enough without the extra bother. Remember that, in an emergency, it is YOU calling the shots - they're there to give you anything you need.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sorry,
to make it clear. I had declared an emergency with an initial MAYDAY call.
It was is the ensuing conversation with ATC that it was suggested that I prefix all my calls with MAYDAY.
eg MAYDAY G-ABCD my engine has restarted wish to cancelled emergency.
It was this prefixing of the callsign with the word MAYDAY when involved in an distress situation that I was wondering about.
Gaz
to make it clear. I had declared an emergency with an initial MAYDAY call.
It was is the ensuing conversation with ATC that it was suggested that I prefix all my calls with MAYDAY.
eg MAYDAY G-ABCD my engine has restarted wish to cancelled emergency.
It was this prefixing of the callsign with the word MAYDAY when involved in an distress situation that I was wondering about.
Gaz
Guest
Posts: n/a
The words "Mayday" only need to be used in your initial call to Atc. In your subsequent calls it is NOT neccessary to do this.
In my opinion the words "mayday" are used to get the attention from everybody, once you've got that they KNOW that you have an emergency.
In my opinion the words "mayday" are used to get the attention from everybody, once you've got that they KNOW that you have an emergency.
Guest
Posts: n/a
With ref Mayday. One of our A/C had an engine out and a return landing into AUH. As a result of being stepped on by A/C comming onto freq. pan/maday calls are now prefixed by mayday/pan. This informs all call signs that missed the original mayday/pan, that there is an emergency in progress. This is most important in a far off land. The stress is high enough without having to wait for a pause to get a call in. English is not the first tongue for many.It,s all about getting the message across and not blindly following the manual.
[This message has been edited by nohat (edited 21 April 2001).]
[This message has been edited by nohat (edited 21 April 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Nobody steps on another transmission intentionally. It's not a question of what words are used. If you're gonna get stepped on, you're gonna get stepped on.
Furthermore, nobody is suggesting "blindly following the rules".
However, in an emergency, it is often very important to keep transmissions short. Adding the word "Mayday" plus full callsign to the start of every transmission is, in my opinion, a waste of what could be very valuable time.
If other aircraft can't understand what is going on, it's up to ATC to keep the frequency clear in language that they WILL understand.
If nohat reckons that there needs to be a change to ICAO PANS OPS then perhaps they might consider it, or possibly file a national difference. But otherwise, so long as we stick to ICAO standard, then everyone will know what to expect. And that means, at least in an exam situation rather then in case of a real emergency, sticking to what it says in CAP 413.
Furthermore, nohat, you do not preface ANY message with "Pan". The call is "Pan Pan". What is more, there are not many countries outside the UK that recognise "Pan Pan", and for such a situation go straight to Mayday.
Furthermore, nobody is suggesting "blindly following the rules".
However, in an emergency, it is often very important to keep transmissions short. Adding the word "Mayday" plus full callsign to the start of every transmission is, in my opinion, a waste of what could be very valuable time.
If other aircraft can't understand what is going on, it's up to ATC to keep the frequency clear in language that they WILL understand.
If nohat reckons that there needs to be a change to ICAO PANS OPS then perhaps they might consider it, or possibly file a national difference. But otherwise, so long as we stick to ICAO standard, then everyone will know what to expect. And that means, at least in an exam situation rather then in case of a real emergency, sticking to what it says in CAP 413.
Furthermore, nohat, you do not preface ANY message with "Pan". The call is "Pan Pan". What is more, there are not many countries outside the UK that recognise "Pan Pan", and for such a situation go straight to Mayday.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Afterthought:-
Adding "Mayday" on the start of every transmission could cause severe difficulties and confusion in case of a second, concurrent emergency on the same frequency. The controller may well not listen to the callsign, think he's still talking to the first aircraft, confusion all round.
Yep - I'm even more convinced - "Mayday" should ONLY be used in the first call.
Adding "Mayday" on the start of every transmission could cause severe difficulties and confusion in case of a second, concurrent emergency on the same frequency. The controller may well not listen to the callsign, think he's still talking to the first aircraft, confusion all round.
Yep - I'm even more convinced - "Mayday" should ONLY be used in the first call.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hug monster You are right about what Cap 413 instructs. But not all call signs will have heard or understood the transmisions from the mayday A/C. Also you will find that some ATC officers have a poor understanding of English. ICAO procedures have not been sufficient in some situations. Also a lot confusion occures when communication is attempted between party's that English is not the first language. Listen to the Russians talk to the Spanish if you do'nt know what I mean. You will also find that ICAO works well in the UK and gets worse the further you fly southeast. 
In the AUH incident the crew stuck to ICAO and found that things did not happen as advertised. The ATC officer became overloaded trying to explain why XYZ was getting priority to other A/C in a language that neither he nor they spoke well. Clearly things needed to improve. My Company now train their crews to prefix emergency calls the way I mentioned. Thas has resulted in no more confusion. As for your correction, I was merely keeping it short so that I did'nt have to type the full procedure. This is in fact "Pan Pan, Pan Pan, Pan Pan" or "Mayday Mayday Mayday" I asumed that we all knew the full call and I would not have to teach everyone to suck eggs. Thank you for your imput. If you only ever fly in the UK, ICAO works well. In my opinion we are lucky to have the best ATC in the World. I fly all over the globe and sadly the same cannot be said for a significant number of Countries. In the end it's all about getting the message across ie HELP. If you have to modify the phrase to achieve this then just do it. Was it Confucius who said " rules are for the blind obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men".
[This message has been edited by nohat (edited 22 April 2001).]
In the AUH incident the crew stuck to ICAO and found that things did not happen as advertised. The ATC officer became overloaded trying to explain why XYZ was getting priority to other A/C in a language that neither he nor they spoke well. Clearly things needed to improve. My Company now train their crews to prefix emergency calls the way I mentioned. Thas has resulted in no more confusion. As for your correction, I was merely keeping it short so that I did'nt have to type the full procedure. This is in fact "Pan Pan, Pan Pan, Pan Pan" or "Mayday Mayday Mayday" I asumed that we all knew the full call and I would not have to teach everyone to suck eggs. Thank you for your imput. If you only ever fly in the UK, ICAO works well. In my opinion we are lucky to have the best ATC in the World. I fly all over the globe and sadly the same cannot be said for a significant number of Countries. In the end it's all about getting the message across ie HELP. If you have to modify the phrase to achieve this then just do it. Was it Confucius who said " rules are for the blind obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men". [This message has been edited by nohat (edited 22 April 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Gazeem, I too had never heard of this procedure of repeating "Mayday" at the beginning of each subsequent call after the initial one, until I did a MCC course with a couple of pedanti........... ahhhhh.......... highly experienced BA chaps.
Apparently, it is the correct technique.
Apparently, it is the correct technique.
Guest
Posts: n/a
No, oleo, it is not the correct technique. You will find that in CAP413.
In general, I find myself in agreement with nohat. However, such practices are outside what we should be teaching PPL students for their RT exams.
If later, and with flying experience behind them and a lot more confidence under their belt, such diversion from ICAO practices can be used. However, as nohat says, "rules are for the blind obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men". They have to learn the "official" way before they play around with various "unofficial" practices. Once they know the reason for the rules, then they will know in what circumstances the rules may be broken, and to what end.
In general, I find myself in agreement with nohat. However, such practices are outside what we should be teaching PPL students for their RT exams.
If later, and with flying experience behind them and a lot more confidence under their belt, such diversion from ICAO practices can be used. However, as nohat says, "rules are for the blind obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men". They have to learn the "official" way before they play around with various "unofficial" practices. Once they know the reason for the rules, then they will know in what circumstances the rules may be broken, and to what end.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Ok All, I have just come back from work and while I was sitting in the cruise, I went through the text in the Jeppesen. The following is from Aeronautical Telecommunications, Annex 10 vol 2. Section 5.3.1.2.1. "At the commencement of any subsequent communication in distress and urgency traffic, it shall be permissible to use the radiotelephony distress and urgency signals". There you have it, It is a recognised ICAO procedure to prefix with mayday or pan, if you so wish. My Company in light of our exprience now use this method as SOP's. You must do what you feel is best on the day. I hope you never have to use it for real. Happy landings.
Guest
Posts: n/a
nohat, I shall stand corrected if you can tell me if Jeppesen are quoting from ICAO PANS OPS procedures, or whether it is from an FAR...?
The reason being that the FAA have quite a few non-declared differences between their practices and ICAO. Is this one?
The reason being that the FAA have quite a few non-declared differences between their practices and ICAO. Is this one?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hug Monster, the extracts were taken from the following publications.
ICAO Rules Of The Air,Annex 2
Aeronautical telecommunications, Annex 10, vols 1&2.
Search And Rescue, Annex 12
Procedures-Rules Of The Air And Air Traffic Services, Pan-Rac (Doc 4444)
Procedures-Aircraft Operations, Pan-Ops (Doc 8168).
It is not an FAR idiosyncracy. If you look at them, then things start to get complicated. Gazeem congrats on passing your exam. Keep asking questions and you'll go far. I think we can all learn from this. There is usually more than one document that covers any given procedure. Usually written in such away that only Barristers can understand. They all apply. Or maybe not. It depends on how the Judge feels on the day.
Edited for finger failure
[This message has been edited by nohat (edited 23 April 2001).]
[This message has been edited by nohat (edited 23 April 2001).]
ICAO Rules Of The Air,Annex 2
Aeronautical telecommunications, Annex 10, vols 1&2.
Search And Rescue, Annex 12
Procedures-Rules Of The Air And Air Traffic Services, Pan-Rac (Doc 4444)
Procedures-Aircraft Operations, Pan-Ops (Doc 8168).
It is not an FAR idiosyncracy. If you look at them, then things start to get complicated. Gazeem congrats on passing your exam. Keep asking questions and you'll go far. I think we can all learn from this. There is usually more than one document that covers any given procedure. Usually written in such away that only Barristers can understand. They all apply. Or maybe not. It depends on how the Judge feels on the day.
Edited for finger failure[This message has been edited by nohat (edited 23 April 2001).]
[This message has been edited by nohat (edited 23 April 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Thought you might be interested....
When I trained to be a ship's radio officer we were taught that all distress R/T traffic should be prefixed and terminated by the word MAYDAY. eg "MAYDAY XXXX this is YYYY twenty souls on board MAYDAY".
The rationale was that it would quickly be obvious to stations switching to the frequency in use that distress traffic was in progress and that they should stay off unless they had something useful to say. It was considered that this far outweighed the time spent saying MAYDAY twice.
It has to be said though that emergencies at sea tend to progress more "slowly" than those in the air so cluttering up R/T traffic with MAYDAY may not always be appropriate.
As with all things, apply a little common sense and you won't go far wrong.
When I trained to be a ship's radio officer we were taught that all distress R/T traffic should be prefixed and terminated by the word MAYDAY. eg "MAYDAY XXXX this is YYYY twenty souls on board MAYDAY".
The rationale was that it would quickly be obvious to stations switching to the frequency in use that distress traffic was in progress and that they should stay off unless they had something useful to say. It was considered that this far outweighed the time spent saying MAYDAY twice.
It has to be said though that emergencies at sea tend to progress more "slowly" than those in the air so cluttering up R/T traffic with MAYDAY may not always be appropriate.
As with all things, apply a little common sense and you won't go far wrong.
Guest
Posts: n/a
My dear nohat,
I cannot but strongly disagree with you about following the rules. I suppose you're talking about R/T phraseology. You should have a look to the incidents and accidents where "not following the rules" played a major part (nor least in the worst ever air accident. You may well want to visit an open discussion in the News Forum about a certain Delta 777 Crew.
The fact of English not being the mother tongue of everyone (certainly not mine), makes more sense of using EXACTELY the correct phraseology.
Fly safely
I cannot but strongly disagree with you about following the rules. I suppose you're talking about R/T phraseology. You should have a look to the incidents and accidents where "not following the rules" played a major part (nor least in the worst ever air accident. You may well want to visit an open discussion in the News Forum about a certain Delta 777 Crew.
The fact of English not being the mother tongue of everyone (certainly not mine), makes more sense of using EXACTELY the correct phraseology.
Fly safely
Guest
Posts: n/a
Joaquin. Not sure what you are getting at. It has been established that prefixing an emegency call IS within the RULES. I have not advocated the disregarding of any regulation without a sound and reasonable reason. Also I might add, allowed within the rules. IE if both pilots are incapacitated, one of the cabin staff would have to step in. I don't think they would be prosecuted for for flying without a valid license in their possession, do you?
Might I suggest you go back and re-read the entire thread.
Might I suggest you go back and re-read the entire thread.