Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 04, 2015, 11:22:44 AM
Home Help Login Register      
News: LiveATC.net Flyers Released!  Please click here to download & print a copy and be sure to post at an airport near you!

+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Recent Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10

 on: September 30, 2015, 11:41:19 PM 
Started by RonR - Last post by SirIsaac787
To top it all off... they probably already were being handled as an emergency aircraft, hence why the controller polled them for the SOB and lbs of fuel. Don't forget, a pilot of an aircraft is only one of a few entities that can "declare an emergency" for that aircraft.

You are absolutely correct. This was an emergency as declared by ATC. Could also be declared by the owner, pilot, dispatch...but pretty clearly this was all done by ATC, rightly so. If you need ARFF standing by and to inspect your aircraft after landing, then you are an emergency (the action taken by the ARFF in this case is evidence of that).

The reason why this is actually an issue...Avianca 52. One factor in that deadly crash was the failure of the flight crew to communicate the true emergency nature of their fuel situation. If they had declared an emergency on frequency, you bet your rear-end the controllers would have tried doing things differently. Air traffic controllers are trained to perk up and go on "high alert" if you will when they hear the words "emergency" or "minimum fuel." Communication can save lives and far too often, not specifically in this incident, we see pilots not declare emergencies and they are the only one's that know the true danger they are in. Never be afraid to use the "E word." Unless you are a complete moron and are intentionally and knowingly abusing your ability to declare an emergency (while I do not remember the exact specifics, the guy that landed on the beach near JFK rings a bell), no one is going to call you out for being overly cautious and declaring an emergency. At the end of the day, it's worth the extra paperwork.

 on: September 30, 2015, 02:38:10 PM 
Started by RonR - Last post by Brad G.
Is there a specific reason why aircrew might be reluctant to declare an emergency?
Passengers don't get to go to their destination airport... that's an inconvenience (not even a 'discomfort'). The plane will land at a slightly higher-than-normal speed (but still within their normal tolerances)... that's not even a workload increase for the pilots, just a "we might have to crank up the autobrake setting another notch and/or use reverse thrust a bit longer than normal" thing. After they've landed and finished flying the plane, they'll be stuck on the runway until they can be towed off - that's an inconvenience to airport staff and the control tower's number of operations scoreboard.

Where was the emergency?

Another specific reason might be that it was unnecessary. The controller was relaying relevant information to the local controllers... how often do non-emergency air carriers require enroute controllers to relay information of that nature? What would dropping the "E Word" even do that wasn't already being done?

To top it all off... they probably already were being handled as an emergency aircraft, hence why the controller polled them for the SOB and lbs of fuel. Don't forget, a pilot of an aircraft is only one of a few entities that can "declare an emergency" for that aircraft.

 on: September 30, 2015, 02:22:07 PM 
Started by RonR - Last post by GeoffSM1
Is there a specific reason why aircrew might be reluctant to declare an emergency?

 on: September 30, 2015, 01:55:16 PM 
Started by GeoffSM1 - Last post by GeoffSM1
Whilst waiting for a Ryanair flight out of Cork last Monday morning I noticed a huge flock of birds on the taxiway to R170. When I got back home I checked out the EICK archives on here and learned that the birds had been a problem for much of the morning - so much so that an exasperated Controller finally declares that the birds have been 'loitering with intent to put it mildly.'

 on: September 29, 2015, 11:27:21 PM 
Started by RonR - Last post by SirIsaac787
If you want the ARFF standing by the runway, then you're an emergency. Never be afraid to use the "E Word."

But the crew did a fantastic job handling the mechanical issue and their communication of everything that was going on and what they needed was excellent.

 on: September 29, 2015, 07:40:28 PM 
Started by PYLOUFRA - Last post by martyj19
As with anything, you request the service you want ("Request basic service").  It is not up to the controller to recommend anything or help you decide what you want to do.

In my view, it is always best to ask a flight instructor who is familiar with the area, local conditions, and country specific regulations, rather than seeking advice from the Internet.

 on: September 29, 2015, 05:19:06 PM 
Started by PYLOUFRA - Last post by PYLOUFRA

Regarding ATSOCAS services in class G airspace, could anyone give me an example of phraseology given by the Air Traffic controller to ask the pilot to choose between procedural, deconfliction, traffic or basic service ?

Many thanks,

Best regards,     

 on: September 29, 2015, 04:32:29 PM 
Started by RonR - Last post by flyflyfly
Thanks, very interesting recording! And great to listen to the calm Aer Lingus crew.

@rustybugs: Concerning hurrying back: with 2 out of 3 redundant hydraulic systems still working fine, they obviously didn't see any short term risk to flight control. Hence, they decided they had plenty of time to fly the plane, walk through all the checklists and make a thorough landing preparation.

The hydraulics redundancy doesn't apply to ground steering (nor to gear door closing) - so they knew they had to be towed off the runway. Still, there wasn't any flight control issue at all, so no need to hurry.

Unnecessary hasty decisions can turn such a non-issue into a catastrophe. Remember the TransAsia pilots who noticed the single engine failure and, within seconds, pulled the engine cut off - unfortunately shutting down the incorrect and only remaining good engine. Had they decided to just keep climbing slowly on one engine, while running their checklists step by step to identify and shutdown the stalled engine - they'd still be alive today. Acting quickly isn't always the best move.

 on: September 29, 2015, 04:04:26 PM 
Started by RonR - Last post by airaos
Great work and comms by the crew, ATC, and JFK.
Just another day in the Office. The 757's are flown by a mixture of Aer Lingus and Air Contractors crews and high on experience

 on: September 29, 2015, 01:48:12 PM 
Started by tyketto - Last post by tyketto

This is mainly for the providers of the NCT and KMHR feeds.

It's that time of year again. This weekend is the California Capital Airshow is going to be occurring this weekend (10/2 to 10/5) at KMHR. The NOTAM for the TFR is already up:


Hard to believe that this is the 10th year of this show. This year, we're getting the Thunderbirds, the Canadian Forces Snowbirds, and the USN's F-18 Super Hornet teams, among many other pilots, barnstormers, and performers. The only thing missing would be Amelia (Rose) Earhart. Wink

Anywho, any idea if the feed providers are going to swap frequencies to catch the airshow? I can pull out the list I had a few years ago when I was on the field, but with 3 different teams coming in, it's definitely going to be different. FreqOfNature may have some of those as well, but it would be great to see if the feeds could cover the show.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10

Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!