Ferris, please tell us you have never progressed to the flight deck. Please!:ugh:

They usually do - doesn't matter what aircraft- dip(drip) sticks and fuel totalisators and a handy calculator ( or Flt. Engnr. ! ) works best.

The only time to believe the fuel gauges is when they show Empty !

Give us a break ferris.

To quote someone else (post #70)
How the hell did the crew were put into that corner :=

And that just goes to show how little you know about me, sir. :)

Just from listening to the script, the event sounds awful. I hate to say it but the voice of panic emminated form the cockpit with clear the circuit stuff we are breaking left for a visual onto 31R, in a big international airport but a detailed traffic pattern. We may not have the full access to the rt conversation but normally with a cross wind touching out of limits, a normal conversation with ATC re requirements for another rwy not just throwing all the toys out of the cot in an instant. As another poster pointed out the next wind read out was 22kts cross wind but AA may have not wanted to go the whole hog in shooting a 22L approach down to the deck re fuel and a full go around scenario. Just from the ATC transcript, the whole event sounds uncomfortable.

check the facts
 

With my over 20 years of experience, as an area/approach/tower controller both in the militairy and civil side, I still consider ATC to be a part of ATS. So in my opinion still a service, but with extensive responsibilities. It is not without a reason that the required standards for controllers, as for pilots, are very high (at least in The Netherlands).

There are two things that I notice when following the discussion. First, and I am not the first one to recognize this, not all the facts of this incident are known. So this makes it very difficult to built an opinion, and especially to judge := the people involved.

Secondly, and many incidents and arguments in all kinds of variety start by this, a lack of communication. The pilot omits to state the nature of his emergency and the controller omits to ask. Now again, not all the facts are known, so it could be that the crew is too busy or stressed to state the nature of the emergency and the controller is too busy (according to the RT and probably additional coordination) organizing all the the other flights that are affected by the emergency of the AA flight.

Nevertheless it is a fact that the controller does not know the nature of the emergency and is thereby unable to provide optimal assistance. The lesson I learned (again) from this incident, keep communicating :ok:.

I hope someone can help me out, I've listened to this a couple of times and this is what I've come up with. Is this basically a correct sequence of events?

1. American is not on an emergency/mayday at the start of the tape when he makes contact with tower.

2. He's cleared to land 22L.

3. He's told the wind.

4. He can't accept the wind and declares an emergency.

5. He lands on another runway.

He cannot accept the wind limits on 22L. It's only a short tape and we can't know too much but it doesn't sound like he's operating with a stack of failures on board - it's simply out of a/c limits. Correct?

So then I presume he now will go below bingo fuel if he doesn't break off immediately for the other runway - hence an emergency, because of his fuel state. It will become an emergency if he can't route there directly, but it isn't at this point right now.

My question is therefore, if he's just gotten to that stage of fuel - disregarding any warnings he's given along the route - surely it's a bit drastic to start carving up the skies when you're at a major airfield and got (I presume) half an hour or so of fuel left?

Am I missing something important here?

Caudillo

If he is airborne and only has 30 minutes of fuel left, then that is an emergency.

Of course it is. How very convenient of you to neglect to mention the other a/c inconvenienced. As I said- how would you feel if YOU were the captain of the a/c on final that had to break off the approach? Do you really believe that "getting everyone out of the way" at JFK involves only one or two a/c? The delays that would ensue? All the other captains now looking at their fuel and wondering how long it will take to clean up and get an approach?
Some of the attitudes on display here really do perpetuate certain stereotypes. Disregard totally any inconvenience to ATC. It is irrelevant, and part of the job to deal with emergencies (part of providing service). Based on the info available (the tape, which is all that can be discussed here), how did it go from "we can't take the crosswind" to "get everyone out of the way, we are landing now"? Read the title of the thread. Maybe 'the guy with balls' is one who carries enough fuel, or diverts when he doesn't have enough (for whatever reason). Lets face it- that's the real issue here. Commercial pressure.

OK, speaking as elderly SLF (with just a couple of flying lessons which gives me just a glimmer of understanding about aviation issues), plus a lifelong interest in aviation and a LOT of reading in forums like this:
A lot of discussion has gone on about mayday/emergency/pan and the way that things are stated differently in NYK as opposed to anywhere else. Just watching the Air Crash Investigation programs on the Discovery Channel shows that often accidents happen due to lack/misunderstanding of communications. This event concluded happily apart from a few ruffled feathers but, if it ended badly and, in the subsequent investigation, someone said “He didn’t call MAYDAY but just said he would declare an emergency,” then all hell would break loose about communications yet again. I just find it difficult to believe (given all I read here about correct procedures etc.) that a discrepancy like this is allowed to happen in this modern age. I have spent lots of time on flight decks (when we were allowed) and listened to many exchanges between air crew and ATC and have always been filled with confidence of my safety when listening to these professionals going about what is (to them) their daily job. I am not just nit-picking here. The amount of words on this issue shows that it is something worth discussing and it is JUST POSSIBLE that it could lead to a misunderstanding with tragic consequences. Lesser things have....

I flew a SAR helo at a fighter base for several years and whenever the fighter guys had a 'problem' they were very reluctant to declare an emergency using the standard phrases of MAYDAY or PAN but generally just said they were declaring an elergency.

They few times over the years I've had a problem myself and needed assistance I've declared the appropriate phase and the required help was forthcoming very quickly.

I think there is a reluctance to use the standard emergency phrases as they are used very infrequently and are unfamiliar to most pilots, a similar thing happens when a standard phraseology is changed for whatever reason until the players on both sides of the microphone get used to it and it becomes commonplace.

Regards,
BH.

The people responsible for this debacle are sat flying their accountants desk miles from the action, coining in on their min fuel bonus whilst congratulating themselves on their corporate management.

When the inevitable happens and i am amazed it has not already, i only hope the audit trail shoots them up their guilty arse as they flee blubbing out Part A "but the Captain has the final say"

Examples need to be made of these people to get some change, but just like the recent financial mess nothing ultimately will happen to the folks responsible.

I don't suppose the previous communication is available ?
Seems that passage comes in a bit late.
Pete

@JWP1938
Just because you are posting in "this day and age" does not necessarily mean that all things are much better than they used to be.
A heck of a lot is better, as attested by the safety record; there is a heck of a lot that isn't. And it seems, in some ways, we are destined to not learn from the mistakes made in the past.
In the corporate environment that this undertaking seems to have become, there is always some trendy manager with a degree in something-or-other that feels the pressing and urgent need to reinvent the wheel, and a lot of past learning can be forgotten in that reinvention. Folk that resist some of these apparently arbitrary changes are labeled as dinosaurs, or similar.:rolleyes:

Sounds a bit like our local council. On a particular dual carriageway junction here there have been many accidents (with injuries) and many, many more near accidents. On being asked for a roundabout the council said that the criteria for a roundabout have not been met. On being pressed further it transpired that there had to be a fatal accident before the possibility was even discussed. Injuries only (or the strong possibility of a fatality eventually) didn’t count.

This one had me in stitches!

Lecturing someone on "complicated" JFK aircraft movement logistics...and admonishing them they'll never "progress past the flight deck" because they supposedly don't understand the ramifications......

That's a bit like lecturing an Afghani who grew up in the middle of minefields and unexploded ordinance on the "danger" of playing with a firecracker...

"Listen kid, it could go off in your hand and perhaps blow your fingernail off. Is that becoming clear to you? It could even put your eye out. Is it sinking in?"

Attention all Naval Aviators! You may never have guessed this operating on and off your boat, but what you do and how you operate can have an effect on others. Yes indeed. You may get away with selfishly thinking only of yourself on the USS ....... with it's uncomplicated aircraft logistics and prevelance of fuel-fat, recovering aircraft and forgiving environment where screw-ups only result in death or dismemberment for yourself and others....but in the civilian world such selfishness might cause another aircraft to....taxi to another runway. Or even be vectored to a new heading. Im not kidding!

Let us not forget the unfortunate crew and pax of a south american DC-8? into JFK a few years ago who were held and held due to wx who did NOT communicate sufficiently their fuel state emergency and crashed !!!!.

Maybe the AA Capt. was just having a bad day, or the nth. in a row bad day.

If you look at the Flightaware track (ref. in an earlier post) he had already done 2 circuits in a hold.

Until the full picture is revealed everything else posted here is speculation.

January 25, 1990, Avianca 707:

DCA90MA019

They were not critizied for not stating "Mayday" three times, they were critized for not clearly declaring an emergency.

General comment: "Mayday" three times serves a useful purpose in a non-radar ATC enviornment, especially when relay of communications is taking place through ARINC or such. But, in a busy radar environment it serves no purpose other than to tie up the frequency. AAL 52 could not have made their declaration any clearer.

Too much speculation without all the facts... especially from the DCVR. That should probably shead a great deal of light on what drove the crew to declare an emergency so late in the game. Hopefully the transcripts from the voice recorder will be made available even if the NTSB does not hold hearings on this incident.

The good news here is that no injuries or fatalities occured.

After how many have puckered up at the approached TOD after a long journey with unexpected ground delays at the departure airport, stronger than forecast head winds, longer than usual sequence vectoring??? oh and better yet, the winds on the active runway are beyond the limits stated in the FCOM?

Let's wait and see before judgement is passed on either the crew or the controllers.

Thanks for your contribution, AMF. Perhaps if you keep up with the discussion, it wasn't about how complicated (or not) the logistics are at JFK. It was about the appropriate (or not) decision to begin disregarding ATC instructions and declare an emergency. And yes, it certainly appears from posts like protectthehornets, that some cannot see any problem with that.

Lets call a spade a spade. This is how it looks to me: The guy was close to landing, getting low on fuel after already accepting some delay, and thought that by sticking his neck out and demanding the other runway he was going to get "penalty box" type vectors and a delay he wouldn't be able to take. How am I doing so far?
The problem with this arises when he didn't give ATC the chance to accommodate him or not, or even see what was going to happen. Playing the emergency card too early, so to speak. All supposition of course, but all the purile stuff about "who's the boss" does make you wonder.