Was it a MAYDAY at EDI?

[anawanahuanana]

Just a quick one from me, not intending to offend anyone or get flamed......

I'm noticing a disparity. This thread seems to be mostly people saying a twin with 1 donk out is an emergency.

If the thread had started with a press article stating the usual "engine failed, aircraft plunged from the sky as crew wrestled for control, pax thought they were going to die" etc etc, most people would be jumping up and down saying a twin is designed to fly perfectly well on a single engine and it's not a huge deal as it's practiced in the sim all the time.

Not saying either view is right or wrong, just that the responses seem to relate directly to the article that bought about the thread......

[haughtney1]

most people would be jumping up and down saying a twin is designed to fly perfectly well on a single engine and it's not a huge deal as it's practiced in the sim all the time.

I doubt that very much......most people that post on here that are actually "IN" the industry would say that it was a serious situation, that is trained for and practiced in the sim.
Anyone that tells you that losing an engine in a twin is no big deal is
spouting bullsh1t, and if you don't believe me.......ask Nearly Man what his adrenalin levels were like after all the bells and whistles started shouting at him (you might have to buy him a pint first tho)

[Eejit]

Is it really that crucial which phrase is used in this scenario?

Obviously it is a serious situation, and up to the captain to decide whether the aircraft is in 'grave and imminent danger' or not in immediate danger but in a situation of urgency.

Using the word MAYDAY will not unfurl a magic blanket to whisk you and pax safely to the ground, nor does the phrase PAN PAN mean you will not be given as much priority than if you give a MAYDAY (unless it really isn't your day and somebody else is in deeper poo than you and you are then number 2)

As stated, you can always up- or down-grade the initial call

[mjtibbs]

quoting from the bbc

A Flybe spokeswoman said: "On Monday morning, Flybe flight BE7220 from Manchester to Edinburgh landed without incident at 0750 after reporting a technical fault with the aircraft.
"This resulted in a warning light showing on the control panel. Engineers are investigating the fault and the aircraft is expected to resume its normal flying pattern this afternoon.

surely after such an incident it would be grounded for more than a few hours?

[Manchester ATC]

Ok. It's up to the pilot in charge. If he calls Mayday or Pan. Nobody else may take that call.

[Thumperdown]

The Flybe company sop is that for a simple shutdown or failure of a power unit without a fire a Pan call should be made.
Therefore in accordance with the company procedure a Pan call it should have been.

[the heavy heavy]

'a simple shut down or failure'

never had on of those old boy, at the time they all felt pretty fcking worrying.

well done to the boys involved.

as somebody else has said it's whatever the guys on the day thought was going to get them the service and tlc they needed from all the people not in the FD.

the opinions of the arm chair experts and trivia generals are, as usual, fascinating.

[speedrestriction]

surely after such an incident it would be grounded for more than a few hours?

That depends entirely on the reason for the shutdown.

[poorwanderingwun]

Pan or Mayday... ??? Seems a pointless discussion ( Which I realise I'm now contributing to ).. In my book it depends on what I'm flying / performance / Met / Airfield conditions etc... It's up to the guys up front it's what we're paid for and everyone else can sit back and mind their own damn business...

[Albert Driver]

The Mayday call got everyones attention

...and that's the point. You say whatever you have to to get the level of service you require in the traffic circumstances at the time.

Remember a certain Commander who got the whole world's immediate attention by saying quietly "Houston, we have a problem".

In other circumstances a Mayday might need to be prefixed by STOP TRANSMITTING. (Yes, I just shouted). It all depends.

[Bill.Martin]

PAN

This whole PAN business is just a UK way of overcomplicating a situation

Without wishing to be too pedantic, perhaps we should remember that Distress/Emergency Calls have a common heritage in both the aviation and maritime environments, and a prescribed hierarchy:

• Sécurité (lowest) - important safety information
• Pan-pan - emergency on board but no immediate danger to anyone's life or to the vessel itself
• Mayday (highest) - grave and imminent danger to life or to the vessel, requiring immediate assistance

The "UK way" explanation doesn't quite work, since all three terms are of French origin (Sécurité is, obviously, unadjusted, Pan from "panne", and Mayday from" m'aidez")

[Right Way Up]

Interesting that Flybe dictates am SOP for which call is made. I would hope that it is taken as advice, and the P1 is left to use use his nous to determine which one fits his/her situation.

[Capt. Horrendous]

From my experiences, practically speaking, both pan and mayday calls are treated the same by atc anyway, despite the semantics of the definition.

[metabolix]

Whilst I accept that an engine failure may not be the most dramatic of events, I would never describe it 'simple'. Engines don't fail / wind down of their own accord in the normal course of operation and therefore something is not right. Fuel contamination perhaps? Is the other engine likely to go quiet on me as well? Lots to think about and decisions to be made. Reducing my workload is an integral part of that and therefore, personally speaking, a Mayday would be my first call to ATC, without exception.

Only when I have established (as far as I can) that the other engine is fully operational and likely to remain so until I am safely on the ground, would I then consider downgrading to a Pan.

It's my bottom up there

[Finals19]

You say whatever you have to to get the level of service you require in the traffic circumstances at the time.

Exactly. Also a few other points to review once I have the aircraft stabilised and the engine secured (assuming I am not on fire, in which case the ATC call would be a no brainer...obviously)

- aircraft position (terrain, ability to hold safe airspeed and altitude)
- nature of failure, if it can be ascertained (caveat here being IF, and most of the time it can't be 100%, so this in itself means a Mayday)
- Flight conditions - IMC or VMC? Icing or not?
- anticipated performance between current position and destination or diversionary airfield.

To name but a few. IMHO, its a mayday that can if conditions dictate, be downgraded to a PAN. Whoever tells you that twins can happily fly on one engine is talking b******s or has balls of steel. Speaking personally, a catastrophic failure certainly gets the adrenaline racing - bottom line is you've lost more than 50% of available thrust and (typically) half your systems. Get priority and get it on the ground.

[Dried ears]

From my experiences, practically speaking, both pan and mayday calls are treated the same by atc anyway, despite the semantics of the definition.

So why do we bother with the difference then?

[Thumperdown]

A' simple shutdown or failure' is one not associated with another circumstance i.e fire, catastrophic failure or severe vibration etc. I would suggest through my own experience that any failure, even a 'simple' one would raise the blood pressure a bit!

The Flybe company sop in this circumstance is to make a PAN call, however, sop's are the cornerstone of a sound operation but where it is deemed.....

[old,not bold]

Funny old world, isn't it;

Whoever tells you that twins can happily fly on one engine is talking b******s or has balls of steel.

Are those who are saying that or similar on this thread the same who shot down, with huge scorn, those of us who think that operating twins over the ocean is not such a bright idea, whatever the statistics say, when the subject was addressed some time ago in a pprune thread?

Or is that a thread drift?

[haughtney1]

Just to add......try saying PAN anywhere else in the world..and listen to the response

[Finals19]

Whoever tells you that twins can happily fly on one engine is talking b******s or has balls of steel

Are those who are saying that or similar on this thread the same who shot down, with huge scorn, those of us who think that operating twins over the ocean is not such a bright idea, whatever the statistics say, when the subject was addressed some time ago in a pprune thread?[/

Err..no in a word. And my original post wasn't intended to shoot anyone in particular down but merely to add force to the statement about losing an engine. I had an engine failure on a heavily loaded twin out of an airport with sufficient terrain and a required climb gradient that put grey hairs on my head in seconds. It wasn't a nice scene. As for flying over oceans, sure no problem as long as you remember your aircraft limitations and always have an "out" if it alls goes t*ts up.