Declare an Emergency! Please...

[derg]

Admittedly, I blew an engine out of ORD a few years ago and we didn't declare.

My school of thought at the time was that once we used the "E" word, being ORD and rush hour, the chopperazi would swarm around and we'd be all over the news.

In retrospect, even though we got priority handling and the runway of our choice, I probably should have just declared and got it over with.

Funny thing, is that ORD tower went from the staccato, slightly grumpy pace to relaxed, calm and very mellow. Texted flight control downwind and we didn't hear a peep from them until we got to the gate, kind of odd them asking about souls and board and fuel remaining and what our intentions are when we had already finished deplaning!

 

[MikeD]

Declare an emergency if you need to. You can cancel it if you like, although airport ARFF services would still likely want to meet you and check you out depending on what the nature of the emergency was.

And normally, most ATC I've see nowdays preface a "when able" just before asking the "nature, souls, fuel remaining"; so it works out good.

And lastly, when asked "fuel remaining"; give that to ATC in TIME, not actually gallons or pounds onboard.

 

[jtrain609]

Declare an emergency if you need to. You can cancel it if you like, although airport ARFF services would still likely want to meet you and check you out depending on what the nature of the emergency was.

And normally, most ATC I've see nowdays preface a "when able" just before asking the "nature, souls, fuel remaining"; so it works out good.

And lastly, when asked "fuel remaining"; give that to ATC in TIME, not actually gallons or pounds onboard.

I've had people tell me that atc wants it in pounds or gallons so they know how big of an explosion they should be expecting.

 

[SteveC]

I disagree on the situation outlined above, I guess obviously because I was sitting there. We eventually did tell them" souls on board, fuel remaining, descending to 10,000', standby," but because we weren't on fire, the necessity to go whole hog, if you will, wasn't there.

But you said, and I quote: "At the same time, we needed to turn and descend right away, which we requested. The controller denied our requests 2-3 times, even after we told them we didn't have boots anymore and were in ice, and that we lost our cabin and needed to descend." (bold added)

That doesn't make sense to me. Why would you waste the time and effort of requesting a turn and a descent, 2 or 3 times, plus go to the trouble of explaining the details of your situation when it would have been so much simpler and quicker to just say "Flight XYZ is declaring an emergency. We need a turn to heading XXX and a descent to YYYY"? Why are you wasting so much time and effort just to avoid saying the "E" word?

I think Swissair is a great example of when you DO need to go all the way, right away. Smoke in the cockpit is, to me, an immediate emergency descent, diversion and emergency declaration all within about 15 seconds. But let's be professionals, and know that there are times to declare right away, and a lot more times where having a measured response is very likely the best course of action. I get a little concerned when our initial reaction always goes to the "DECLARE AN EMERGENCY 10 SECONDS GO" side of the scale, because it says to me that we're not fully thinking through an issue.

I agree with you 100%, but that is different than the situation you just described that you found yourselves in. You said that you lost pressurization and boots and you were at altitude and in ice...what part of that situation does not call for a descent sooner than later?

Or as I've always said to my students, if you need to react like greased lightning in order to save your butt, you're likely already dead; there are very few situations that can happen in an airplane that will result in your death unless you react immediately and in many situations, quick reactions without thinking through a situation will get you killed more often than winding the clock and figuring out exactly what's happening.

Still in agreement with the first part of your premise, but disagree strongly with the second. "Wind the clock" is one of my favorite mantras when things are going south. But I don't classify declaring an emergency as a quick reaction item that can get you into trouble. The only thing that it can do is help you - it can't hurt you. "Wind the clock" is to keep someone from reacting too quickly and doing something like feathering the wrong engine, or stomping on the wrong rudder - things that can get you dead. Declaring an emergency won't get you dead, and in some situations can keep you from getting that way.

I guess I'll also follow this up with the old adage of "aviation, navigate, communicate." I think an emergency declaration comes down the line when dealing with most situations. In my view, and I think all this reflects this, you've got to go through a process with this stuff, and keying the mic comes nearly last. First you've got to identify IF you've got a problem, and then identify WHAT the problem is. Then you need to figure out IF you can fix the problem, and then determine that if you can, HOW you can fix it. At this point you've got a pretty good idea of the scope of what you're dealing with, and you can probably start talking with somebody outside the cockpit about what you need/want to do.

So you guys ended up having to spend an inordinate amount of time communicating your request for a turn and descent multiple times, and explain the nature of your mechanical issues, when a simple phrase would have turned you loose to do the more important things. :dunno:

I do think that having an itchy trigger finger on declaring an emergency is a problem because you're getting ahead of yourself. Until you know the full scope of what you're dealing with, after winding the clock a bit, I think you're doing yourself a disservice by declaring right away. Maybe you want to descend first before doing anything else before trying to figure out what you're dealing with. Maybe you want to sit there for a minute to take in what's happening. Maybe you want to talk with the guy next to you about what they think. Maybe a bunch of things, but I think external communications come nearly last in all this.

I just think it's hard to see that from a controller standpoint, which I guess is what this whole conversation is about; that there's a bunch of stuff potentially going on, and talking with a controller, or declaring an emergency, can be low on your list of things to do.

I agree that there are times when you don't need to declare right away, if at all. I don't have an issue with taking the time to decide if that is needed. My only point is that if you are in a situation where you're starting to build ice, losing pressurization, and you NEED a descent - that's not the time to be dinking around debating if it is a true emergency or not. In that situation the simple act of declaring will get you what you need right then, so quit debating and declare and get your turn and descent started (you've obviously already taken the time to determine that that was important), then you can slow back down and do some more analysis and trouble shooting.

 

[Vector4Food]

Thought I'd add, I have had a Pan Pan before... to be honest I treated them identically to a Mayday basically.

It's an interesting difference "Declaring an Emergency" seems to have replaced "Pan Pan", MayDay in this day and age usually means the proverbial has really hit the fan, and things aren't likely to turn out well.

 

[jtrain609]

But you said, and I quote: "At the same time, we needed to turn and descend right away, which we requested. The controller denied our requests 2-3 times, even after we told them we didn't have boots anymore and were in ice, and that we lost our cabin and needed to descend." (bold added)

That doesn't make sense to me. Why would you waste the time and effort of requesting a turn and a descent, 2 or 3 times, plus go to the trouble of explaining the details of your situation when it would have been so much simpler and quicker to just say "Flight XYZ is declaring an emergency. We need a turn to heading XXX and a descent to YYYY"? Why are you wasting so much time and effort just to avoid saying the "E" word?



I agree with you 100%, but that is different than the situation you just described that you found yourselves in. You said that you lost pressurization and boots and you were at altitude and in ice...what part of that situation does not call for a descent sooner than later?



Still in agreement with the first part of your premise, but disagree strongly with the second. "Wind the clock" is one of my favorite mantras when things are going south. But I don't classify declaring an emergency as a quick reaction item that can get you into trouble. The only thing that it can do is help you - it can't hurt you. "Wind the clock" is to keep someone from reacting too quickly and doing something like feathering the wrong engine, or stomping on the wrong rudder - things that can get you dead. Declaring an emergency won't get you dead, and in some situations can keep you from getting that way.


So you guys ended up having to spend an inordinate amount of time communicating your request for a turn and descent multiple times, and explain the nature of your mechanical issues, when a simple phrase would have turned you loose to do the more important things. :dunno:



I agree that there are times when you don't need to declare right away, if at all. I don't have an issue with taking the time to decide if that is needed. My only point is that if you are in a situation where you're starting to build ice, losing pressurization, and you NEED a descent - that's not the time to be dinking around debating if it is a true emergency or not. In that situation the simple act of declaring will get you what you need right then, so quit debating and declare and get your turn and descent started (you've obviously already taken the time to determine that that was important), then you can slow back down and do some more analysis and trouble shooting.

*shrug*

I don't know what to tell you, Steve, I disagree with you and would not change how we handled the situation. I think you're under the impression that we trotted along for 10-15 minutes trying to convince ATC to let us descend, when the whole ordeal took under 10 seconds, about the amount of time it took us to stop our climb, reduce power, and start heading back downhill at a brisk pace.

I'm not really sure what the point of arguing over 10 seconds is to tell you the truth.

 

[SteveC]

We declared in order to TELL the controller what we were going to do.

The point is that you ended up having to do what I think you should have done in the first place. If you're happy with how you guys handled it, more power to you.

 

[derg]

FINISH HIM!!!

 

[seagull]

The answer is that it is just a matter of experience. Our pilots declare when even slightly in doubt. i know I do. Not even an issue or a question. It's really a "no-brainer", I think.

 

[moxiepilot]

I'll start declaring the E word more as soon as ATC stops giving me the "nature of emergency, souls on board, total fuel remaining, etc" quiz show immediately following every time I say it.

There's a phrase for that: "STANDBY"

 

[Screaming_Emu]

I've had people tell me that atc wants it in pounds or gallons so they know how big of an explosion they should be expecting.

i had NY approach specify pounds when they asked

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

Rarely does one need to fill out paperwork or make phone calls after declaring an emergency.

Because the pilot doesn't declare really means little. ATC often declares an emergency and the pilot never knows it.

It can make a big difference. Controllers are not necessarily pilots and may not know the ramifications of what an emergency is. I recall at least one story of a partial panel CFIT where the pilot informed ATC that the vacuum system went inop. Controller had no idea what that meant and thought that the pilot lost one of his radios.

BTW, that paperwork piece?

Here's a real story. Part 135 pilot flying a Metroliner has am engine problem. Doesn't declare an emergency and while working out the problem busts altitude in the clouds in busy airspace, leading to a loss of separation and enforcement action.

I guarantee that there was more cost and expense to responding to the subsequent enforcement action than there would have been in in declaring the emergency and giving ATC the opportunity to move other traffic out of the way.

My only true emergency involved loss of power while IFR in the clouds and a diversion for landing. Declaring the emergency, the only paperwork was the FAA's. All I had was a short conversation with an inspector a few days later as he filled out his paperwork.

 

[boondr]

i had NY approach specify pounds when they asked

I just want a number, whatever form it is that is easier for you, I don't care if it's in fluid ounces, so I can give it to my Sup and get him/her off my shoulder and let me work. I have said to a Sup during an emergency "STFU!" (full words were spoken) because he insisted on playing backseat driver for every decision. (IE after I gave a 270 heading to another aircraft to move it out of the way "I would have made that a 280 or 290 heading just to give myself a little more room. After a speed assignment to another aircraft "good speed, now make sure everyone else gets a speed too" etc....STFU! I am trying to work!)

 

[SteveC]

...
Declaring the emergency, the only paperwork was the FAA's. All I had was a short conversation with an inspector a few days later as he filled out his paperwork.

Same experience our crew had recently. The inspector emailed a copy of the form that he had to fill out ahead of time so our pilots knew what information he needed. A short phone call later and we were done.

 

[Screaming_Emu]

I just want a number, whatever form it is that is easier for you, I don't care if it's in fluid ounces, so I can give it to my Sup and get him/her off my shoulder and let me work. I have said to a Sup during an emergency "STFU!" (full words were spoken) because he insisted on playing backseat driver for every decision. (IE after I gave a 270 heading to another aircraft to move it out of the way "I would have made that a 280 or 290 heading just to give myself a little more room. After a speed assignment to another aircraft "good speed, now make sure everyone else gets a speed too" etc....STFU! I am trying to work!)

Gotta love a good micro-manager.

I still have yet to (knowingly) talk to you over the radio. Are you usually working the sector with the Hyper arrival, or is it usually a bit lower than that?

 

[boondr]

Gotta love a good micro-manager.

I still have yet to (knowingly) talk to you over the radio. Are you usually working the sector with the Hyper arrival, or is it usually a bit lower than that?

The IAD arrivals rarely talk to us unless they come in from the ENO/SIE direction or NY Center shortcuts them late at night from the NE over the EMI area. We talk to a lot of the IAD departures to the North and NW above 10. The Dulles area(SHD) are the ones you guys complain about. If you are talking to a controller that works "outside the box" it is probably us.

 

[Screaming_Emu]

The IAD arrivals rarely talk to us unless they come in from the ENO/SIE direction or NY Center shortcuts them late at night from the NE over the EMI area. We talk to a lot of the IAD departures to the North and NW above 10. The Dulles area(SHD) are the ones you guys complain about. If you are talking to a controller that works "outside the box" it is probably us.

I've never had a problem with any of the Potomac controllers. Even when I was one of the people annoying the hell out of you guys in a Katana. The worst I've gotten is "umm...is there an instructor on board?" when I was instructing out of BWI. I like flying out of IAD, very predictable. 95% of the time you know exactly what to expect. ATL was obnoxious. Sometimes they wanted the speeds on the arrival, sometimes they didn't. When you asked they'd get all butt hurt like you should know better.

The only thing I hate is that ridiculously long downwind at 250kts or slower. Especially on go home day it seems to take forever.

 

[Hacker15e]

There's a phrase for that: "STANDBY"

Yup...and ATC should default to "standing by" instead of wasting both of our time by asking.

 

[BobDDuck]

I don't think I've EVER had ATC ask me a bunch of stuff right away when I've declared before. I've never had a "we need to land right the heck now" sort of emergency, but several have been urgent and they've always been exceedingly helpful and waited until I had a moment to request specific info.

I did have an FO flip out that we declared after we lost 1 of our 3 hydraulic systems (the one that provides 1/2 of the brakes) because he didn't want to have to do all that paperwork when we landed and it was going to make us late for the overnight. Ummm... sure.

 

[MikeD]

i had NY approach specify pounds when they asked

Generally, ARTCC will want to know time-wise, so they know what they have to work with. ATC cares about the time factor, whereas ARFF cares more about the quantity.

In lieu of ATC specifying quantity, it should be given in time.

Fuel Remaining: A phrase used by either pilots or controllers when relating to the fuel remaining on board until actual fuel exhaustion. When transmitting such information in response to either a controller question or pilot initiated cautionary advisory to air traffic control, pilots will state the approximate number of minutes the flight can continue with the fuel remaining. All reserve fuel should be included in the time stated, as should an allowance for established fuel gauge system error.