When to call MAYDAY
 

Does your company state in its operations manual part A under what conditions the flight crew should elect to call MAYDAY or PAN PAN?

I would be very interested to hear of any company that did so - anyone?

The reason I would be so interested is that such a subject should be covered in basic AIRMANSHIP.

Furthermore, MAYDAY is a situation in which time is of the essence. I would be very concerned to think that aircrew might be looking through the manual trying to find the right page on which it is dictated by the company whether their current situation is considered by the author (whose decision is, of course, final) to justify calling MAYDAY.

Sorry - IMO it should not be there. Use your basic skills, airmanship and professional judgement. The manual cannot cover all situations. So don't bother covering any. You will merely distract from the immediate problem in hand - flying the aircraft and (hopefully) getting it on the ground safely.

In my opinion,

PAN PAN is when one doesnt feel like messing around in the air for too long..and MAYDAY when everyone buckles up and no time to call for 3xPAN PAN...
And just before you have to kiss your ass goodbye:you say BRACE BRACE.

Safe Flying,

M.85

IF IN DOUBT CALL 'MAYDAY' - YOU CAN ALWAYS DOWNGRADE YOUR SITUATION LATER. 'PAN' IS A WASTE OF BREATH AROUND MOST OF THE WORLD - ATC WILL NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT !

I thought it was to do with "grave and imminent danger " !:)

Quoting from ops manual part B (QRH) preamble for the B757.

" There are some situations wich always require declaration of an emergency ....etc"
it lists the following
" Engine failure or Fire
Wheel Well Fire
Cabin smoke or fire which cannot be immediately eliminated or extinguished
One source of AC power remains
One Hydraulic system remains
Checklist contains the phrase 'declare an emergency' "
and obviously
" any other situation crew determined ...... may have adverse effect on safety of flight."

We have a recommendation in SOP's (4 engine aircraft) - loss of 1 engine only = PAN, loss of 2 engines = MAYDAY (safely fly on three engines at all weights etc generally).

Of course it is only a recommendation.

Sorry guys....

from past experience......you can completely FORGET about using PAN unless you are in UK controlled airspace, and as for MAYDAY....you will be lucky if you get the expected/required response from any other foreign ATC service.....other than english speaking.

Flame me at will....but I am going from past personal experience and from my Company's experience of Mayday experiences.

As a rule of thumb only, MAYDAY is appropriate when there is an imminent threat to life whereas PAN is appropriate when, if things don't change soon, then it will be a MAYDAY situation.

An ops manual can only tell you about certain circumstances that most definitely are MAYDAY but you would be expected to know these anyway.

A "PAN" call is fully understood in New Zealand. They are certainly understood around the Central North Island.

I expect my Trans-Tasman colleagues would also be familiar with them.

If the situation is only worthy of a "PAN", then it should not matter if it needs to be repeated until understood. If the situation is such that there is no time to repeat it, then it should probably have been a "Mayday" to start with.

PAN is known and understood in my part of the world too. I used it once, many years ago and got the immediate attention that was needed. I had to upgrade to MAYDAY during the subsequent course of the flight - and that had the desired effect as well.

It seems that PAN is a British creation that has spread over many years to 'the colonies' - Sadly however Manuel will simply say 'Que' ..................

I haven't had much need to refer to ICAO's Pans Rac document, but I'm sure there used to be a reference to PAN in there. Compliance with a Pans document is not mandatory, but if it isn't fully implemented, the State must notify the fact in its AIP. If "Manuel's" country has done so, I feel sure that Jeppesen, and other such service providers, will have detected it and made relevent notes for its clients.

I wonder if the FAA uses the term in its publications? Does it appear in Jar-land documents? If there is significant inconsistency in this, then maybe the matter should be raised with your local ALPA rep., to take up with IATA who, in turn, will (or should) take it up with ICAO and the State concerned, as a matter related to aviation safety.

Or maybe I'm just living in Disneyland after all...

Regarding Pan calls. Please heed the words of Beamer and Mondriver. They're providing hard won experience from their own companies' operations.

I know with absolute certainty that both can quote examples extensively and on a worldwide basis.

The rule of thumb they and their colleagues have discovered has been noted above. Pan is in the vocab of controllers of anglo influenced, trained or speaking nations, some european countries and areas like the Middle East with a strong core of ex-pat ATC staff. Anywhere else is a recipe for a baffled silence.

Rob

MayDay and Pan

Both Mayday and Pan call terms come from the French - Mayday deriving from M'Aidez (Help Me) and Pan deriving from Panne (Breakdown or broken).

Both terms have the same meaning under the internation aviation laws as under the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) - that is to say if the situation does not place the craft and its occupants in grave and imminent danger, then you call Pan-Pan.

In my profession, a Pan call would be for example a major steering failure, or propulsion loss in open water, but you place a nasty rocky lee shore nearby to drift onto and obviously it would be a Mayday.

I can see clearly that a Pan call would have little mileage in the air, as you do not want a graduated response in the field services ("He only needs one truck as he said Pan"). If you have a problem which is not something you are trained to cope with and continue normal flight with, then you have a problem, and it should be a Mayday, giving you full support from the ground.

Sods law dictates if it hasn't gone fully wrong yet, it probably will at 200' on the approach to your chosen piste.

As a pilot, I interpret very differently the rules of when to say what that when I am on the bridge of a superyacht, and a Mayday would come markedly sooner on the 'Oh ******'-ometer from the cockpit that the bridge.

Thats my view of things from sea level. I'm reading with interest the views of those under Company SOP's who have to follow procedures whilst contemplating if they themselves are happy with the developing situation as they decide what to use.

Cheers :confused:

That's my view:D

I've never thought of it as a method of achieving a graduated form of response. It's more a matter of priority in communications and traffic handling. Thus, a call of "PAN" will take precedence over someone else who has just provided a position report, or an enroute weather report, etc.

If someone then calls "MAYDAY", that communication gets the priority over PAN calls and routine communications.

The same sort of priority should apply to aircraft approaching an airport for landing. In the instance where a PAN call is made, that aircraft gets priority for landing over everyone else... unless someone else turns up screamin MAYDAY. Well, that's how I've always understood it and, notwithstanding the hard won experience of those claiming that PAN is a useless call in some parts of the world, I believe it has a clear implication for safety of flight.

That was why I suggested that some action needs to be taken in regard to the countries where "PAN" is unknown. But, then, I guess that if you've got the sort of trouble that requires a PAN call in a country like that, you've surely got even bigger problems than a lack of knowledge of PAN... :sad:

I would use MAYDAY anywhere in the world. PAN I would use in the UK; everywhere else I would 'DECLARE AN EMERGENCY' and once acknowledged would state the nature and my intentions. I've found that to be the most effective throughout my flying experience.

The key words 'MAYDAY' and 'EMERGENCY' appear to be universally recognised.

FJJP

Succinct and to the point - after 25 years flying around the world I could not agree more

Engine failure on take-off - Mayday or Pan??
 

A discussion point, from an "orange" flight safety magazine, same topic of use of Mayday/Pan calls: Hmmm..... for me, in a twin-engined aircraft, if I get an engine failure on take-off, the Mayday pro-word would be getting some serious use! Regardless of the cause of the failure, by using Mayday, I am telling ATC (& other traffic) that I wish the airspace to be cleared (possible climb/performance problems - emergency turn rather than the SID?), & if appropriate, the runway to be kept sterile. Weather & performance considerations permitting, I will be landing back at the same airfield fairly shortly!

Apart from that, as mentioned on the "multi-engine failure" Tech Log thread, there are circumstances that could lead to imminent problems with the live engine, & I don't want to be the one to find them!!

Thanks for that, Douglas.

I am astonished that anyone would go into print with anything so crass and stupid as that assertion.

Loss of an engine, particularly on takeoff, most certainly is a MAYDAY situation. Anything else is playing with the lives of all on board.