Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

AA crew fed up with JFK ATC - declares emergency.

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

AA crew fed up with JFK ATC - declares emergency.

Old 7th May 2010, 19:18
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 48
Posts: 1,631
AA crew fed up with JFK ATC - declares emergency.

Apparently the crosswind component on the cleared Rwy exceeded the allowable limit. I wonder who will get the shit for this.

Construction And Crosswind Leads To JFK "Emergency" (With Audio)
AdamFrisch is offline  
Old 7th May 2010, 20:00
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Age: 63
Posts: 2,173
I hope the runway wasn't covered with diggers/trucks or associated staff. Heaven knows what could be on it if is officially closed.
eastern wiseguy is offline  
Old 7th May 2010, 20:03
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Third planet from the sun
Posts: 383
Eastern Wiseguy,

He landed on 31R which wasn't closed. 31L was closed according to the article.
I guess he must have been quite low on fuel as well for declaring an emergency so promptly.

Best regards,
Sabenaboy
sabenaboy is offline  
Old 7th May 2010, 20:19
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Age: 63
Posts: 2,173
D'OH........read the article too quickly.....
eastern wiseguy is offline  
Old 7th May 2010, 22:53
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: all over the place
Posts: 75
JESUS....I understand the pilot couldn't land as it was over his limits but he didn't even give the controller a chance....and then telling atc what he was going to do........eh hello ....you are not the only plane in the sky......In a normal emergency ok you can do what you want....but really just how low on fuel was he???. ....If he was so low on fuel surely he should have said it earlier when he realised the winds were getting near limits and may go over.....

Also "I said 3 times I'm declaring an emergency'"...... I didn't hear anyone say he wasn't getting 31 after this.......didn't this moron even consider the heading was for traffic and then he'd prob get the runway he asked for....

...or am I missing something??
alwaysmovin is offline  
Old 7th May 2010, 23:53
  #6 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 48
Posts: 1,631
Apparently the NYC controllers have their own way of doing things according to this answer from different forum:

I think some people need to understand ZNY center does not operate like some other centers in the country. "Min Fuel" means nothing to NY, because they have 200 other a/c coming over the pond all declaring "Min Fuel."

You can ask for whatever you need, your not gonna get it. Even in this case the crew "declared" and still the controllers tried to play stupid, and act like they didn't hear the crew declare an emergency.

You can request 31R as soon as you get the local ATIS, which was maybe 150mi out. All your request is going to go in the garbage, they are not going to change the entire arrival configuration for one a/c, needless to say how this change will affect EWR or LGA. The crew did the right thing by declaring and deviating from FAR necessary to get that aircraft safely on the ground.

Spend some time here flying in and out of JFK and you'll understand how things work here.
AdamFrisch is offline  
Old 8th May 2010, 00:05
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: On a foreign shore trying a new wine diet. So far, I've lost 3days!
Age: 72
Posts: 395
I've listened to the tape 3 times now and not once did I hear any reference to fuel emergency. Maybe the crew declared a fuel emergency before, in which case, no problem. But I hope the crew listen to the tape and take on board the assistance that was trying to be offered and appreciate the increased workload that was handled very professionally by the controller. No doubt the controller was also co-ordinating with colleagues around to facilitate the American pilots safe and expeditious landing, which, unfortunately the tape doesn't record. Whoever the controller was, a job well done, in difficult circumstances.
On the beach is offline  
Old 8th May 2010, 01:56
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
the plane landed safely...the pilot did his job

atc took way too long and sometimes you have to remind atc who the boss is.

pic is ultimately responsible and has the final authority.
protectthehornet is offline  
Old 8th May 2010, 02:15
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: A quiet backwater
Posts: 69
Well said, Sir, Paladin of the USS Hornet. The Monday morning quarterback crew seem to forget that while all Captains have the right to make any decision in the interest of safety and have the authority to act upon that decision, any Captain so doing will be asked some whys and wherefores at a later date. Both AA and the FAA are not shy about giving crews a chance to explain their actions after the fact and this Captain no doubt understands that. He did what he thought best at the time. He made a decision. That is what he is paid to do. Being a Captain is not a popularity contest.
Plectron is offline  
Old 8th May 2010, 02:28
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 474
As alluded to in a previous post, JFK, LGA and EWR will hang on to their runway alignments until someone calls a stop to it. All three airports have to change their alignment if one changes.

While it may have been more diplomatically handled, changing runways would make operational/safety sense.....but realigning all three airports has an impact on arrival/departure rates.

For example, JFK will hang onto the Canarsie approach until someone misses or says they won't do it.

The most recent example of an incident/accident I am aware of is hanging on to a 4R approach (with a tailwind). A Gemini MD-11 went off the end (fortunately into an EMAS area) landing in tailwind situation. For those not aware, MD-11's have a very high Vref to begin with. A tailwind adds to the landing energy significantly. If not for EMAS, the damage on the aircraft would have been substantial.

NYC03IA117
Shore Guy is offline  
Old 8th May 2010, 02:42
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The No Transgression Zone
Posts: 2,211
I think more background is required I'm not sure what to make of it yet...lots of non-standard coms from the AA FD
Pugilistic Animus is online now  
Old 8th May 2010, 03:09
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Among camels and dunes
Posts: 426
According to Jepp online, landing beyond threshold is 2638m and beyond G/S is 2295m. Considering to that the wind 320/23 gusting 35 kts is 100 degrees from the right, thus a tail wind component to consider to.

Not sure what heavy type he landed, but from experience of putting the A340-600 down there on a VOR approach, a tailwind in definitely not wanted! Nor 35 kts of gusting crosswind for that matter, however, the hiccup in communication between the crew and ATC is clearly evident.
Jetjock330 is offline  
Old 8th May 2010, 04:40
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Somewhere Over America
Posts: 192
They held for a while (zoom to see):

FlightAware > American Airlines #2 > 04-May-2010 > KLAX-KJFK

Their original plan was 11.1 yet 6.5 was the actual at the gate on a B767.

Someone should give them an Air Metal for not becoming another AV52.
Halfnut is offline  
Old 8th May 2010, 07:32
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Up front To The Left
Posts: 18
EMC call

Gentlemen, if a pilot say he is going to declare an emergency, it doesnt mean "he is declaring an emergency". If he says "Mayday, Mayday, Mayday" that means he is declaring an emergancy and now you have everybodys attention. The missunderstanding is due to non-standard phraseology.

Regds

GixxerK5
GixxerK5 is offline  
Old 8th May 2010, 08:03
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cotswolds
Age: 64
Posts: 1,262
Whilst the "Mayday, mayday, mayday" is the phrase of choice when butting into a communication with an emergency, I see not reason to use that phrase when already in active communication with a controller.

In fact I have done just the same in the past.

In my view the declaration of the emergency was pretty clear.
vanHorck is offline  
Old 8th May 2010, 08:14
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Up front To The Left
Posts: 18
Two choices

There are two choices when declaing an emergency. Mayday x 3 or Pan Pan x 3. Thats all! However, the Pan call is not worldwide recognized.
If you want ATCs unambigous attention, these are the phrases to be used, particularly important in a very busy environment. The results speaks for it self.


Regds
GixxerK5 is offline  
Old 8th May 2010, 08:15
  #17 (permalink)  

Metrosexual
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Enroute
Posts: 624
Why would you arrive at the circuit - at an airfield with known runway configuration issues - without gas for an 'out'?
Jet_A_Knight is offline  
Old 8th May 2010, 08:16
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The Far Side
Posts: 297
Reminds me of an incident in Barbados many years ago. A PanAm Tri-Star doing a 2 engine ferry had a problem with another engine very shortly after liftoff. He announced engine failure, declared an emergency, and his intention to return immediately as well as commencing fuel dump.
When ATC started complicated radar vector instructions, the aircraft announced curtly you don't understand, we are returning NOW, have the equipment standing by!
They did a very tight circuit, dumping fuel almost to touchdown.
ZQA297/30 is offline  
Old 8th May 2010, 08:19
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Posts: 67
So unprofessional by AA2 – on several levels
Emergency = Maydayx3
Where was the emergency here?
Wind out of x-wind limits = Divert (no emergency)

Bully-boy tactics by the pilots = lengthy re-training session in the sim…
The Trappist is offline  
Old 8th May 2010, 08:35
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the dark side of the moon
Posts: 946
No it is not recognized as standard phraseology, but "declaring an emergency" is exactly the same as saying Mayday 3x to ATC in the USA. And just because a crew declares an emergency doesn't absolve ATC of their responsibility to provide traffic separation. The controller was not being difficult when he asked them to maintain runway heading. He did it to give him time to sort the situation out. The runway track is protected for go-arounds, whereas an immediate turn may put the aircraft into someone else's flight path.
J.O. is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.