When Declaring an ’Emergency’ Is Not Enough
By my count....9:04 from calling missed approach....first engine flames out.
I would suggest the issue is not what was said....but when it was said. I would have been screaming fuel problems way back when I knew I was starting into my planned reserve. If the crew did not say anything until they began the missed approach....then they waited way, way, way, way too late to say something. They hoped to get in and no one would be the wiser.....that bit them squarely in the butt!
I would suggest the issue is not what was said....but when it was said. I would have been screaming fuel problems way back when I knew I was starting into my planned reserve. If the crew did not say anything until they began the missed approach....then they waited way, way, way, way too late to say something. They hoped to get in and no one would be the wiser.....that bit them squarely in the butt!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Aus, Europe & everywhere in between
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hear, hear Nick!
You guys need to think outside the square.
Of course, use standard phraseology as much as possible but sometimes that won't happen. ATC SHOULD recognise that an emergency exists and deal with it.
C'mon you guys, we are paid to use our judgement.
You guys need to think outside the square.
Of course, use standard phraseology as much as possible but sometimes that won't happen. ATC SHOULD recognise that an emergency exists and deal with it.
C'mon you guys, we are paid to use our judgement.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: https://t.me/pump_upp
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oogle,
Last summer an AUA DH8D advised me to have left engin problem and wanted to divert. It took me some time, in very very busy afternoon, to find out that he was declaring emergency. And that happened only after I've asked him "Are you declaring emergency?" He sounded like he was not shured whether he should do it or not, but finaly said yes. The point is, I cannot know unless I'm told. How can I recognize that anyone is in problem? I can only assume and assumption can, and usually does, lead to mistake or misjudgment. What ever you need or have to say, say it! Do not expect me to read anybodys mind. I am sorry but I can't do it. I am neither trained to do it nor I have the powers of my own. However, if I'm told either Mayday or Pan, I know precisely what the procedure is, and what must be done, and, what is even more important, I haven't met a single controller that wouldn't do much more than requried by the book.
Last summer an AUA DH8D advised me to have left engin problem and wanted to divert. It took me some time, in very very busy afternoon, to find out that he was declaring emergency. And that happened only after I've asked him "Are you declaring emergency?" He sounded like he was not shured whether he should do it or not, but finaly said yes. The point is, I cannot know unless I'm told. How can I recognize that anyone is in problem? I can only assume and assumption can, and usually does, lead to mistake or misjudgment. What ever you need or have to say, say it! Do not expect me to read anybodys mind. I am sorry but I can't do it. I am neither trained to do it nor I have the powers of my own. However, if I'm told either Mayday or Pan, I know precisely what the procedure is, and what must be done, and, what is even more important, I haven't met a single controller that wouldn't do much more than requried by the book.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Aus, Europe & everywhere in between
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jovica
I fully agree with what you asked the pilot. You questioned him and that is great.
My point is that don't assume that someone will only say "PAN or "MAYDAY" only. You obviously had the wit to question them.
Hopefully most other pilots and controllers are able to do the same.
I fully agree with what you asked the pilot. You questioned him and that is great.
My point is that don't assume that someone will only say "PAN or "MAYDAY" only. You obviously had the wit to question them.
Hopefully most other pilots and controllers are able to do the same.
Nick,
I see that you are saying "we all blame the pilot and not the controller" but I think that is a bit unfair. What most were reacting to is the automatic assumption made that ATC will cope easily with non standard phraseology.
I think we can all agree that this was an error of communication in which both the message transmitter (pilots) and the message reciever (ATC) failed to gain the same mental model of the situation.
That is the reason for standard phraseology I guess, and possibly the reason hat the report, as quoted by Nick, said:
Farmer1 & 212man:
Farmer asks
NO is the answer I suggest.
Pan means you have a problem, request priority and assistance may be required.
Mayday means you have a problem that REQUIRES immediate aassistance and priority.
thus if you have "an emergency" you have these two to choose from. Simple. If you will not require any assistance or priority and judge that you will not have any need for them as you problem develops anytime between now and landing including getting diverted or held by ATC for other traffic, then do you have an emergency at all?
Example: a chip light, no secondaries. I suggest a Pan because it will get you priority to the landing (you wont get held circling endlessly waiting for other traffic). You will get assistance to the landing by ATC so you can concentrate on the cockpit issues. If you get secondaries, and have to land right here and now: upgrade to mayday and down you go. ATC are already on hieghtened alert due to your pan, thus react much faster to help you.
I see that you are saying "we all blame the pilot and not the controller" but I think that is a bit unfair. What most were reacting to is the automatic assumption made that ATC will cope easily with non standard phraseology.
I think we can all agree that this was an error of communication in which both the message transmitter (pilots) and the message reciever (ATC) failed to gain the same mental model of the situation.
That is the reason for standard phraseology I guess, and possibly the reason hat the report, as quoted by Nick, said:
“The root cause of the problem was that the crew was trained to use the word ’emergency’ rather than ’mayday,’” said ASRS,
Farmer asks
On the other hand, if we have an emergency, and we are not too bothered about any of the above, and have no particular desire to get our message across, we declare an emergency, or use some other non-standard phraseology?
Pan means you have a problem, request priority and assistance may be required.
Mayday means you have a problem that REQUIRES immediate aassistance and priority.
thus if you have "an emergency" you have these two to choose from. Simple. If you will not require any assistance or priority and judge that you will not have any need for them as you problem develops anytime between now and landing including getting diverted or held by ATC for other traffic, then do you have an emergency at all?
Example: a chip light, no secondaries. I suggest a Pan because it will get you priority to the landing (you wont get held circling endlessly waiting for other traffic). You will get assistance to the landing by ATC so you can concentrate on the cockpit issues. If you get secondaries, and have to land right here and now: upgrade to mayday and down you go. ATC are already on hieghtened alert due to your pan, thus react much faster to help you.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: KPHL
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The issue is not whether ATC should think and respond to all RT, but whether we can expect them to fully understand our requirements when we fail to use non-standard RT.
It's so easy to blame ATC for not providing the required assistance after declaring an emergency, but that blame doesn't help your dead passengers. What would have helped them is the use of standard RT that allows the system to respond the way it was intended.
In the case that started this thread the reason the pilots didn't get the services they needed was 100% due to their communications. The fact that ATC didn't respond should definitely be investigated, but I would not expect fault to be attached to their inaction.
Nick, you said "we all respond to situations with our brains, not our rule books". Following this discussion and ignoring the rule books for a moment, if you have to declare an emergency away from home is your brain going to respond with "Mayday" or "emergency"?
Matthew.
It's so easy to blame ATC for not providing the required assistance after declaring an emergency, but that blame doesn't help your dead passengers. What would have helped them is the use of standard RT that allows the system to respond the way it was intended.
In the case that started this thread the reason the pilots didn't get the services they needed was 100% due to their communications. The fact that ATC didn't respond should definitely be investigated, but I would not expect fault to be attached to their inaction.
Nick, you said "we all respond to situations with our brains, not our rule books". Following this discussion and ignoring the rule books for a moment, if you have to declare an emergency away from home is your brain going to respond with "Mayday" or "emergency"?
Matthew.
Combine Operations
Join Date: May 2005
Location: U.K.
Posts: 687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please allow me to look at the situation from what I imagine might be the perspective of ATC. I have never done the job - I'm not clever enough - so I will no doubt get it wrong, but please bear with me.
a. An aircraft calls me, and says he is declaring an emergency.
b. Ah, he has an emergency, says I to myself. Adrenalin begins to flow a wee bit. What is the nature of the emergency, I wonder, and I ask him the question. He duly proceeds to describe his problem(s), possibly in fine detail, and in technical terms. While he is doing this, I am trying to translate into terms I understand the severity of his situation. I have a problem here, in that although I am fully qualified ATC, with a few hours on my PPL, I am relatively new in the job, and I am the only controller on duty. I also have a couple of personal problems, but they're - well - personal. (There could be the problem with the common language as well, etc. etc. but let's not go OTT.) The point is, I know my job, and I assume he knows his, but I do not know his, and he does not know mine.
c. Anyway, I'm not absolutely sure I fully understand his situation, but there is one fact of which I am quite certain: it is not as serious as all that. How do I know that? Because the pilot has not used the word Mayday. Simple.
d. The conversation may or may not continue, and no doubt I would alert at least some of the emergency services at some stage or other.
e. It is even possible that eventually I will realise he is actually in distress, and go onto full alert with the Aircraft in Distress procedure, but this is by no means certain.
Even if paragraph e. occurs, everything from the start of paragraph b. has been time wasted, for the simple reason that the pilot did not say the word Mayday. I fail to understand the reluctance of so many pilots to use that word.
As to declaring Pan Pan first, and then perhaps upgrading to Mayday, I would suggest it is safer to do the reverse. If there is an emergency, ask yourself, "Is this a distress situation?" If the immediate answer is "NO," then perhaps declare Pan Pan. If the answer is "Yes", or "Well, maybe", or "Er..." or anything else, then I can see only one thing to do, and one word to say.
I am not advocating calling Mayday every time an amber light flashes. I advocate being professional, and acting in the best interests of your passengers and those on the ground. Life is difficult enough; why make it more so for no good reason?
With sincere apologies to all you ATC types. I am trying to get across to the pilots what I consider to be a very important message, understand?
a. An aircraft calls me, and says he is declaring an emergency.
b. Ah, he has an emergency, says I to myself. Adrenalin begins to flow a wee bit. What is the nature of the emergency, I wonder, and I ask him the question. He duly proceeds to describe his problem(s), possibly in fine detail, and in technical terms. While he is doing this, I am trying to translate into terms I understand the severity of his situation. I have a problem here, in that although I am fully qualified ATC, with a few hours on my PPL, I am relatively new in the job, and I am the only controller on duty. I also have a couple of personal problems, but they're - well - personal. (There could be the problem with the common language as well, etc. etc. but let's not go OTT.) The point is, I know my job, and I assume he knows his, but I do not know his, and he does not know mine.
c. Anyway, I'm not absolutely sure I fully understand his situation, but there is one fact of which I am quite certain: it is not as serious as all that. How do I know that? Because the pilot has not used the word Mayday. Simple.
d. The conversation may or may not continue, and no doubt I would alert at least some of the emergency services at some stage or other.
e. It is even possible that eventually I will realise he is actually in distress, and go onto full alert with the Aircraft in Distress procedure, but this is by no means certain.
Even if paragraph e. occurs, everything from the start of paragraph b. has been time wasted, for the simple reason that the pilot did not say the word Mayday. I fail to understand the reluctance of so many pilots to use that word.
As to declaring Pan Pan first, and then perhaps upgrading to Mayday, I would suggest it is safer to do the reverse. If there is an emergency, ask yourself, "Is this a distress situation?" If the immediate answer is "NO," then perhaps declare Pan Pan. If the answer is "Yes", or "Well, maybe", or "Er..." or anything else, then I can see only one thing to do, and one word to say.
I am not advocating calling Mayday every time an amber light flashes. I advocate being professional, and acting in the best interests of your passengers and those on the ground. Life is difficult enough; why make it more so for no good reason?
With sincere apologies to all you ATC types. I am trying to get across to the pilots what I consider to be a very important message, understand?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think anyone disagrees that Mayday should be called, and to fail to do so makes it more work for everyone.
What I find amazing here is that Some ppruners seem to say that if the one word is left out, all bets are off on ATC responsibility. If you don't say Mayday, ATC can just ignore you, I guess you believe. I don't agree!
ATC has a responsibility to help fill in the mistakes, gaps and errors of others, just as the pilots do, too.
If ATC clears you to land on a runway that has taxi traffic on it, you are WRONG to land. If ATC vectors you to run out of gas, and you run out of gas, you are WRONG.
The world is not a pile of rule books where we play hide the weenie to decide which person is 100% wrong, while all other occupants of the system get to stand by, lilly white.
If you fail to act in an intelligent manner to make someone else's situation better, even if it is not in your rulebook, you are wrong. Doubly so when it is in your rule book.
So, the pilots were wronger than ATC in this case, but ATC was WRONG.
What I find amazing here is that Some ppruners seem to say that if the one word is left out, all bets are off on ATC responsibility. If you don't say Mayday, ATC can just ignore you, I guess you believe. I don't agree!
ATC has a responsibility to help fill in the mistakes, gaps and errors of others, just as the pilots do, too.
If ATC clears you to land on a runway that has taxi traffic on it, you are WRONG to land. If ATC vectors you to run out of gas, and you run out of gas, you are WRONG.
The world is not a pile of rule books where we play hide the weenie to decide which person is 100% wrong, while all other occupants of the system get to stand by, lilly white.
If you fail to act in an intelligent manner to make someone else's situation better, even if it is not in your rulebook, you are wrong. Doubly so when it is in your rule book.
So, the pilots were wronger than ATC in this case, but ATC was WRONG.
Combine Operations
Join Date: May 2005
Location: U.K.
Posts: 687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nick,
If you include me in that, then I am obviously not making myself clear, and I apologise.
If the word Mayday is not used, I am not saying ATC will ignore you, but they just might, for any number of reasons, some of them perhaps valid.
Despite all the replies on this thread, several from me, I think your initial post says it all. The pilot used non-standard phraseology, he did not receive the service he desired, and he complained. If he had done his job professionally, I'm sure he would have received the service he had every right to expect.
To paraphrase the title, "When is declaring an 'Emergency' not enough?"
Always.
What I find amazing here is that Some ppruners seem to say that if the one word is left out, all bets are off on ATC responsibility. If you don't say Mayday, ATC can just ignore you, I guess you believe. I don't agree!
If the word Mayday is not used, I am not saying ATC will ignore you, but they just might, for any number of reasons, some of them perhaps valid.
Despite all the replies on this thread, several from me, I think your initial post says it all. The pilot used non-standard phraseology, he did not receive the service he desired, and he complained. If he had done his job professionally, I'm sure he would have received the service he had every right to expect.
To paraphrase the title, "When is declaring an 'Emergency' not enough?"
Always.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: KPHL
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I absolutely agree that ATC does have a responsibility to act beyond their rule book, and in fact do so quite regularly. I just think it's wrong and potentially ineffective to demand that they operate outside their rule books due to our errors.
I was reading (perhaps between the lines) that some were advocating leniancy on non-standard RT.
When we look back on an incident, such as the one that started this thread, it becomes quite difficult to say whether ATC was wrong or irresponsible when the issue could have been miscommunication. If ATC said anything to imply that they understood a non-standard situation had arisen and then did not confirm the status of the aircraft, then I would lean towards irresponsibility. On the other hand, if all the ATC responses sounded like typical handling of routine traffic, then perhaps their lack of emergency response was limited to the communication problem and nothing else. The reason the aircraft diverted might have been an indication...or not, need more details.
The reason that I've investigated incidents like this in the past has almost always been to prevent further occurrences rather than to assign blame. What I learn from this is the value of standard RT and to not always expect others to do things for me.
Matthew.
I was reading (perhaps between the lines) that some were advocating leniancy on non-standard RT.
When we look back on an incident, such as the one that started this thread, it becomes quite difficult to say whether ATC was wrong or irresponsible when the issue could have been miscommunication. If ATC said anything to imply that they understood a non-standard situation had arisen and then did not confirm the status of the aircraft, then I would lean towards irresponsibility. On the other hand, if all the ATC responses sounded like typical handling of routine traffic, then perhaps their lack of emergency response was limited to the communication problem and nothing else. The reason the aircraft diverted might have been an indication...or not, need more details.
The reason that I've investigated incidents like this in the past has almost always been to prevent further occurrences rather than to assign blame. What I learn from this is the value of standard RT and to not always expect others to do things for me.
Matthew.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: At Work
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's look at the law in the U.S.
91.3 states the pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.
In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.
Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under this section shall upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.
The translation of this is there is no requirement to use any specific word or phrase in any manual, rule or law. The only requirement is that you are to handle the emergency period. Communicate in any manner necessary. If anything goes wrong it is your fault. Handle it. Mayday, Pan, Look you &%$hole, No, I am going to do the following, or whaterver phrase that is necessary is appropriate and supported by the law.
91.3 states the pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.
In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.
Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under this section shall upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.
The translation of this is there is no requirement to use any specific word or phrase in any manual, rule or law. The only requirement is that you are to handle the emergency period. Communicate in any manner necessary. If anything goes wrong it is your fault. Handle it. Mayday, Pan, Look you &%$hole, No, I am going to do the following, or whaterver phrase that is necessary is appropriate and supported by the law.
Last edited by diethelm; 28th Aug 2005 at 20:33.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: paris
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a non native English speaker, I would add that it is important to pronounce clearly, to articulate, to speak slowly...
Don't hesitate to talk to us as if we were 6 years old...
Sounds are distorted by R/T, there may be background noise. In case of something going wrong, the radar room "wakes up", the people are like bees in a hive, other controllers talk to you, you talk to them etc... and it can be very difficult for a "non native English hearing ear" to catch all the sounds...
avoid the "we aren't" or "can't"... use "are not" etc... (most of all if you're American )
I don't know if Asian pilots read this forum, but those are very difficult to understand for us French... (especially Chinese), even when they use standard phraseology... I also find the Spanish accent difficult to catch. (those are just examples )
well, now, all the above is easy to say... when under pressure, the delivery can get quicker and it's "back to basics"...
Don't hesitate to talk to us as if we were 6 years old...
Sounds are distorted by R/T, there may be background noise. In case of something going wrong, the radar room "wakes up", the people are like bees in a hive, other controllers talk to you, you talk to them etc... and it can be very difficult for a "non native English hearing ear" to catch all the sounds...
avoid the "we aren't" or "can't"... use "are not" etc... (most of all if you're American
)I don't know if Asian pilots read this forum, but those are very difficult to understand for us French... (especially Chinese), even when they use standard phraseology... I also find the Spanish accent difficult to catch. (those are just examples
)well, now, all the above is easy to say... when under pressure, the delivery can get quicker and it's "back to basics"...
Once again the pages of PPRuNe prove educational. I recently heard a C17 crew call for a return to OKBK and that they were "declaring an emergency". It genuinely didn't trigger any useful response until they stated that they had smoke in the cockpit. I had never heard the expression used over the r/t before that, in 29 years of flying around all sorts of interesting places.
However, when I declared a "PAN" while returning with one engine on my 135 at idle, I got the full treatment even though it was 3 in the morning. I certainly didn't mind the controller asking me to confirm it wasn't a practice, after he'd carried out all the correct initial actions.
Nick and Oogle, just because you do things one particular way in N America doesn't mean it's right. It's not just about ATC having the wit/language skills to question a pilot, it's a system-failure in your training that YOU and your countrymen are going to have to address. If you want correct results first time, use the internationally-agreed terminology. Perhaps a useful topic for a Flight Safety push Stateside sometime, particularly for crews who are likely to spend time working with non-USA ATC?
However, when I declared a "PAN" while returning with one engine on my 135 at idle, I got the full treatment even though it was 3 in the morning. I certainly didn't mind the controller asking me to confirm it wasn't a practice, after he'd carried out all the correct initial actions.
Nick and Oogle, just because you do things one particular way in N America doesn't mean it's right. It's not just about ATC having the wit/language skills to question a pilot, it's a system-failure in your training that YOU and your countrymen are going to have to address. If you want correct results first time, use the internationally-agreed terminology. Perhaps a useful topic for a Flight Safety push Stateside sometime, particularly for crews who are likely to spend time working with non-USA ATC?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: KPHL
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
diethelm, you're correct that the emergency condition allows you to deviate from the rules, however you are still directly responsible for the operation of the aircraft and hence the safety. The rules for what you need to say to get a desired response remain. There still is the requirement. You have the option (at least in FAA airspace) to deviate, but you must think of what's best. What we've been discussing here is that what's best is standard R/T, especially when there is a communication barrier such as language.
Passion Flying Hobby Science Sponsor Work
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Belgium
Age: 68
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Emergency
A week ago in that bad weather hitting Switzerland, I had my part of that weather and had to put the Heli down several times, one even inside Lyon CRT.
I am not very proud the way I handled this at first, but some thoughts
- I looked several times at the aircraft disaster documentaries at Nat Geo, and feel that very many of them had to say the least -a communication- problem. (The DC-8 crashing without fuel in NY, the Swiss MD-11 etc). I think that some has to do with the pilots pride or ego call it the way you want, to keep up appearances as long as possible because he still is in charge and not meant to 'beg' for or rely on assistance. That attitude may skew the communication.
- I finally got straight with Lyon ATC and they helped me wonderfully, gave me a permanent code, so each time i could move they had me on radar before establishing communication (in fact they called me before I could, when they saw me move). Even at the ground via cell phone ATC give me latest doppler radar readings to get me out the storm. I am really greatfull to these guys.
So maybe it is not just semantics between 'emergency' and 'PAN' or 'MAYDAY', but being clear (in your own head) on what you are asking from and telling to ATC.
d3
I am not very proud the way I handled this at first, but some thoughts
- I looked several times at the aircraft disaster documentaries at Nat Geo, and feel that very many of them had to say the least -a communication- problem. (The DC-8 crashing without fuel in NY, the Swiss MD-11 etc). I think that some has to do with the pilots pride or ego call it the way you want, to keep up appearances as long as possible because he still is in charge and not meant to 'beg' for or rely on assistance. That attitude may skew the communication.
- I finally got straight with Lyon ATC and they helped me wonderfully, gave me a permanent code, so each time i could move they had me on radar before establishing communication (in fact they called me before I could, when they saw me move). Even at the ground via cell phone ATC give me latest doppler radar readings to get me out the storm. I am really greatfull to these guys.
So maybe it is not just semantics between 'emergency' and 'PAN' or 'MAYDAY', but being clear (in your own head) on what you are asking from and telling to ATC.
d3
Last edited by delta3; 29th Aug 2005 at 09:56.
Passion Flying Hobby Science Sponsor Work
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Belgium
Age: 68
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Farmer 1,
I think the point I am making, is that instead of flying marginally by your self, you may inform ATC of it (they don't know) so that you safely get out the bad weather, using their information and improving a lot the communication, so reducing work load.
The fact that they were informed, also made me put down the heli faster, not pushing it. Probably it helped that weather was much worse than predicted, so ATC had some emphaty with my situation.
d3
I think the point I am making, is that instead of flying marginally by your self, you may inform ATC of it (they don't know) so that you safely get out the bad weather, using their information and improving a lot the communication, so reducing work load.
The fact that they were informed, also made me put down the heli faster, not pushing it. Probably it helped that weather was much worse than predicted, so ATC had some emphaty with my situation.
d3
Combine Operations
Join Date: May 2005
Location: U.K.
Posts: 687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Delta3,
You are absolutely right. I apologise if I appeared to be a bit impatient, but my last post was directed more at others on this thread. Reading it now, I realise I could have been more diplomatic.
I had decided I had said enough on the subject, but it was your inclusion of the word "maybe" which made me change my mind. I think it encapsulates everything I have been trying to get across all this time.
Yours was a situation in which I have found myself on more than one occasion, and thankfully, ATC have always been there to save the day for me.
Safe flying.
That's all - fini - no more.
Farmer.
You are absolutely right. I apologise if I appeared to be a bit impatient, but my last post was directed more at others on this thread. Reading it now, I realise I could have been more diplomatic.
I had decided I had said enough on the subject, but it was your inclusion of the word "maybe" which made me change my mind. I think it encapsulates everything I have been trying to get across all this time.
Yours was a situation in which I have found myself on more than one occasion, and thankfully, ATC have always been there to save the day for me.
Safe flying.
That's all - fini - no more.
Farmer.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vienna
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for expecting pilots across the world to speak English when flying in their own country...whew...sounds a bit far-fetched to me.
May not make very much sense at a small glider airfield, but still you might encounter some people not from the area. Especially in Europe where many different languages are spoken in a rather small area.
Why is it so diffcult to learn the ICAO-version of English? It is simply a part of what you should learn when being a pilot. You also shoukd know what the words XPDR means, even if you co not need one in your area.
Regards, Bernhard
That word is magic. All on its own, it informs all those who hear it that there is an aircraft IN DISTRESS. It wakes people up; it starts them pressing buttons, making telephone calls, and basically opening fire with the aforementioned shooting match. It also makes other pilots in the area start thinking about diversions, alternate fuel, and the many and varied other ways the recently-announced situation might affect them.
Thanks a lot for tis great example - by using English (no matter where you are) you allow other piots to listen in and if you are a real emergency, you can make live a ot easier for your colleagues without any work on your side.
On the other hand - as you pointed out - MAYDAY MAKES THE WORLD GO ROUND. The only reason there is a standard is, that not everybody in the world understands English perfectly, and even people who speak English very well, may have trouble understanding some panicked pilot when he speaks in a hurry with a heavy local touch, perhaps from the southern US.
Someone mentioned before, that Anericans do not think that there is a world outside the US. This is a very sensible subject, but generally I would agree that the majority of US citizens has never even thought about that. Not because they are stupid, but when one can travel thousands of miles in all directions without leaving your country (=your currency, your traffic signs, your units,...) you are simply not used to the situation. When you are from a small country like Austria (like I am from), you have 5 countires within a car ride of three hours - a totally different perspective.
On the other hand, there is a fraction of Americans who really think the whole world thinks in Dollars and miles and everyone who does not use the statute mile is an idiot because it is the best system - without being able to provide any reason why. But in the end, this is most often more a question of education and, since people from Germany, Austria or the UK do not behave that different when on mass - vacation in Spain.
Regards, Bernhard
That word is magic. All on its own, it informs all those who hear it that there is an aircraft IN DISTRESS. It wakes people up; it starts them pressing buttons, making telephone calls, and basically opening fire with the aforementioned shooting match. It also makes other pilots in the area start thinking about diversions, alternate fuel, and the many and varied other ways the recently-announced situation might affect them.
Thanks a lot for tis great example - by using English (no matter where you are) you allow other piots to listen in and if you are a real emergency, you can make live a ot easier for your colleagues without any work on your side.
On the other hand - as you pointed out - MAYDAY MAKES THE WORLD GO ROUND. The only reason there is a standard is, that not everybody in the world understands English perfectly, and even people who speak English very well, may have trouble understanding some panicked pilot when he speaks in a hurry with a heavy local touch, perhaps from the southern US.
Someone mentioned before, that Anericans do not think that there is a world outside the US. This is a very sensible subject, but generally I would agree that the majority of US citizens has never even thought about that. Not because they are stupid, but when one can travel thousands of miles in all directions without leaving your country (=your currency, your traffic signs, your units,...) you are simply not used to the situation. When you are from a small country like Austria (like I am from), you have 5 countires within a car ride of three hours - a totally different perspective.
On the other hand, there is a fraction of Americans who really think the whole world thinks in Dollars and miles and everyone who does not use the statute mile is an idiot because it is the best system - without being able to provide any reason why. But in the end, this is most often more a question of education and upbringing, since people from Germany, Austria or the UK do not behave that different when on mass - vacation in Spain.
Regards, Bernhard