AA crew fed up with JFK ATC - declares emergency.

[con-pilot]

It's not just the controllers at JFK. Overall US Air Traffic Controllers are some of the best in the world* in my humble opinion, but, there is the occasional exceptions.

In the US, has others have pointed out here, pilots tend not to use the word 'Mayday', why I've not a clue. Instead we say "I/We are declaring an emergency." Ninety nine percent of the time that will suffice, however, there is on occasion a controller that when hearing the words "Declaring an Emergency." just does not register the seriousness of the situation.

Once I had a rapid decompression in a 727 while at cruise at FL350. I was in the left seat, PF, when the duct blew out. The first indication was the immediate pressure change that you feel in the your ears. The co-pilot and FE handled the checklist while I flew the aircraft and handled the radio.

When it almost immediately became evident that we could not control the cabin I 'declared an emergency' and informed ATC that we had lost pressurization and that we were descending to 10,000 feet.

The controller came right back and said, "Standby and maintain FL350." I didn't respond but just kept descending, I figured he would see the altitude readout start changing and realize that I was not going to "Maintain FL350."

I don't know if he ever did figure this out, but the supervisor did and took over.

That was the last time I used the term 'Declaring an emergency.', from then on I used 'Mayday', that always worked much better.


* London has some really fine controllers as well, I really enjoy working with London Controllers after a few months flying in Asia and the Middle East.

[Final 3 Greens]

Alwaysmovin

I'm not taking sides here, but the tape is edited and we don't know what we didn't hear.

He may or may not have declared three times.

[Johnny767]

What a moronic attitude to take. By definition ATC are in charge. It's Air Traffic CONTROL, not Air Traffic Do-what-you-like-and-we'll-just-watch-you.


ATC is a service. There is only one person "In Charge," and that is the Captain.

"Mayday (x3,) I'm doing a visual and landing on the Taxiway"

If that is what it takes to get the Aircraft safely on the ground.

[TowerDog]

Any of the AA Skygods know what crosswind limits are in your manuals for a B-762?

29 knots if memory serves right..

(The Skygod sub-title on my moniker is not AA induced, but rather from some moron I argued with 10 years ago over the Gulf Air A-320 crash.
I said if they had not learned to fly basic instruments after 2000 hours, they should find something else to do for a living.

The moron came back and asked if I thought I was SkyGod or what...?

Name stuck, he was right.. )

[ferris]

One thing is clear; the huge gap between what the respective roles are!
Yes, the captain is responsible for getting his a/c on the ground safely. ATC are responsible for getting all the a/c on the ground safely.
If the captain was having real fuel issues, and really did need to get on the ground immediately, how did he communicate that so that ATC could assist him in that endeavor (instead of taking over separation/sequencing responsibilities from the controller)?
It just sounds like a dummy spit, pure and simple.

As I said, the buck stops with P1 - both in terms of authority and accountability.

Very true- and I'm sure the 'accounting' part of this is happening (including by the lynch mob/monday's experts here). Maybe the controller might have averted a lot of the angst by appending the vectors instruction with "vectors for short final R31" or similar?

ps. how would you feel if you were one of the commanders of the other a/c buggered around (and there would've been more than the 3 mentioned) to facilitate this "emergency"? You would really hope the guy was on vapour and just hadn't told anyone, right?

[Dream Land]

Seems like there might have been a bit of frustration level by the AA crew, would "RWY 31 is required for operational necessity" be a better way to go? The captain got the job accomplished, but may be in for tea and biscuits.

Cheers, DL

[wingview]

Cpt is always the one who decides, but in this case most probably ATC will have filed a report and both have to come with a good explanation. In about a year we'll know more (if not forgotten).

[bfisk]

"Mayday (x3,) I'm doing a visual and landing on the Taxiway"

If that is what it takes to get the Aircraft safely on the ground.

If that is indeed what it takes to get the aircraft safely on the ground, well done. However:

The FARs state that "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." Note: to the extent required to meet that emergency. That forces the conclusion that the executed option was indeed required, and that forces the question: how the hell did the crew get themselves into that corner (where that's your only out) in the first place?

The above regulation is not a free-for-all-do-as-you-please simply by using the word "emergency". The way I see it, it is needed to protect the crew from litigation when doing "the right thing".

[protectthehornet]

What and Why this happened

In order to understand what happened in the jfk incident, I offer this:

In 1978, the airline industry was deregulated...people said , "HOORAY" the price will come down.

And they did.

But additional runways were not built.

And then in 1982(I think), ATC went on strike. Yes, strike. And President Reagan fired the controllers.

(you in the 727 decompression, I wonder what year that was).

And ATC hasn't been the same since...it has never caught up with this decision. I remember being cleared for a route through a restricted area...all legal...and halfway into the restricted area I was told that I shouldn't be there. I reminded them that they were the controlling authority and THEY HAD CLEARED me for what I was doing.

Silence.

Now, what does deregulation, and the controller's strike have to do with the JFK incident?

With deregulation, scheduling of flights at airports went NUTS...over do it to the max.

Cost controls became imperitive...and what can we do about that...carry less fuel...it saves money. Divert if you have to. So, why didn't American Divert?

LGA, EWR, all nearby...but it takes half an hour of low altitude vectoring to go from JFK to EWR...though the straight line distance is about 30 miles or less.

So, there is our American pilot. He has fuel, but he knows how screwed up things really are.

He declared the emergency ( and please you brits, don't get me started about MAYDAY) and told THEM what he was going to do. Fine. He now has to explain...fine...he knew he would have to do that.

ATC factors include this: It use to be ( or is it USED to be) that controllers had pilot licenses too...but they don't anymore (not that it was a requirement, but it just showed that you knew something about airplanes).

So, the controllers, which still aren't as good as the ones prior to the strike didn't know what THEIR job was...it was to get everyone else out of the way while American did what they wanted to.

And that's the name of that tune.

[protectthehornet]

FARRELL

Keep pushing buttons and watch the machine do your job for you.

[ferris]

Ahh, protectthehornet, you are assuming the pilot was out of fuel and out of options.

At what point, exactly, was this made apparent to the controller? The pilot tells the controller that he needs 31 due to the crosswind. It sounds like he knows how things work, and that someone has to force a runway change (did you read earlier in the thread where the controllers have nothing whatsoever to do with runway configurations- that's between the management and the airlines ). Forcing the runway change is one thing, but forcing his way onto being number 1 in the sequence is entirely different.
Like I said, you really hope he is that low on fuel, but just didn't tell anyone. And if he got to that point- why?

[alwaysmovin]

@final 3 greens...
Fair point and actually I did want to say it was based on what we heard...

I hope there is more and it is indeed cut..... otherwise it scares me that someone like that is allowed to have that sort of responsibility

[mary meagher]

A while back, I got worried about the fuel state while over water, flying at 11,000 as was my custom. Centre noticed, gently reminded me I was off track, did I have a problem? Well yes, I replied, I'm wondering if I have enough fuel.....
In an eager tone, the controller came right back - "Would you like to declare an emergency, Ma'am?" (This was in the USA Deep South, they had time for the niceities).

"Not at this time," I replied. "Well, Ma'am, would you like to divert to the nearest airport?" I agreed that might be a good idea. "Roger that, Cessna 24539, suggest I vector you to Tallahassee. Descend to 3,500 feet."

"Negative, Sir" I came back. "If I'm going to become a glider, I'd like to stay as high as possible as long as possible!"

"Yes Ma'am. We have cleared your track from eleven thousand feet down to the ground. Please advise when you have the airfield in sight!"

And they held my hand all the way down to the ground, and emergency vehicles met me and escorted the Cessna to the fuel pumps, and after filling the tanks I realised that the gauges had been lying all along.

In 20 years of filing and flying the plan in the US, ATC has always been there for me....thanks, guys.

[Pugilistic Animus]

yeah the "extent required" part of 91.3 can bite you

that's why it's there

[protectthehornet]

ferris

I thought I read in this forum that he had six thousand five hundred pounds on landing.

I can imagine that he was watching the wind and runway business prior to contacting approach control and had advised people all the way along that he needed a certain runway...but someone had dropped the ball (as is want to happen) along the way.

[Admiral346]

All runway selection decisions in NY are made by FAA management in very close coordination with the AIRLINES. (The users make every decision about runway selection!!) It is all about capacity.

Controllers vector where they are told to vector.

Great! So the people who want to make money and the people who want to keep things moving are making the choice that the one who is actually in charge should be making! And the other one is just following orders - sorry, but this sounds to much like the "You will do as you are told" mentality not allowing any backtalk or actual intelligent questioning. If this is really how the decision on RWY configuration is made, then it should be definatly changed!

I have seen this happen so many times flying to the US, especially ORD. You get told to use one RWY, you object, ask for something different. Then ATC threatens you with 30 min holding. You agree to hold in the interest of safety, and after flying a vector for 5 min you get what you wanted!
Just voice it aloud on the airwaves, so it is on the tape. There will be no excuses.

And someone further up the thread mentioned ground control. Be it JFK or ORD, but how can one create so much unnecessary stress for everyone around?

Nic

[protectthehornet]

Admiral 346

You are quite right regarding the way to get what you want.

IF all pilots would do what you suggest, we would all be better off.

ORD is especially bad as it impacts Midway airport, and Midway is a marginal airport as is.

I applaud your post and what you did.

[ferris]

Perhaps this needs to be made perfectly clear for you, protectthehronet, and would explain why you will never progress beyond the flight deck). How much the captain had in the tanks when he landed is irrelevant. Is that perfectly clear? IRRELEVANT. If the pilot had made perfectly clear what he wanted, in the case of the landing aircraft who was told to maintain 2000 and break off the approach, what that pilot wanted was to continue the approach and land. In the case of the departing a/c, it was to line up and depart (instead of follow a complex set of taxi instructions and drive around the airport for a later departure clearance). Instead, all these a/c had to be mucked around because the guy in the air wanted to be number 1.
Is this, at all, becoming clear to you? You can, at any time, declare an emergency and moved up the priority list, but all that means is you are moving EVERYONE else down. Is that at all sinking in?
All this "the commander is responsible for the safety blah blah" is all just BS in this case. This guy, in this situation, just moved himself up the landing order because he was frustrated. You can keep peddling the "commander is in charge" bull**** all you want. But it is clear, this was nothing of the sort of a fuel emergency. Due process will occur. And so be it.

[Huck]

Perhaps this needs to be made perfectly clear for you, protectthehronet, and would explain why you will never progress beyond the flight deck

And this is an insult in your book?

Shades of Basil Fawlty. "You're through! You'll never waitress in Torquay again!"

[protectthehornet]

bueler, bueler, bueler...FERRIS?????

such phrasing...commander in charge? I've never heard of that one.

Earlier, I mentioned that he (the captain of the american flight) would have to explain his actions. And that is the way it should be.

But I truly doubt that he declared his emergency because he wanted to make someone taxi around the airport a bit more.

There is a philosophy, described in our regulations about right of way. An airplane landing has the right of way over a plane taking off (assuming an uncontrolled airport). It is always advisible to get someone down safely and wait for someone to takeoff.

And in this case, declaring an emergency assures right of way over everyone else...even a glider...even a hot air balloon.

And why would I want to go beyond the flight deck? Would I want to be an airline manager? maybe for the money, but not the fun.

Let me also add that this whole thing isn't about the emergency, it is about the problems JFK controllers have with the construction. It would have been better to build a new runway!