Originally posted by Evan
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Giant Emergency in Spain
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
Also, in my case, if I blew A tire I would still have 15 main tires remaining. If I lost 1 engine, I still have 3. I also have the ability to dump fuel. So to me, if I was not on fire, no emergency.
What I'm getting at here is that I've witnessed stuff that is arguably stupid (Pulling/Briefing up an ILS approach plate in VMC) but hey, SAFETY FIRST.
Using this logic (SAFETY FIRST), shouldn't you declare an emergency if there's a significant departure from normality...tire problem, engine problem? (Rhetorical question, NOT a recommendation).
In one instance you are sparing NOTHING to be safe. In the other situation, there's at least a little elevated risk if there's an engine out...
This "double standard" is why we are being a pain and telling you you should declare an emergency. Apologies for that (and I get your point), but can you understand why we are thinking that way?Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 3WE View Post
So let me ask you something- I have watched a few preflight briefings where the pilots said, if we lose an engine/have a fire, we will turn around and shoot the ILS to runway X...THE KEY ISSUE THOUGH WAS THAT THE WEATHER WAS SEVERE VMC.
What I'm getting at here is that I've witnessed stuff that is arguably stupid (Pulling/Briefing up an ILS approach plate in VMC) but hey, SAFETY FIRST.
Using this logic (SAFETY FIRST), shouldn't you declare an emergency if there's a significant departure from normality...tire problem, engine problem? (Rhetorical question, NOT a recommendation).
In one instance you are sparing NOTHING to be safe. In the other situation, there's at least a little elevated risk if there's an engine out...
This "double standard" is why we are being a pain and telling you you should declare an emergency. Apologies for that (and I get your point), but can you understand why we are thinking that way?
Comment
-
Originally posted by 3WE View Post
Have you ever heard this sort of exchange?:
ATC: "Belchfire 123, do you wish to declare an Emergency"
Bechlfire 123: "Not if we don't have to, can we please return to land now".
ATC: Belchfire 123, heading 060, descend to 2500, cleared for ILS 09R, when able please say souls on board and fuel remaining.
ATC: Poorsob 456, cancel your approach, turn right heading 180, maintain 4000 ft, I have an emergency incoming.
And have you ever heard something like that? Because...
While the use of mayday or pan-pan is preferable to avoid any confusion or ambiguity, ATC doesn'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.Can we please 'cancel our route' and go back and land ASAP- No paperwork for the FAA. Probably SOME company paperwork.
We are declaring an emergency- FAA will require follow up and there may be ADDITIONAL company paperwork.
Bobby is waking the fine line of not FORMALLY declaring an emergency, to make an important legal (and logistical) distinction. It's not about "the words" but the formal legal implications.
And you care about paperwork? And you think that the wording used during the "situation" will make any difference on the paperwork?
And if he gets to do essentially everything he wants without being an emergency (ATC doesn't have to have an emergency to address a request, nor to give some special consideration)...why not go that way?
By the way, do you know what is the paperwork with eh FAA required for declaring an emergency? Many times. nada. And when there is something, again it will not depend so much on the word you used.
--- 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
-
Originally posted by GabrielWhile the use of mayday or pan-pan is preferable to avoid any confusion or ambiguity, ATC doesn'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.
On the other hand, if the crew suspected more extensive damage that could potentially impact the safety of the flight, that would qualify as an emergency. The fact that they requested an F-18 for aerial inspection makes me think they might have declared emergency to expedite their situational awareness.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gabriel View Post[/B][/U]By the way, do you know what is the paperwork with eh FAA required for declaring an emergency? Many times. nada. And when there is something, again it will not depend so much on the word you used.
Comment
-
Originally posted by BoeingBobby View PostFunny, the couple of times I have declared an emergency there WAS paperwork for the feds. Not to mention the company and the airports emergency response department. But I guess when you looked it up on wiki, or in your thousands of hours PIC in a large jet airplane they didn't do that for you.
I guess its an interesting legal twist if ATC declares the emergency...if things are uneventful, can you tell the FAA that YOU didn't declare an emergency and therefore not obligated to visit with the FAA. teevee?
By the way, I think the horse is dead, but I'm taking bets on how far we go...got a beer we hit 8 pages.Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
Dual hydraulic system failure ( 1 & 4 ) in Dubai in a 200. 2 engines shut down in Miami in a DC-6. Single engine in Miami in a C-46, oil temp. rising on the remaining engine.
Comment
Comment