Full emergency call out for minor incident at LHR!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: western europe
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thanks for that akerosid .... I thought the reference to a PAN may have been on the photo notes ..... my mistake ..... I'm sure I read somewhere that the crew declared a PAN but can't find it
will keep reading ....
will keep reading ....
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: western europe
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
many thanks CA .......
I've been trying to relate the Crew's announcement of a "PAN" with the definition of a "PAN" and subsequent Emergency status
i.e. ...... "PAN - a condition concerning the safety of an aircraft which does not require immediate assistance"
more reading I guess .....
I've been trying to relate the Crew's announcement of a "PAN" with the definition of a "PAN" and subsequent Emergency status
i.e. ...... "PAN - a condition concerning the safety of an aircraft which does not require immediate assistance"
more reading I guess .....
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Notso Fantastic
I must profess a fair degree of understanding of your position.
I work in the railway industry and we have on occasion been rather astounded at the response of the Emergency Services who 'Upgrade' simple problems to fairly major proportions.
Having read the thread it seems to me that there is a desperate need for some clarity of purpose here.
The point that appears to have been missed (and I apologise if I have missed it in an earlier post) is that APPARENTLY the aircrew were not requiring the level of asistance that was provided.
Now one would assume that the Emergency Services would take guidance from the professionals, and thus in this case the response was inappropriate.
Any inappropriate response to an 'incident' places at risk their ability to respond to other incidents and potentially then places lives at risk.
I for one have seen many examples of this in my job over the years and it becomes tedious when Emergency Services personnel then try to assume 'command' when their ability to understand the risk/issues is, at best questionable.
That I believe is the point that 'Notso Fantastic' makes?
I work in the railway industry and we have on occasion been rather astounded at the response of the Emergency Services who 'Upgrade' simple problems to fairly major proportions.
Having read the thread it seems to me that there is a desperate need for some clarity of purpose here.
The point that appears to have been missed (and I apologise if I have missed it in an earlier post) is that APPARENTLY the aircrew were not requiring the level of asistance that was provided.
Now one would assume that the Emergency Services would take guidance from the professionals, and thus in this case the response was inappropriate.
Any inappropriate response to an 'incident' places at risk their ability to respond to other incidents and potentially then places lives at risk.
I for one have seen many examples of this in my job over the years and it becomes tedious when Emergency Services personnel then try to assume 'command' when their ability to understand the risk/issues is, at best questionable.
That I believe is the point that 'Notso Fantastic' makes?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Leverstock Green
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow Notso you have real bee about something! There are laid down proceedures with all emergency services and that is not negociable. I wonder what you do as a job?
In central london, An incident at Parliament I believe is a twelve engine call out. As far as I know even if it is a chip pan fire! I suspect some engines get stood down en route and I am sure some ambulances did in the situation you have got bogged down with. The purposes sometimes of callouts is to rehearse for the one when it does go wrong. Drivers not used to the route at speed. Roads have been changed since the last time etc. etc.
In central london, An incident at Parliament I believe is a twelve engine call out. As far as I know even if it is a chip pan fire! I suspect some engines get stood down en route and I am sure some ambulances did in the situation you have got bogged down with. The purposes sometimes of callouts is to rehearse for the one when it does go wrong. Drivers not used to the route at speed. Roads have been changed since the last time etc. etc.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nickctaylor
I don't know where you get your info from ,it's for the most part cobblers. I'll confess to not knowing the numbers of fire engines asigned to the POW, but I'll presume you are correct. However, the LFB do not take cancelations on route. They get called, and they arrive, in a blaze (no pun intended) of blue lights and 2 tones. I understand the policy is because fires tend to flare up again when apparently under control.
To suggest that any emergency vehicle contuines to a call after they have been canccelled for training purposes is completly wrong. All emergency driver training is conducted over unfamilar roads, it teaches you the ability to get anywhere quickly.
The LFB use route cards with the route to an incident location from thier station, any changes to road layouts have to be notified to the LFB at the planning stage. Police know thier own areas and ajoining ones intimatly. The LAS I understand have route display equiptment.
So quite what the training value of the exercise is I don't know, thats leaving aside the point that to use blues/twos when not on a call could lead to appearing in court.
Astrodome.
I think you may well have misunderstood. The emergency is declared by ATC to one of several fixed levels:
Aircraft accident
aircraft accident imminate
full emergency
aircraft ground incident
local stand by.
The Emergency services respond to that genreric call to thier own response criteria. Based on what they would need to deal with the incident.
They do not turn it into something it is not, these are the agreed responses to the call. The response verries from local standby upwards.
Now, notso fantasic has made the point that that response is over the top. However, as some of us have repeatadly tried to get accross is that there is not the time to have a long discussion about the subject, if there was it wouldn't be an emergency.
ATC therefore make a decision as to what level based on their experience and knowladge.
As I said, Kegworth was a 'full emergency' call. The aircraft crashed, had the emergency services not turned up en mass, then more people could have died.
In the case this thread is all about the original querry seems to be how the ambulance service ended up telling thier staff it was 'crash iminate'. No one seems to know, however it seems that there was some talk about heathrow bus station, and as that does not feature in the emergency plans I suggested that there may have been an incident in the bus station, and somewhere the calls have been confused.
Anything I have dealt with on railways has been a 'has happened' call rather than 'might happen'. However I would rather have as many Police fire and ambulance at the scene before it happens than not enough afterwards.
I don't know where you get your info from ,it's for the most part cobblers. I'll confess to not knowing the numbers of fire engines asigned to the POW, but I'll presume you are correct. However, the LFB do not take cancelations on route. They get called, and they arrive, in a blaze (no pun intended) of blue lights and 2 tones. I understand the policy is because fires tend to flare up again when apparently under control.
To suggest that any emergency vehicle contuines to a call after they have been canccelled for training purposes is completly wrong. All emergency driver training is conducted over unfamilar roads, it teaches you the ability to get anywhere quickly.
The LFB use route cards with the route to an incident location from thier station, any changes to road layouts have to be notified to the LFB at the planning stage. Police know thier own areas and ajoining ones intimatly. The LAS I understand have route display equiptment.
So quite what the training value of the exercise is I don't know, thats leaving aside the point that to use blues/twos when not on a call could lead to appearing in court.
Astrodome.
I think you may well have misunderstood. The emergency is declared by ATC to one of several fixed levels:
Aircraft accident
aircraft accident imminate
full emergency
aircraft ground incident
local stand by.
The Emergency services respond to that genreric call to thier own response criteria. Based on what they would need to deal with the incident.
They do not turn it into something it is not, these are the agreed responses to the call. The response verries from local standby upwards.
Now, notso fantasic has made the point that that response is over the top. However, as some of us have repeatadly tried to get accross is that there is not the time to have a long discussion about the subject, if there was it wouldn't be an emergency.
ATC therefore make a decision as to what level based on their experience and knowladge.
As I said, Kegworth was a 'full emergency' call. The aircraft crashed, had the emergency services not turned up en mass, then more people could have died.
In the case this thread is all about the original querry seems to be how the ambulance service ended up telling thier staff it was 'crash iminate'. No one seems to know, however it seems that there was some talk about heathrow bus station, and as that does not feature in the emergency plans I suggested that there may have been an incident in the bus station, and somewhere the calls have been confused.
Anything I have dealt with on railways has been a 'has happened' call rather than 'might happen'. However I would rather have as many Police fire and ambulance at the scene before it happens than not enough afterwards.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: London
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BJCC
They don't cancel a call, but they do stand down some appliances, once an initial assessment has been made.
Other than that, this thread is dragging on a bit. NOTSO - why have you got this big thing about imagining hundreds of Londoners died because of ambulances at Heathrow? Can you not have a bit of trust that the control centre know what they are doing? I think this thread has gone far enough now...
However, the LFB do not take cancelations on route.
Other than that, this thread is dragging on a bit. NOTSO - why have you got this big thing about imagining hundreds of Londoners died because of ambulances at Heathrow? Can you not have a bit of trust that the control centre know what they are doing? I think this thread has gone far enough now...
