When Declaring an ’Emergency’ Is Not Enough
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When Declaring an ’Emergency’ Is Not Enough
From Aviation International News:
When Declaring an ’Emergency’ Is Not Enough
A 757 crew did not get the response they expected when they declared an “emergency” instead of “mayday.” According to an incident filed with NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting System, the crew found that the word “emergency” didn’t get the desired results outside U.S. airspace. The crew diverted to an airport in South America and declared an emergency, but the non-English-speaking controllers didn’t recognize what that meant. Therefore, no emergency services such as priority handling, fire or rescue equipment were provided. “The root cause of the problem was that the crew was trained to use the word ’emergency’ rather than ’mayday,’” said ASRS, which noted that the official International Civil Aviation Organization word used to signify an aircraft in distress is “mayday.
When Declaring an ’Emergency’ Is Not Enough
A 757 crew did not get the response they expected when they declared an “emergency” instead of “mayday.” According to an incident filed with NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting System, the crew found that the word “emergency” didn’t get the desired results outside U.S. airspace. The crew diverted to an airport in South America and declared an emergency, but the non-English-speaking controllers didn’t recognize what that meant. Therefore, no emergency services such as priority handling, fire or rescue equipment were provided. “The root cause of the problem was that the crew was trained to use the word ’emergency’ rather than ’mayday,’” said ASRS, which noted that the official International Civil Aviation Organization word used to signify an aircraft in distress is “mayday.
I would have thought anyone in aviation would understand what a pilot declaring an "emergency" meant!
Hakaracacas Tower....Seed Bird 233...declaring an emergency....request straight-in approach to Rwy 27....blah...blah...blah
Seed Bird 233....cleared number 43 to land....report airport in sight....blah...blah...blah...
Aw come on here!
Hakaracacas Tower....Seed Bird 233...declaring an emergency....request straight-in approach to Rwy 27....blah...blah...blah
Seed Bird 233....cleared number 43 to land....report airport in sight....blah...blah...blah...
Aw come on here!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“The root cause of the problem was that the crew was trained to use the word ’emergency’ rather than ’mayday,’”
I just looked at all the relevant publications regarding US emergency communications. It is essentially the same as the ICAO guidelines.
It is true that in the past, there was a difference. Maybe these pilots are not up to date.
Before the changes, a controller needed to hear the words..."declare an emergency" in order to have authority to activate ground emergency services. Hence the reason why it was drilled into pilots. Even for a lady giving birth on th plane and needing an ambulance on arrival, the pilot would have to 'declare an emergency' to get that ambulance.
As I said though, the guidelines are now in line with ICAO and the actual text is almost exactly the same as in CAP 413 I think.
Here are some links.
AIM 6-3-1- Emergency Procedures
Air Traffic Controllers Guidelines - 7110.65 - 10-1-1
Pilot Controller Glossary
CAP - 413 *Note: PDF File
I leave you all to make your own minds up.
cl12pv2s
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having had more than my share of "maydays" I was surprised at this report, and learned from it! I now consult the "mayday" procedures section of my flight manual, regularly. Which chapter is it?
cl12pv2s I think the idea is to question the small minds of the ATC wonderboys who didn't put their coffee cups down long enough to actually think. In the world I envision, an airliner that asks for a deviation to land at the nearest airport might trigger those Einsteins to ask a question or two like, "What eees zees eemeergeency that chu speek of?" or "Is something wrong?" or maybe even "Do you want me to do something more than just key my mike?"
As controllers, when they have to dig into procedures to see what they should be thinking, it is time to take that job drilling assholes in hobbyhorses, and quit ATC. And pilots who think those controllers actually did their job should be sentenced to have to work with those clowns for a few years.
cl12pv2s I think the idea is to question the small minds of the ATC wonderboys who didn't put their coffee cups down long enough to actually think. In the world I envision, an airliner that asks for a deviation to land at the nearest airport might trigger those Einsteins to ask a question or two like, "What eees zees eemeergeency that chu speek of?" or "Is something wrong?" or maybe even "Do you want me to do something more than just key my mike?"
As controllers, when they have to dig into procedures to see what they should be thinking, it is time to take that job drilling assholes in hobbyhorses, and quit ATC. And pilots who think those controllers actually did their job should be sentenced to have to work with those clowns for a few years.
Last edited by NickLappos; 26th Aug 2005 at 01:42.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Aus, Europe & everywhere in between
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know, this brings up an interesting point about the use of english in aviation. Sorry but it is relevant here.
Having flown over most of Europe (but not Sth America), it startles me how much english is NOT spoken over the radio by pilots (France & Italy especially).
Case in point - flying in Italy. I was told by ATC that a possible conflict may arise with a police helicopter nearby. I asked ATC what level he was at and they had to ask him in Italian then relay back to me in english (this was before I tried to call him myself).
I thought that ALL ATC and pilots must have a command of the english language to get their ticket.
If they did understand/speak english, then even a monkey who can speak english would understand the relative urgency that the word "EMERGENCY" commands.
Having flown over most of Europe (but not Sth America), it startles me how much english is NOT spoken over the radio by pilots (France & Italy especially).
Case in point - flying in Italy. I was told by ATC that a possible conflict may arise with a police helicopter nearby. I asked ATC what level he was at and they had to ask him in Italian then relay back to me in english (this was before I tried to call him myself).
I thought that ALL ATC and pilots must have a command of the english language to get their ticket.
If they did understand/speak english, then even a monkey who can speak english would understand the relative urgency that the word "EMERGENCY" commands.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"If they did understand/speak english, then even a monkey who can speak english would understand the relative urgency that the word "EMERGENCY" commands."
The reality is that many non english speaking nations have air traffic controllers and pilots who have a limited understanding of english. They will more likely understand standard ICAO phraselogy eg MAYDAY or PAN over 'emergency'.
You are correct that:
1. they should have a better understanding of English, however:
2. english speakers should use standard ICAO phraselogy especially when flying internationally.
If both these points were adhered to, then safety is greatly enhanced. Remember not every word in English is part of ICAO phraselogy.
The reality is that many non english speaking nations have air traffic controllers and pilots who have a limited understanding of english. They will more likely understand standard ICAO phraselogy eg MAYDAY or PAN over 'emergency'.
You are correct that:
1. they should have a better understanding of English, however:
2. english speakers should use standard ICAO phraselogy especially when flying internationally.
If both these points were adhered to, then safety is greatly enhanced. Remember not every word in English is part of ICAO phraselogy.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think as english speakers we may be a little confused by the topic.
English is the language of INTERNATIONAL AVIATION, not the international language of aviation.
Citizens of France, Italy, Spain, Russia, or where ever, when conducting domestic flights, have every right to speak in their native tongue; whatever that may be.
English is the language of INTERNATIONAL AVIATION, not the international language of aviation.
Citizens of France, Italy, Spain, Russia, or where ever, when conducting domestic flights, have every right to speak in their native tongue; whatever that may be.
Remembering that english is the second language is A step in understanding this miscommunication here, but NOT the only step.
Outside of the good ole US, "mayday" or "pan" are the universally accepted terminology. ICAO Ratified even. Inside the US, the culture of "declare an emergency" is still strong, and the reluctance to use pan and mayday calls is not at all unusual. As always in times of stress, pilots tend to "revert", in otherwords they revert to their most familiar training (and often to their first-learned reaction) However, like any cultural change, it will be a long time before US pilots automatically revert to pan/mayday.
Secondly, similar miscommunication and a lack of use of standard phraseology is not a problem isolated to US pilots with non US controllers. 2 cases spring immediately to mind:
1. The Everglades crash where a flight crew became fixated on a blown gear down light at night and allowed the aircraft to fly into the ground trying to work out if they could change the globe. The ATC noticed their descent and simply said words to the effect of "confirm ops normal" rather than "confirm altitude". They all died.
2. The Aloha (I think) airliner which ripped open the fuselage at a crack propagation(seen by a boarding passenger!!) resulting in the loss of a hostie out the hole, serious injuries to those sitting around the hole, and injuries to many other passengers throughout the aircraft. The rip and hole caused an emergency decompression, control issues and eventually and engine failure. At no time did the flight crew call mayday (or pan), but requested immediate descent and landing. As a result, the controllerts had no idea of the scope of the problem and failed to activate/notify emergency services until the aircraft was very close to the airport and the controllers took the intiative anyway. The result was a significant delay in medical response to the injured, but fortunately, due only to the great credit of the flight crew in landing the single engine, flapless and damaged aircraft, no further deaths.
Such miscommunication aspects have been done before INSIDE the USA, and will be done again. As it will be done outside the US. That is why mayday and pan were chosen over the ambiguous "declare an emergency" as the ICAO standard.
Outside of the good ole US, "mayday" or "pan" are the universally accepted terminology. ICAO Ratified even. Inside the US, the culture of "declare an emergency" is still strong, and the reluctance to use pan and mayday calls is not at all unusual. As always in times of stress, pilots tend to "revert", in otherwords they revert to their most familiar training (and often to their first-learned reaction) However, like any cultural change, it will be a long time before US pilots automatically revert to pan/mayday.
Secondly, similar miscommunication and a lack of use of standard phraseology is not a problem isolated to US pilots with non US controllers. 2 cases spring immediately to mind:
1. The Everglades crash where a flight crew became fixated on a blown gear down light at night and allowed the aircraft to fly into the ground trying to work out if they could change the globe. The ATC noticed their descent and simply said words to the effect of "confirm ops normal" rather than "confirm altitude". They all died.
2. The Aloha (I think) airliner which ripped open the fuselage at a crack propagation(seen by a boarding passenger!!) resulting in the loss of a hostie out the hole, serious injuries to those sitting around the hole, and injuries to many other passengers throughout the aircraft. The rip and hole caused an emergency decompression, control issues and eventually and engine failure. At no time did the flight crew call mayday (or pan), but requested immediate descent and landing. As a result, the controllerts had no idea of the scope of the problem and failed to activate/notify emergency services until the aircraft was very close to the airport and the controllers took the intiative anyway. The result was a significant delay in medical response to the injured, but fortunately, due only to the great credit of the flight crew in landing the single engine, flapless and damaged aircraft, no further deaths.
Such miscommunication aspects have been done before INSIDE the USA, and will be done again. As it will be done outside the US. That is why mayday and pan were chosen over the ambiguous "declare an emergency" as the ICAO standard.
Last edited by helmet fire; 26th Aug 2005 at 07:18.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Aus, Europe & everywhere in between
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Awww! C'mon guys. A bit of lateral thinking.
"EMERGENCY" in any flight manual is exactly that - an emergency. I think most avaition professionals would understand the term.
OK, OK. The pilot didn't say the recommended ICAO terminology (in the case that Nick mentioned) but let's get some idea of the situation. He was in some state of duress so if the word "emergency" is the only one that comes to mind - so be it!
They have every right of course but it is the ICAO standard? Can a fellow (French) pilot at a smaller airport understand me (if I say in english) that I have an emergency so please watch out? Don't think so. Maybe I should not be flying in his country?
I know in Australia that CASA requires all student pilots to have (or even demonstrate) a good command of the english language.
"EMERGENCY" in any flight manual is exactly that - an emergency. I think most avaition professionals would understand the term.
OK, OK. The pilot didn't say the recommended ICAO terminology (in the case that Nick mentioned) but let's get some idea of the situation. He was in some state of duress so if the word "emergency" is the only one that comes to mind - so be it!
Citizens of France, Italy, Spain, Russia, or where ever, when conducting domestic flights, have every right to speak in their native tongue; whatever that may be.
I know in Australia that CASA requires all student pilots to have (or even demonstrate) a good command of the english language.
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't these ATCOs have a dictionary to hand? I would, if I were doing ATC in a foreign language. Come on now - the aircraft is diverting and giving you a very specific message; surely you'd ask for clarification, reach for your dictionary, or get on the phone to find someone who speaks better English.
Disagree Whirly. Lets say you are in the hotseat, busy/lazy/bored/whatever, and a bloke says he is diverting . Is it a major emergency? Is it a minor emergency? Is it a weather emergency? Did he say it's in emergency governor? Was he asking if the divert field has emergency services? He has not asked you for help. Maybe he doesn't need the interruption of you asking just yet. Maybe he will tell you what/why/when when he can. Maybe if it is serious he will say "mayday" and indicate that you need to give assistance NOW. Or maybe if he needs any assistance he will say "pan" soon.
What about those other 20 aircraft that are calling?
And oogle, you are right as an english-is-your-first language point of view. But it happened in the USA too!!!
What about those other 20 aircraft that are calling?
And oogle, you are right as an english-is-your-first language point of view. But it happened in the USA too!!!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
emergencies
I know in Australia that CASA requires all student pilots to have (or even demonstrate) a good command of the english language.
seems good enough for everyone else.....? who not the U.S. too?
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All very valid and very interesting points on both sides of the discussion.
A couple more:
re. Whether we can expect the ATC to make an inference when they heard the words, "I am declaring an emergency," rather than, "Mayday"....
Well, I partially agree with Nick; I would hope that most controllers around the world would have a bit of 'nouse' about them and enough English, to start questioning something when someone asks for a 'deviation'.
HOWEVER, I mostly disagree, as I can quite easily imagine how the controller might not be 'startled' into action. Particularly, when working in his second language. We mustn't underestimate how much comprehension is lost purely by the fact that someone is working in their second language. Remember even the subtleties of 'intonation' are different from langauge to language.
So if the ATC is trained to respond to the words 'Mayday' and 'Pan', then he might not twig that 'declaring an emergency', or 'requesting deviation' could mean the same thing. That is exactly the reason why there is 'Standard ICAO Phraselology'. It takes out the need to 'twig' and infer.
Helmet Fire makes some good points on this.
-----------------------------------------------------
re. Local language for local flights....I don't see there's anything wrong with this. Each ICAO member state is supposed to be able to offer English at ATC. Most member states require some English for their students. But, it is rediculous to expect M. Pilotte(a French pilot) and M. Controlleur (a French controller) to necessarily talk to each other in English. Surely this is asking for more 'miscommunication' and more accidents?
-----------------------------------------------------
It's easy for us to see things from a 'first-language-English' speaker's point of view. We've got it easy. However, imagine that the International Language was French (only because that's what I know).
You expect and are trained to hear," M'AIDEZ, M'AIDEZ". Instead you hear, "Je déclare une urgence !" or, "Je suis dans une tache de l'embętement ici !," (Deliberately badly translated there!) Would you be able to put two and two together?
The bottom line...
The pilot did not use Standard Phraseology and should've! I guess it was an American magazine!
cl12pv2s
GadgetGuru,
As my earlier post points out, ICAO phraseology is now being trained in the US. This is a recent change, and I suppose there are still some old, bold pilots who haven't quite got used to it. (Not that I think this relieves them of responsibilty at all. When in Rome do as the Romans do, or do as the Romans expect you to do!)
A couple more:
re. Whether we can expect the ATC to make an inference when they heard the words, "I am declaring an emergency," rather than, "Mayday"....
Well, I partially agree with Nick; I would hope that most controllers around the world would have a bit of 'nouse' about them and enough English, to start questioning something when someone asks for a 'deviation'.
HOWEVER, I mostly disagree, as I can quite easily imagine how the controller might not be 'startled' into action. Particularly, when working in his second language. We mustn't underestimate how much comprehension is lost purely by the fact that someone is working in their second language. Remember even the subtleties of 'intonation' are different from langauge to language.
So if the ATC is trained to respond to the words 'Mayday' and 'Pan', then he might not twig that 'declaring an emergency', or 'requesting deviation' could mean the same thing. That is exactly the reason why there is 'Standard ICAO Phraselology'. It takes out the need to 'twig' and infer.
Helmet Fire makes some good points on this.
-----------------------------------------------------
re. Local language for local flights....I don't see there's anything wrong with this. Each ICAO member state is supposed to be able to offer English at ATC. Most member states require some English for their students. But, it is rediculous to expect M. Pilotte(a French pilot) and M. Controlleur (a French controller) to necessarily talk to each other in English. Surely this is asking for more 'miscommunication' and more accidents?
-----------------------------------------------------
It's easy for us to see things from a 'first-language-English' speaker's point of view. We've got it easy. However, imagine that the International Language was French (only because that's what I know).
You expect and are trained to hear," M'AIDEZ, M'AIDEZ". Instead you hear, "Je déclare une urgence !" or, "Je suis dans une tache de l'embętement ici !," (Deliberately badly translated there!) Would you be able to put two and two together?
The bottom line...
The pilot did not use Standard Phraseology and should've! I guess it was an American magazine!
cl12pv2s
GadgetGuru,
As my earlier post points out, ICAO phraseology is now being trained in the US. This is a recent change, and I suppose there are still some old, bold pilots who haven't quite got used to it. (Not that I think this relieves them of responsibilty at all. When in Rome do as the Romans do, or do as the Romans expect you to do!)
Last edited by cl12pv2s; 26th Aug 2005 at 11:08.
It's a conceptual thing.
Americans have a problem visualising a 'world' outside the US.
They:
Don't 'do' currency, except dollars
Have a world championship in a game for american teams only
'Qualify' place names, eg Paris-France
They have a very parochial view.
Lovely folk though, the ones I know!
CG
Americans have a problem visualising a 'world' outside the US.
They:
Don't 'do' currency, except dollars
Have a world championship in a game for american teams only
'Qualify' place names, eg Paris-France
They have a very parochial view.
Lovely folk though, the ones I know!
CG
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: KPHL
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let me get this straight:
- If we screw up and use non-standard terminology then every ATC in the world (ICAO) should be able to compensate for our lack of professionalism.
- We must all learn ICAO standard terminology but then should be able to say whatever we want wherever we are whilst ATC are busy flipping pages in a dictionary trying to figure out what we've said (oh yeah, they're also trying to maintain a safe and expeditious flow of traffic).
You must all be kidding!!!!
Learn the standard terminology and stick to it.
If you don't and ATC still provides you with what you've requested, you owe them a thank you.
If you don't and ATC doesn't provide you with what you've requested, you have yourself to blame.
If anyone doesn't agree with this, bring it up with your licence issuer and see what happens.
- If we screw up and use non-standard terminology then every ATC in the world (ICAO) should be able to compensate for our lack of professionalism.
- We must all learn ICAO standard terminology but then should be able to say whatever we want wherever we are whilst ATC are busy flipping pages in a dictionary trying to figure out what we've said (oh yeah, they're also trying to maintain a safe and expeditious flow of traffic).
You must all be kidding!!!!
Learn the standard terminology and stick to it.
If you don't and ATC still provides you with what you've requested, you owe them a thank you.
If you don't and ATC doesn't provide you with what you've requested, you have yourself to blame.
If anyone doesn't agree with this, bring it up with your licence issuer and see what happens.
Well said Mathew!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Missouri, USA
Age: 59
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, well said. And I agree with everything cl12pv2s said in his last post.
As for expecting pilots across the world to speak English when flying in their own country...whew...sounds a bit far-fetched to me.
As for expecting pilots across the world to speak English when flying in their own country...whew...sounds a bit far-fetched to me.
Standard ICAO phraseology.....in Nigeria 212man? Every time...all day long....the whole year?
That is not a Charlie, over.
That is not a Charlie, over.