There may be some discretion involved.....and landing a modern jet safely on one engine is a very doable thing.....but the QRH will say land at nearest suitable airport, as it is definitely a serious incident.
As opinions are free, I'll give you mine......there are very few major incidents like this in one's career, and personally I would take advantage of every resource available, and a mayday call opens lots of doors.
I have flown 3 and 4 engine jets, and our manual clearly said the loss of one engine did not constitute an emergency, ( and you can legally continue to airport chosen by commander- look at BA flight that flew from LAX to London after engine failure on takeoff in 747), I would still declare emergency/mayday and get it back on ground safely.
I have never heard of the Caa/ FAA ever chastising someone because they have declared emergency, but I have seen them question pilots who had a potentially serious problem and failed to declare emmergency.

As far as I am concerned, it is my choice. If PAN doesn't give me what I want, I'll shout Mayday. An engine failure in a twin is an inconvenience rather than a dire emergency, but you will have to land at the "nearest suitable" (which us not necessarily the closest). What you are doing with your call is to let then know of your plight, reserve tracks, levels and resources due to your problem; things you are going to take disregard less of what ATC say. My experience of ATC in Europe is such that they are extremely accommodating to any aircraft with even minor faults that declaring any emergency status is pointless. They will give you want you need anyway. With one exception - LHR. To a diverting aircraft low on fuel "LHR are only diverting accepting aircraft with an emergency. Do you have an emergency?" "Not yet, but if you keep me on this heading I will be." Five minutes later "Mayday, mayday..."

No further redundancy? Another failure a certain crash? May day...

Do we have any document to support our reasoning to support PAN or MAYDAY.
Any FAA/ JAA or ICAO Document.
Thanks.

Last engine, last hydraulic system, last electrical generator... Last chance...

Guidance is clear!!

:eek:

Keep it simple. Mayday. You can always downgrade to a Pan later on.

Not forgetting that some of the countries you might overfly are 'rumoured' to not 'understand' 'PAN'.......

Here is some guidance:

http://www.b737mrg.net/downloads/b73...pan-mayday.pdf

Not a bad list, but...

Engine failure to me will always be a mayday, at least initially... unless maybe it's a controlled shutdown at altitude.

Three calls of "pan-pan" in radiotelephone communications, is used to signify that there is an urgency on board but that, for the time being at least, there is no immediate danger to anyone's life or to the vessel itself. This is referred to as a state of urgency.
Three calls of "Mayday" means that there is imminent danger to life or to the continued viability of the vessel itself.

Thus "pan-pan" informs potential rescuers (including emergency services and other craft in the area) that a safety problem exists whereas "Mayday" will call upon them to drop all other activities and immediately initiate a rescue attempt.

Any failure of multiple systems rendering the aircraft in a single system state should thus be considered a potential Mayday

Mayday. You may as well get yourself some priority and attention. It is unlikely that there will be another one in the same airspace so no one else is going to be put into danger.

As most here I have had many problems but never felt they required a Mayday. Four engines do help of course.

Pan Pan or Mayday depending on the circumstances. By some poster's logic pilots of single engine aircraft should include Mayday in their taxi call. The definitions are in Annex (10?) to the Chicago Convention.



The radiotelephone distress signal to indicate grave and/or imminent danger requiring immediate assistance is

MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY.

The radiotelephone urgency signal to indicate a condition concerning the safety of an aircraft, vehicle or of some person on board which does not require immediate assistance is

PAN PAN, PAN PAN, PAN PAN.

To anyone with a grasp of English either might be appropriate depending on the nature of the failure and performance.

Both are acceptable means of declaring an emergency. And, contrary to what many will tell you, all ICAO countries have a similar radio licence syllabus and Pan/Mayday calls are an easy mark, right after the phonetic alphabet! Ask any Air Trafficker from Lagos to Tokyo. Even my wife knows that after doing a day boating course.

HOWEVER; a generation of simulator instructors seem to have succumbed to the view that perceived conservatism equals increased safety. Perhaps some were indoctrinated by previous companies SOPs, or by that habit in aviation of adding margins to margins, or simply by peers strong opinions.

Whatever the cause, just like any language changes over the years, so has aviation language. Particularly in Asian countries; when you are doing a check Mayday has become the default call for engine fail on a twin. You won't get a 5 if you use PAN.

I don't like to see aviation phraseology diminished by 'ghost' procedures but this is the reality. The PAN call is slowly being eroded out of use.

See BOAC's extremely diplomatic (and correct) post further up.........

:=

Glad you noticed....:) I know how I would 'start'!

Or French, since both phrases come from that language. ;)

m'aidez = help me!
en panne = broken/failed/not functioning. "Houston, ahhh - We have a problem!"

There are, of course, single-engine failures, and single-engine failures.

An uncontained failure that sprays shrapnel through the wing and cabin and lights up the EICAS like a Christmas tree is a Mayday, even with 4 engines (Qantas A380).

Definitely commander's call. And as the saying goes - if there is doubt, there is no doubt.

Ahh, the proverbial British understatement....Glad you're around to tell the tale. :D

Then there are countries in which "MAYDAY" isn't understood.
Been there, done that...

Actually the Qantas 380 Captain out of SIN used a PAN call. Later stating "at no time did I feel our lives were in danger".

Can we agree that whatever our opinions are, there is no right or wrong answer?

You can't "declare" a pan - there is no such thing. A pan call is just an urgent message, nothing more.

You CAN, however, declare an emergency, using mayday.


Should you declare an emergency with an engine failure?

Answer, a couple of reasons to declare an emergency at all:
- When you can't adhere to the clearances given by air traffic control
- When you immediately need to do something different that what you were cleared.

E.g. emergency descent. You call mayday to let the air traffic controller know, that you will be descending no matter what. He will the be able to assist your decent by getting other traffic out of your way (hopefully).

Same for an engine failure during departure. Most likely you will fly a contingency procedure instead of your originally cleared SID. A mayday call, will let the controller know that he needs to keep other traffic clear of your way. Good communication will ease the work of the controller (see Thomson on youtube for a well executed example - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KhZwsYtNDE).

Calling pan will not give you anything at all. Pan is just a message that takes priority over other radio calls. You don't get any priority over other traffic, and it doesn't allow you to deviate from your present clearance.

Since the misunderstanding about what a pan call really is and means, is so ingrained, calling "pan" and anything the controllers will interpret as an emergency will give you the same privileges as calling mayday - still doesn't make it correct.

HPSOV L:
But you are providing an example of a quad loosing an engine, not a twin.
In the example you provide multiple systems of each type remain functioning.
In the twin scenario, 50% of some systems are gone, a single source remains, hence the MayDay is warranted whereas in the case of a quad a simple PAN will suffice

Sky job:
Sorry, should have made it clear I was responding to a previous post. Relevant as it challenges preconceptions. Also could I suggest an ETOPs twin on one engine has as much redundancy as, say, a Pilatus PC12. This is not to deny it is a serious situation, however you can't say it's mandatory to make a MAYDAY call. That is just opinion.

Cosmo:
I think you're a bit off with your understanding of phraseology. Read the ICAO annex.