AA crew fed up with JFK ATC - declares emergency.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Where its at
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
suninmyeyes, sure, I'm aware of that - my point was that if you're at the stage of 30 mins fuel remaining, it's an emergency but you've still got time to play with. Given that he presumably had half an hour left I don't see why he did what he did.
The only time to believe the fuel gauges is when they show Empty !
Avianca is a bit different as the never declared an emergency
91.3 is absolute and was one of the first provisions in the Avigation Act of 1926 before then the post office told you when to fly ...and you flew or you were out, but with 91.3 came 91.13
...I, for the sake of learning, hope we'll get some more details
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Home soon
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what i heard on the tape, the captain lost it and engaged in a one man show trying to prove to atc and probably to his fo that he is the boss.
I wouldnt be surprised if the pilot on the radio was also flying the aircraft.
Poor Rt if not totally inexistent, showed his childish behavior by saying to atc he wanted no one in front of him just because...rather than making sure he had priority..
Atc well done eventhough he failed to confirm the type of emergency, ibelieve it became a cock fight rather than a well managed cooperation in a difficult situation.
Declaring an emergency should be clear and started by 3xmayday, followed by nature of emergency,actions and specific requests.
I wouldnt be surprised if the pilot on the radio was also flying the aircraft.
Poor Rt if not totally inexistent, showed his childish behavior by saying to atc he wanted no one in front of him just because...rather than making sure he had priority..
Atc well done eventhough he failed to confirm the type of emergency, ibelieve it became a cock fight rather than a well managed cooperation in a difficult situation.
Declaring an emergency should be clear and started by 3xmayday, followed by nature of emergency,actions and specific requests.
In reading the many comments regarding the respective authority and responsibilities of ATC and a captain and recognizing the concurrency of requirements of traffic flow and managing an emergency due either to fuel or weather limitations, it may be worth re-reading the NTSB Report on Eastern Airlines 66, available here.
In the report, there is support, if that's what one wishes to call it, for both arguments - captain's final authority when the ship is threatened and ATC's responsibility to maintain traffic flow, knowing that a runway change may solve one crew's problem but will create dozens more who may be close to the same situation.
The key of course is, how severe was the emergency and as someone has already pointed out, that will become apparent in the days to come. Both weather limitations, (crosswind) and fuel were the reasons given and it is reasonable to expect that either or both will be examined as the basis for the request, along with the airline's fuel policy and the captain's weather briefing at departure, etc, etc, etc.
It is abundantly clear to all professionals here that declaring an emergency to jump the queue is unacceptable so the burden of proof, after the request is granted and the airplane is on the ground, remains with the captain - this has already been stated many times: the captain has the authority to do what he-she wants but must be able to answer for such decisions. So too, must ATC, when denying or delaying the necessary assistance to a flight declaring an emergency. It is not ATC's right or requirement to outguess a flight crew.
There are parts of the NTSB Report on Eastern 66 which are relevant to this issue, again for both views.
We were four back behind Eastern 66 when he went in and along with others went around and held at Southgate before getting a clearance to divert. As we turned south at Hancock for the Empire intersection, (now the Ellis intersection if I recall), we began to see how huge the thunderstorm was; it was the largest I had ever seen up to that point, with huge contouring. The ride in the descent was through heavy rain and turbulence, the noise on the windshield over which we had to shout to be heard by one another. Our approach to 22L had the same conditions yet even after several aircraft went around and some said a change of runways was required, the approaches did not change.
I fully realize the many differences between that accident/circumstances and this incident and am not comparing the two with a view to justifying either of the arguments being presented here. But there are sufficient similarities to be instructive, for both sides.
PJ2
In the report, there is support, if that's what one wishes to call it, for both arguments - captain's final authority when the ship is threatened and ATC's responsibility to maintain traffic flow, knowing that a runway change may solve one crew's problem but will create dozens more who may be close to the same situation.
The key of course is, how severe was the emergency and as someone has already pointed out, that will become apparent in the days to come. Both weather limitations, (crosswind) and fuel were the reasons given and it is reasonable to expect that either or both will be examined as the basis for the request, along with the airline's fuel policy and the captain's weather briefing at departure, etc, etc, etc.
It is abundantly clear to all professionals here that declaring an emergency to jump the queue is unacceptable so the burden of proof, after the request is granted and the airplane is on the ground, remains with the captain - this has already been stated many times: the captain has the authority to do what he-she wants but must be able to answer for such decisions. So too, must ATC, when denying or delaying the necessary assistance to a flight declaring an emergency. It is not ATC's right or requirement to outguess a flight crew.
There are parts of the NTSB Report on Eastern 66 which are relevant to this issue, again for both views.
We were four back behind Eastern 66 when he went in and along with others went around and held at Southgate before getting a clearance to divert. As we turned south at Hancock for the Empire intersection, (now the Ellis intersection if I recall), we began to see how huge the thunderstorm was; it was the largest I had ever seen up to that point, with huge contouring. The ride in the descent was through heavy rain and turbulence, the noise on the windshield over which we had to shout to be heard by one another. Our approach to 22L had the same conditions yet even after several aircraft went around and some said a change of runways was required, the approaches did not change.
I fully realize the many differences between that accident/circumstances and this incident and am not comparing the two with a view to justifying either of the arguments being presented here. But there are sufficient similarities to be instructive, for both sides.
PJ2
" you know this is asinine"
That was the EAL flight's first indication trouble ...it is a little different PJ2 but that report does show that clearly the difference between clearance issuance and clearance acceptance and who is ultimately responsible
When the AA captain declared an emergence, why did he not keep the controller abreast of the situation or request assistance? why was he so hostile over the vectoring?
That was the EAL flight's first indication trouble ...it is a little different PJ2 but that report does show that clearly the difference between clearance issuance and clearance acceptance and who is ultimately responsible
When the AA captain declared an emergence, why did he not keep the controller abreast of the situation or request assistance? why was he so hostile over the vectoring?
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
already posted in the atc forum but duplicated here for those that don't visit it:
Notwithstanding the fact that a (supposedly) highly qualified pilot is unable to spell the word "doughnut" the above goes a long way in explaining the mindset of the posters (none of whom, I am sure, have ever bothered their ar$es visiting a busy ATC unit to see the chaos they cause).
As long as "sky gods" such as these take to the air in the misplaced belief that they have carte blanche to do as they wish and to hell with everyone else, such incidents will continue unabated.
I have news for you guys - YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY AIRCRAFT IN THE SKY!!!!
When will that ever sink in?
Yes, we all know that you are ultimately responsible for YOUR aircraft - what you fail to understand is that WE are responsible for ALL OF THEM - AND WILL BE HELD TO ACCOUNT FOR IT!! If you have any doubt of that, get off of your sheepskin lined pedestal and have a look around these forums for examples....try starting with a few recent Italian cases.
Every controller that I have ever met will, without exception, do all in their power to aid and assist each and every aircraft under their control - whether it be in normal circumstances or in an emergency. Clearly, any aircraft having declared an emergency WILL have priority.
We are not, however, either mind readers or magicians. If you have not previously indicated a problem and/or actually declared an emergency (hopefully, using the unambiguous phraseology developed for the purpose), it is highly unlikely that the fact will be known outside of your immediate vicinity. (for the septics amongst you, think fart range). As an aviator friend would say -" I may have a pair of balls but neither of them is crystal"!
By all means aviate, navigate, communicate - that's what we would expect - do not, however, assume that all surrounding aircraft can be magically made to disappear with a sweep of the radar to accommodate your whims. Same goes for unilaterally deciding to help yourself to an out-of-use runway. It may or may not be in useable condition, full of vehicles, etc.
For the reasonable amongst you, please do not take this as an out-and-out attack on the piloting community - my wish is to highlight the idiocy of the few, not to alienate those professionals who still understand the meaning of the term "airmanship".
Rant mode off, enjoy the rest of the weekend.
Guy.
ATC provides a service from the air-conditioned, dohnut and tea room bunker
I don't know if it's an ego thing for the controllers, but that's just the way it is.
As long as "sky gods" such as these take to the air in the misplaced belief that they have carte blanche to do as they wish and to hell with everyone else, such incidents will continue unabated.
I have news for you guys - YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY AIRCRAFT IN THE SKY!!!!
When will that ever sink in?
Yes, we all know that you are ultimately responsible for YOUR aircraft - what you fail to understand is that WE are responsible for ALL OF THEM - AND WILL BE HELD TO ACCOUNT FOR IT!! If you have any doubt of that, get off of your sheepskin lined pedestal and have a look around these forums for examples....try starting with a few recent Italian cases.
Every controller that I have ever met will, without exception, do all in their power to aid and assist each and every aircraft under their control - whether it be in normal circumstances or in an emergency. Clearly, any aircraft having declared an emergency WILL have priority.
We are not, however, either mind readers or magicians. If you have not previously indicated a problem and/or actually declared an emergency (hopefully, using the unambiguous phraseology developed for the purpose), it is highly unlikely that the fact will be known outside of your immediate vicinity. (for the septics amongst you, think fart range). As an aviator friend would say -" I may have a pair of balls but neither of them is crystal"!
By all means aviate, navigate, communicate - that's what we would expect - do not, however, assume that all surrounding aircraft can be magically made to disappear with a sweep of the radar to accommodate your whims. Same goes for unilaterally deciding to help yourself to an out-of-use runway. It may or may not be in useable condition, full of vehicles, etc.
For the reasonable amongst you, please do not take this as an out-and-out attack on the piloting community - my wish is to highlight the idiocy of the few, not to alienate those professionals who still understand the meaning of the term "airmanship".
Rant mode off, enjoy the rest of the weekend.
Guy.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ferris asks how I would feel if I had been the plane following and had to go around.
I would be proud to get out of the way of someone who had declared an emergency. and I am ready to do so at any time, unless of course I am in an emergency myself.
now, if the American Airlines pilot declared an emergency so he could meet a hot date and get a blow job, he will hear from me.
But if he was near his fuel limits, exceeding the crosswind limits and had notified center and approach prior to the business with tower, I am with him a hundred percent.
I make my living flying out of the New York area...granted mainly LGA and EWR but enough JFK to know the score there.
''a scout troops short a child...Kruschev's due at Idylwild"
I would be proud to get out of the way of someone who had declared an emergency. and I am ready to do so at any time, unless of course I am in an emergency myself.
now, if the American Airlines pilot declared an emergency so he could meet a hot date and get a blow job, he will hear from me.
But if he was near his fuel limits, exceeding the crosswind limits and had notified center and approach prior to the business with tower, I am with him a hundred percent.
I make my living flying out of the New York area...granted mainly LGA and EWR but enough JFK to know the score there.
''a scout troops short a child...Kruschev's due at Idylwild"
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: FL350
Age: 47
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2 questions for me guys,
Was this guy the only 767-2 arrival at JFK?
Did they change the runway config after the incident?
As far as I see, in an environment like JFK, taking the decision to turn to come back visually just by telling ATC and not giving him the time to move people around with proper separation is criminal!!
happy landings
Was this guy the only 767-2 arrival at JFK?
Did they change the runway config after the incident?
As far as I see, in an environment like JFK, taking the decision to turn to come back visually just by telling ATC and not giving him the time to move people around with proper separation is criminal!!
happy landings
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
again duplicated from the atc forum for the benefit of all...
West Coast,
Please indicate exactly where on the aforementioned tape you noticed any reference to "an emergency that dire". I may only have heard an abridged version - can't be sure - the only problem indicated was a breach of crosswind limits - not, as far as I am aware, a "dire emergency".
I repeat, each and every controller that I have worked with for the last 20 years would do all they possibly could to help in those situations. I see no indication of such a situation in the tapes provided.
S.H.G.
I agree wholeheartedly - however, we cannot provide assistance until a) we know there is a problem and b) we have some indication of what is required. It is in YOUR best interests to let us know ASAP. A lot can be done, but only if/when we know it is necessary.
For the record, most ATC manuals also have a clause stating that controllers can/should do whatever may be deemed necessary in unforeseen circumstances. We can and will do everything possible to help however, I repeat, I have two balls but neither of them are crystal!!!!!
West Coast,
I'm gonna be scared to Sh1te likely from an emergency that dire, also scared that I might prang someone, but sometimes it has to be done.
I sure as hell am not going to let ATC paint me into a corner when I lose a motor on takeoff and need an immediate turn, or when I lose one while at a low CI cruise number at cruise altitude meaning I have to start down NOW because I don't have any excess speed to trade to hold altitude.
S.H.G.
ATC have no idea what's going on in a cockpit in an emergency situation and it's always our priority to deal with that emergency (by "AVIATING") before we tell them what has happened.
For the record, most ATC manuals also have a clause stating that controllers can/should do whatever may be deemed necessary in unforeseen circumstances. We can and will do everything possible to help however, I repeat, I have two balls but neither of them are crystal!!!!!
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: london
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now, I don't know all the background information (assuming the runway they eventually landed on was closed) but the way I have always been taught to operate is thus...
During pre-fight...
Read Weather
Read NOTAMs
If the forecasted weather indicates that landing on the only available runways (as dictated by the NOTAMs) may not be possible, plan an alternate that will allow landing.
If on arrival said conditions exist, divert to this prepared alternate.
Dont bully the controllers because you can't get into your scheduled destination.
Gethomeitis?
During pre-fight...
Read Weather
Read NOTAMs
If the forecasted weather indicates that landing on the only available runways (as dictated by the NOTAMs) may not be possible, plan an alternate that will allow landing.
If on arrival said conditions exist, divert to this prepared alternate.
Dont bully the controllers because you can't get into your scheduled destination.
Gethomeitis?
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto
Age: 79
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does it really matter who had the most responsibility or the most dire need or the most urgent social date or the biggest genitalia and ego or the least fuel? The ultimate resolution (which by definition will become a standard) will depend on who has the most money to spend on lawyers for the next twenty years. Whoever finally stops paying the lawyers will lose. Lawyers will spend years (and charge accordingly) on determining the best course of action that should have been taken in the few minutes of an anomalous situation. The lawyers always win and will make a lot more money than you ever will. They will take years to make a case and charge you for it and then can claim that their failure to convince a judge or jury wasn't their fault. Try using that disclaimer of responsibility in any other profession such as being an air traffic controller or a pilot flying.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hotel time zone
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely once an emergency has been declared, one needn't feel excluded from landing maybe slightly outside the crosswind limits if it is the safest course of action?
Therefore, if he was indeed in a very low fuel state, going for a jolly round a visual circuit is the last thing that I'd be doing. On fumes - I'd be landing straight in on 22, and deal with the crosswind.
This sounds like a very misplaced hissy fit to me.
Therefore, if he was indeed in a very low fuel state, going for a jolly round a visual circuit is the last thing that I'd be doing. On fumes - I'd be landing straight in on 22, and deal with the crosswind.
This sounds like a very misplaced hissy fit to me.
"As long as "sky gods" such as these take to the air in the misplaced belief that they have carte blanche to do as they wish and to hell with everyone else, such incidents will continue unabated.
Who knows what this brigand may do next. His ilk would probably scream right in for an emergency landing due to a fire, typical Sky God act, while the more reasonable airman would delay such a hasty action in order to ask permission for something like, for instance, to dump fuel.
There are rules for dumping fuel, of course, thank God there exist airman (or used to exist) that don't think they have carte blanche to ignore them.
Not sure you can have it both ways mates. Our actions today are the result of those who paid the price in the past.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 857
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: US
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a feeling the crosswind and gust components got changed after the emergency rwy change. Notice the gusts over max xwind were not announced after the emergency? Did the winds really die down or were they reported diferently or not reported at all? I have played this game in the past so know they can be different.
The captain will have to explain what he did so let us wait for the final report. I still am waiting for the investigation to be completed before stating any opinion. At this point I don't have one.
The captain will have to explain what he did so let us wait for the final report. I still am waiting for the investigation to be completed before stating any opinion. At this point I don't have one.
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just re-listened to the US1549 tape. Some posters above will note with disapproval, no doubt, that Capt. Sullenberger said neither "declare an emergency", "PAN PAN" or "MAYDAY".
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: US
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the US declaring an emergency does the same thing. I did it and you get what ever you want. Why ask for more? Filling in the squares for international operations is the only reason. Service will be the same.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: US
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1549 after saying both engines were out really didn't have to declare an emergency. Maybe when they said we are going to be in the Hudson would have also precluded declaring an emergency. Sometimes it is so obvious you don't have to do it. Just my opinion.