Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Giant Emergency in Spain

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    It's not an emergency
    How not? They were landing with at least 1 tire in knowingly destroyed condition. They needed the emergency services to meet the airplane immediately at the runway in case there was a wheel fire or some other damage caused by rubber / brake disk shrapnel (like punctured fuel tanks or hydraulic lines).

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Gabriel View Post

      How not? They were landing with at least 1 tire in knowingly destroyed condition. They needed the emergency services to meet the airplane immediately at the runway in case there was a wheel fire or some other damage caused by rubber / brake disk shrapnel (like punctured fuel tanks or hydraulic lines).
      I think he is pointing out that 'mayday' communicates an urgent emergency rather than a failure condition that is currently contained and under control, where 'pan' is appropriate. Both signal the need for immediate attention but communicate different states of urgency. That is, I think, not clearly agreed upon or understood throughout the aviation world.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Evan View Post

        I think he is pointing out that 'mayday' communicates an urgent emergency rather than a failure condition that is currently contained and under control, where 'pan' is appropriate.
        No, Evan. He is questioning that they declared emergency with whatever wording.

        Originally posted by BB
        It's not an emergency! And I didn't know, nor do I care if the used a Mayday call

        --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
        --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Gabriel View Post

          How not? They were landing with at least 1 tire in knowingly destroyed condition. They needed the emergency services to meet the airplane immediately at the runway in case there was a wheel fire or some other damage caused by rubber / brake disk shrapnel (like punctured fuel tanks or hydraulic lines).
          You just keep flying your Tomahawk Gabriel. You will NEVER understand no matter how many times it is explained to you. And I kinda thought you were a pretty smart guy.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Evan View Post

            I think he is pointing out that 'mayday' communicates an urgent emergency rather than a failure condition that is currently contained and under control, where 'pan' is appropriate. Both signal the need for immediate attention but communicate different states of urgency. That is, I think, not clearly agreed upon or understood throughout the aviation world.
            It should be, it is clearly worded in the ICAO radio phraseology manual which is used worldwide.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Boeing Bobby
              You just keep flying your Tomahawk Gabriel. You will NEVER understand no matter how many times it is explained to you.


              Indeed, we may never understand. There are indeed lots of details to keep straight...what is an emergency?, what is the right phraseology? Indeed there are things as a insider you learn, practice, do and see, that give you better understanding and perspective. Discussion forum parlour talkers...we do lack that.

              Hey, our plane is broken, we need to deviate from our flight plan and need some special accommodations to land soon, and these things have been known to crash and burn when there's tire and engine problems...so exactly what should I say on the radio?, and I would like to be turning back towards the airport now, if not in the next minute...If you do what's right and clearly communicate with the tower, I would hope there's no foul, even if you don't get a perfect 10 on your style points.

              It is tough to keep track of all the details...including that during a rejected take off you want the best possible braking...absolutely...but is that with or without the antilock/antiskid systems? But what do I know, I'm really just an MSFS jock.




              Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by 3WE View Post

                Indeed, we may never understand. There are indeed lots of details to keep straight...what is an emergency?, what is the right phraseology? Indeed there are things as a insider you learn, practice, do and see, that give you better understanding and perspective. Discussion forum parlour talkers...we do lack that.

                Hey, our plane is broken, we need to deviate from our flight plan and need some special accommodations to land soon, and these things have been known to crash and burn when there's tire and engine problems...so exactly what should I say on the radio?, and I would like to be turning back towards the airport now, if not in the next minute...If you do what's right and clearly communicate with the tower, I would hope there's no foul, even if you don't get a perfect 10 on your style points.

                It is tough to keep track of all the details...including that during a rejected take off you want the best possible braking...absolutely...but is that with or without the antilock/antiskid systems? But what do I know, I'm really just an MSFS jock.[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]


                Doesn't even justify a response.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post

                  Doesn't even justify a response.
                  ...and yet it got one.
                  Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post

                    It should be, it is clearly worded in the ICAO radio phraseology manual which is used worldwide.
                    Thanks! Another fine addition to the library over here.

                    Here's what it doth tell us:

                    RTF Emergency Communications

                    As soon as there is any doubt as to the safe conduct of a flight, immediately request assistance from ATC. Flight crews should declare the situation early; it can always be cancelled.
                    Now, we've already debated the meaning of "safe conduct of a flight' in which ATLcrew defines it as "fixin' to hit something". I'm not sold on that definition however.

                    • A distress call (situation where the aircraft requires immediate assistance) is prefixed: MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY.
                    • An urgency message (situation not requiring immediate assistance) is prefixed: PAN-PAN, PAN-PAN, PAN-PAN
                    (Note: I've rarely if ever heard it spoken three times.)

                    That's... uh... a bit ambiguous. If you don't require immediate assistance, why would you use either one? However, I feel (from my 0ft AGL hindsight machine) that this situation is better described as 'urgent' than 'distressed'.

                    However, there is some obvious grey area in the old ICAO radio phraseology manual:

                    Fuel Reserves Approaching Minimum

                    ’Fuel Emergency’ or ‘fuel priority’ are not recognised terms. Flight crews short of fuel must declare a PAN or MAYDAY to be sure of being given the appropriate priority.
                    Now, minimum fuel reserves are still fuel reserves, so this is not what I would call 'distress' either. Yet...

                    But declaring an emergency to assure being given the appropriate priority seems reasonable in this case, especially since the crew didn't know the extent of the damage until a chase plane was dispatched to put some eyeballs on the situation.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Evan View Post
                      Blah Blah Blah.
                      No objections to what you copied and discussed.

                      But, one bottom line to the big E is that it gives you the power to navigate where you want to navigate, and make ATC get everyone out of the way...And it's quick and efficient .

                      (Which is what your last sentence basically says).

                      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Evan View Post

                        Thanks! Another fine addition to the library over here.

                        Here's what it doth tell us:



                        Now, we've already debated the meaning of "safe conduct of a flight' in which ATLcrew defines it as "fixin' to hit something". I'm not sold on that definition however.



                        (Note: I've rarely if ever heard it spoken three times.)

                        That's... uh... a bit ambiguous. If you don't require immediate assistance, why would you use either one? However, I feel (from my 0ft AGL hindsight machine) that this situation is better described as 'urgent' than 'distressed'.

                        However, there is some obvious grey area in the old ICAO radio phraseology manual:



                        Now, minimum fuel reserves are still fuel reserves, so this is not what I would call 'distress' either. Yet...

                        But declaring an emergency to assure being given the appropriate priority seems reasonable in this case, especially since the crew didn't know the extent of the damage until a chase plane was dispatched to put some eyeballs on the situation.
                        I was once told by a controller that, from the ATC perspective, while the use of mayday or pan-pan is preferable to avoid any confusion or ambiguity, they ndon't care if you say mayday, pan-pan, emergency, or oh my god I am going to die. The moment that they suspect that the safety of a flight is compromised they treat it as an emergency. Of course the extent of the help and accommodations will depend on the nature of the emergency and whether the pilot is able and willing to comply clearances. But that decision is not based on which word you used to declare the emergency.

                        In this particular instance, you have an engine failure and you are going to land with at least one destroyed tire. You will (or should) want the emergency services responding and checking the plane after you land. I don't see why you would not declare an emergency (with whatever word you choose) and request emergency services. and I don't see why you would not require the assistance of the emergency services. But it must be that I am not as smart as BB thought I was.

                        --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                        --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Well I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night and the kid at the front desk didn't say that at all!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Departure this is younameit 123, we blew a tire on take off and we have also lost number two engine. We would like a place to go hold to run our check list and access the situation. Departure younameit 123, we have spoken to our company and we will need to continue to hold until we are down to maximum landing weight. That will be about 4 hours. No we do not have the ability to dump fuel. Thank you, we would like to request men and equipment standing by for our landing because of the blown tire. Thank you we will let you know when we are ready to start our approach.

                            You think you don't get EVERY bit of the same handling v/s declaring an emergency?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I will impose my credentials and give you the argument that you desire so much. There are things that you learn from actually flying heavy jet aircraft around the world for 20 plus years. I have tried my damnedest to try to explain it to a couple of you, but it doesn't seem to sink in. We have a new member here Kent Olsen, that seems to come from the same background as I do. Maybe he can explain it better than I have.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
                                Departure this is younameit 123, we blew a tire on take off and we have also lost number two engine. We would like a place to go hold to run our check list and access the situation. Departure younameit 123, we have spoken to our company and we will need to continue to hold until we are down to maximum landing weight. That will be about 4 hours. No we do not have the ability to dump fuel. Thank you, we would like to request men and equipment standing by for our landing because of the blown tire. Thank you we will let you know when we are ready to start our approach.

                                You think you don't get EVERY bit of the same handling v/s declaring an emergency?
                                I think you also want to alert the tower ASAP, as in before traffic following begins to roll if you potentially left tire fragments on the runway. Am I wrong?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X