declaring an emergency

[avbug]

I was kind of hoping you'd respond...thanks.

 

[Diesel]

I've held off on posting partly because reading avbug's life story is so interesting. I look back and remembered I used to be that guy. I used to be that guy kicking arse and taking names. If it was flying float planes or king air's into 1500 ft dirt strips. I was avbug. Then my world changed. The golden bullet finally got me.

In the middle of a cold winter night my boss was killed and that's when I realized I was on the ragged edge. I needed to close that chapter in my life.

I don't think you can seperate flying like avbug and then putting on a different hat and flying 121, 135, or 91. You either are that risk taker hanging it all out or your not. When the shizle hits the fan your going back to your old way of doing things. It's a life changing decision!

I went to where I work today and I had the biggest shock of my life. Checklists and discipline where now the rule not the exception. Training, CRM, and SOP's they were now my life. I was no longer thinking how is this going to affect tomorrow's flight. How can I limp this plane back home? Not anymore. It's broke it's broke.

And then one day it happened. Climbing out I hit a goose solid IFR at 200kts right through the engine. First words out of my mouth was we're declaring an emergency. Because now anything where I have to pull an emergency checklist or might affect my completing this flight safely is an emergency.

It is better to err on the side of safety and declaring an emergency than to be put number 2 behind a 150 on final just so you don't have to say those few words.

Besides I think they like driving the fire trucks around the airports.

 

[avbug]

They do like driving the trucks at the airports.

However, whatever image you might have of who you think I might be, you are mistaken; nothing I do is less than professional. I don't take chances; I don't act rashly; I don't go play cowboy, and I don't divide my flying one from the other. I approach every action deliberately and with care.

The golden whatever...the list of co-workers, friends, and associates I've known over the years who have been injured and killed is long. I have loaded a friend in an airplane and watched it burn a few minutes later. I've watched one with whom I closely worked fly through multiple powerlines ahead of me. I've dreampt of a friend and awakened to learn of his death that very night, in an airplane. No golden whatevers. That's reality. Airplanes and helicopters and flying machines are just that...machines.

In a potential "emergency," I don't grab the microphone first. I fly the airplane. That's not preference, nor technique; it's the only professional course of action. Fly first, talk later.

I calculate performance. I check weather. I check notams. I file. I strive for precision. No rolling through life with my hair on fire. I didn't do that when I was eighteen, and I don't do it now, either. I don't "kick arse." I don't "take names." I don't fly King Air's off 1,500' dirt strips. I fly plain jane every day airplanes and am fortunate to be paid to do it.

I hit a goose too...or an owl, or who knows what. Last year, late at night, above 10,000, while slowing to 250 outside Las Vegas. It smashed the radome, and made quite a racket. It went up and over the forward copilot windscreen. No golden whatever there, either. And no, I didn't declare an emergency. Didn't even know what had happened (only that something had) until I looked at it on the ground, and didn't realize the real damage until I returned the next day. There was no emergency to "declare."

I've never submitted that requesting priority is out of line; if you need it, don't ask for it, take it. You have that right. Advise ATC of your intentions.

What I have stipulated is that many pilots feel that a formal "declaration" is the holy frisbee, the great ushering of power and grace that some how changes something. It doesn't. And it isn't necessary to get help. Fly the airplane, and when able, state the problem and intentions. If calling it an emergency is the bees knees, then have at it.

 

[wiggsfly]

I've done it twice. Last April I lost an engine in a skyhawk when the crankshaft seal blew out. That was fun between the smoke, the windshield covered in oil, and a sudden brake in the clouds I had really thought I was on fire. There ain't nothin like a deadstick landing with no windshield.

The first time I was on my instrument checkride. We had takes off and I was puutting on the foggles when we blew a mag (literally came right off the engine). In that case the examiner handled everything and we made it back to the airport without much problem.

 

[Diesel]

No golden whatever there, either. And no, I didn't declare an emergency. Didn't even know what had happened (only that something had) until I looked at it on the ground, and didn't realize the real damage until I returned the next day. There was no emergency to "declare."

First of all that's a great postflight.

I'm not comparing a some thump in the night. I'm comparing a goose through the engine which shut it down.

 

[Clyde]

I was just wondering from some more experienced pilots--what are some real-life situations where you would declare an emergency. Loss of engine when in a twin. How about vacuum system failure in IMC? Thanks for the imput.

In a nutshell, anytime you feel the safety of the flight is in question and your flight needs priority.

A few years ago I declared an emergency after losing (not flaming out) an engine on a Falcon 20 during a climb during the day. Declared an emergency for two reasons: 1: I had no idea what caused it and knew I had to divert, and 2: I would be unable to comply with ATC instructions and thus risk an FAR violation.

Remember, declaring an emergency allows you to deviate to the extent required to meet the emergency, and thus may help prevent some type of certificate action by the FAA.

 

[dash8driver]

true.. declaring doesnt give you carte blanche.. but let me break it down.

declaring: lets you deviate to the extent required to land safely

not-declaring: does not let you deviate from the FARs

end result.. while you can still be violated for something after you declare.. that not a valid argument for not declaring because what ever got you violated after you declared, would also get you violated if you didnt declare.

declare if you feel the safety of flight is compromised or if you think the monday morning qb's will think it was. delcare if you need special assistance or priority handling. declare if its one of the items your ops manual says you must declare for.

bottom line... be safe.

 

[avbug]

First of all that's a great postflight.

Yes, it was a great postflight. The radome was intact, but smashed. Delaminated throughout, it was ruined. At night, it was very difficult to detect. During a thorough daylight inspection, which I helped conduct in the morning, the damage was evident. I grounded the airplane that night, pending further inspection, and the inspection was conducted in daylight. The postflight inspection was VERY thorough.

As one who has made a living for many years working on and inspecting airframes, appliances, engines, propellers, etc, I can assure you, it was very thorough. But thanks for your concern.

declaring: lets you deviate to the extent required to land safely

not-declaring: does not let you deviate from the FARs

You sure about that, Dash8Driver? Sure?

Wrongo!

But then that's been a large part of my point, all along. You have full authority to deviate from any regulation necessary to the extent necessary to meet the needs of an inflight emergency and to attend to the safety of the flight, period.

There is no requirement to declare anything to exercise that authority. There never has been. Ever. I very much doubt there ever will be. A wives tale of sorts exists to the contrary, as you have just demonstrated.

You can, and should, and are expected to do whatever is required to meet the nature of your emergency, period. End of story.

As always, and again, you're free to use the "e" word if it makes you feel better.

I'm not comparing a some thump in the night. I'm comparing a goose through the engine which shut it down.

Loud bang, shattered radome, shut down engine, whatever. Who cares? You did what you felt was appropriate given the circumstances, as did I. In other words, nothing more than our jobs. You do what you must. In 2000, I had five engine failures in four months...not one of which resulted in a condition that warranted declaring an emergency. The individual situations could have warranted it had the circumstances been different, but they didn't. No golden bullets or bb's, or frisbees, or whatever that melodramatic golden doohickey is that has apparently helped you see the light (whatever).

Had circumstances warranted making a formal declaration of some kind on the radio, and in several of those circumstances had there been someone around to hear it or who would have cared, certainly I would have considered it. As it was, there wasn't, and I didn't. More aptly, I made the right decision given the circumstances that prevailed at that moment in time.

What you might have done under those circumstances may be entirely different...but is also entirely irrelevant, as you were not there. I was.

Each person makes the appropriate decision in real time.

Back to the original point, however, again...a formal declaration of an emergency by a pilot is not necessary to receive priority, and never has been. Further, ATC may require a report where priority is given...even though you never "declared" anything. The controller may give you priority without your asking. You may declare an emergency. You may identify your condition and state your actions. A number of scenarios, almost infinite to be sure, may occur wherein priority is given. No matter how you slice it; priority is priority. You don't get any more priority when you "declare." You don't get any more anything...it's still just priority.

Further, you aren't insulated from enforcement action if you "declare." If you cause the "emergency," you're still liable, and a formal pronouncement that it's an "emergency" doesn't alleviate you of the responsibility, nor insulate you from the consequences of your action.

Conversely, simply because you fail to "declare" an emergency, you have a full legal right, and responsibility, to exercise your authority as Pilot in Command, to deal with that emergency. You aren't protected, and you aren't liable, based on the grounds of any formal pronouncement of the "e" word. It just 'taint so.

 

[dash8driver]

You sure about that, Dash8Driver? Sure?

hahahah.. ok there stud..

yea, declaring is not technically necessary. but if you dont understand the benefits of declaring then not even your studliness will help you.

as for that being a part of your point previously, i dont see it. i see your point being that you dont feel that pax, fires or engines are worth of the e-word. that you dont declare because you dont have to, not because its a good idea or not.

 

[JAFI]

There are two parts of this issue I would like to comment on.


1. You use the word "emergency" when you determine it is an emergency and to ask for assistance from ATC and any one on the same radio freq. ( you may be asked to write a letter to the ATC facility)

2. You do what you have to do to meet the emergency (FAR 91.3 and 125/135/121 equilivants). As other actions in life, you may be called to explain your actions to the proper authority.

Always err to the safety side.

My 2 cents.

JAFI

 

[Rolling-Thunder]

Avbug; well said !

Completely understand your reasoning on the declaring an emergency vs. dealing with the situation issue.

I have been doing fire/rescue/ems for 25 years, and always get a chuckle at the scene of a working fire.

You can always tell the rookies from the seasoned guys, as the rookies will be running around in panic mode.

 

[Sctt@NJA]

Rolling Thunder

No one is saying not to fly the airplane and deal with the situation first and always.

Declaring an emercency is not being in "panic mode".

When you aren't 50 feet agl in the middle of nowhere chances are there will be time and at least some benefit derived from declaring. End of story.

 

[Rolling-Thunder]

You mis-interpretted what I posted.

My first comment applies to what AVbug posted about emergencies.

My last two comments were relating to Avbugs comments about firefighting on the ground.


Having said that, everything Avbug said about dealing with in-flight situations makes perfect sense to me.

 

[Sctt@NJA]

Back to the original point, however, again...a formal declaration of an emergency by a pilot is not necessary to receive priority, and never has been.

I am not worried about Avbug, he can take care of himself. But I worry about what kind of influence this kind of advice has on a low time pilot.

What he says is true. But if you are in a situation where you need priority handling (don't want to be stuck #2 behind that c-150), the easiest, clearest way to assure that handling is to declare.

Frankly what I am worried about is that an impressionable pilot may come away from listening to Avbug and figure that declaring is for wimps and a major sign of weakness. And then hesitate to declare if and when appropriate.

 

[JediNein]

Frankly what I am worried about is that an impressionable pilot may come away from listening to Avbug and figure that declaring is for wimps and a major sign of weakness. And then hesitate to declare if and when appropriate.

Which is why I posted.

The most paperwork required for any emergency was proving currency for myself and the airplane, and the mechanic's report on what was repaired. I filled out a NASA report because I thought it was a good idea.

In those emergencies where every decision was reviewed by the FAA, it was done verbally. I am still amazed at how many and by how much regulations in part 91 can be broken to meet the emergency. I am still amazed at how many regulations needed to be bent and broken to meet one particular emergency.

Fly SAFE!
Jedi Nein

 

[flyifrvfr]

Actually AVBUG, the points and questions that I have brought up are not only valid, but the response you give is not only garbage, but unsafe as well. I read the entire thread on this issue and I can say with glee that this is poetic justice at its best. In more than one post, you have tried to make me look like I don't know what I'am talking about.

In a post on page six I believe, you tell a member that you would like to meet him at the flag pole and kick his butt. I think this thread, your responses, and attitude reduces your credibility. I hope that pilots who read your posts take each one with a grain of salt. I also would like the moderators to know that I'am not personally attacking you. I was, however, patiently waiting for you to open yourself up to the kind of treatment you have given me.

 

[Flibmeister]

Which is why I posted.

In the situation I described, you do have a minimum fuel situation.

Jedi Nein

No, you don't. You have a situation which requires you to reevaluate your options, in exactly the same manner you would if you ran into higher-than-expected headwinds.


If I were the controller involved in your scenario, and you invoked that "minimum fuel" argument in response to a rerouting you didn't like, I'd simply chuckle and reiterate that the new routing is your new clearance. There's nothing that says I have to give you what you want just because you use the "E" word-- it just gives you the option to not do what I want.

So, you would then have two options:

One, you can reevaluate the situation and choose a more reasonable course of action, such as requesting clearance to your new fuel stop.

Two, you can invoke your PIC emergency authority, operate contrary to the new ATC clearance, and begin preparations to defend your decision to the feds that will be investigating it.

If you honestly think they're gonna see it your way, hey, go for it. You can always find a new career.

 

[Sctt@NJA]

I've had critical patients on board when flying ambulance, many times. Knowing that use of the term "lifegaurd" will already grant priority, using the magic "e" word seems superfluous. Priority is priority, and you don't get more simply because you use the "e" word.

Priority is not priority. I have flown life gaurd flights too. Most of the time atc clears a path for you, sometimes they don't. I used to do a bunch of organ bank flights. Some of the organs have a longer shelf life than others. Some flights were not time critical, some were.

If I had a heart onboard thats only good for 4 hours from the time it was harvested and I started getting vectors around Boston or NY airspace I would tell ATC about that heart and how long it had before it was mush. They already knew about our life gaurd status but the level of priority went way up and the vectors turned into direct.

This probably goes hand in hand with your idea of simply informing atc of the situation without having to use the "e" word. But it does illustrate just the little point of not all priority handling being created equal.

Jedinein, sorry dude but don't take my posts as support for your ideas. That whole 4hrs 20mins fuel being a min fuel situation is just dumb.

 

[A Squared]

In the situation I described, you do have a minimum fuel situation.

No you don't. You obviously didn't read the NTSB decision I posted. I didn't post it because I have some fetish for posting irrelevant links. I posted it because it had the court transcript of the hearing of a pilot who had his certificate *revoked* (not suspended) for doing what you suggest.

 

[avbug]

Frankly what I am worried about is that an impressionable pilot may come away from listening to Avbug and figure that declaring is for wimps and a major sign of weakness. And then hesitate to declare if and when appropriate.

At no time have I suggested anything else. I have always stated that if one should do whatever one feels one must do to meet the demands of the situation. That may involve feathering a propeller. It may involve making an immediate descent. It may involve shutting down an engine, isolating a bus, restraining a passenger, carrying extra speed, slowing down considerably, and yes, formally stating that one has an emergency.

My point and my comments have always been exact, and consistent on this topic. Do what you must do, period.

State your case, and your intentions.

How you choose to do that, is up to you. Fly the airplane. State your intentions, and then act. There is no arguing with that. None. It's dirt-basic. And it leaves no room for contention. Fly the airplane. Take action. Period.

If making a formal declaration is part of your action, then take it. There's no anatomy measuring to be done, here. If you want to count dead friends on one hand, and inflight emergencies on the other, there's a very good chance that most posters here still wouldn't add up to what I can list. So what? This topic has nothing to do with who has had the scariest ride, or who can tell the best story, or who is afraid to "declare" to avoid not being macho enough. Not at all. No hair on fire, no golden bb's. That's all crap.

Do what you must to meet the demands of the situation, bar nothing. Period.

But understand that you don't need to formally "declare" in order to get the priority handling you desire, or need. I have never stated that it is wrong to do so.

In more than one post, you have tried to make me look like I don't know what I'am talking about.

No great challenge there, mate. I merely quoted you.

 

[JediNein]

No you don't. You obviously didn't read the NTSB decision I posted. I didn't post it because I have some fetish for posting irrelevant links. I posted it because it had the court transcript of the hearing of a pilot who had his certificate *revoked* (not suspended) for doing what you suggest.

Nor did you read my post. It was changed a long time before your response, unfortunately at the same time Flibmeister responded.

My original post stated "the pilot in the case you cited did not have a minimum fuel situation." The rest was deleted.

Fly SAFE!
Jedi Nein

 

[flyifrvfr]

No great challenge there, mate. I merely quoted you.[/QUOTE]
Again AVBUG, point out for me where I have said something that was wrong, unsafe, and otherwise ridiculous. You can't, and that is why you try to come back with smart remarks that are also wrong. You are on a sinking ship and to continue to try to make me look bad, makes you look worse. I asked you some valid questions that you wont answer. Is a passenger who is having a heart attack a mountain or a molehill. I, and every other rational thinking person on this board await your reply to the question.

 

[avbug]

Sinking ship?

No, not really. It' all about you. A desire to "get" you. Grind you into tiny little pieces and feed you to parakeets so that you vanish without a trace. Hurt you by degrees, until at last your mind crumbles. More than a desire. A dream, really. I can't explain it. I woke up one morning and thought to myself, "Self, what a beautiful morning! The sun is bright, the grass is green, I feel rested and alive. Today, I believe I'll do everything in my power to ruin flyingifrvr."

That's what I said. And now my evil plan is at work, slowly picking you apart. Can you feel it?

Grow up.


Ahh, gotta edit. You did insist on asking again, a question I already answered, weather a person experiencing a "heart attack" is a mountain, or a mole hill. Neither, really. It's a person having a heart attack. But I'm sure you knew that.

Just like the drooling fools that panic at the sight of a fire, most folks fall apart when they see a teaspoon of blood, or a medical problem such as a cardiac arrest.

Truth be told, very few who experience a cardiac arrest will survive, depending on the nature of the arrest, weather it's a shockable rythym, etc. CPR is nearly, but not quite futile. Chances are that the cardiac victim is already circling the drain. Perhaps that might inspire you to break you neck trying to be the hero you watch on ER...but you're wasting your time. If the person is indeed having a cardiac arrest, and even if that person is shockable, if they don't get shocked on the airplane, the chances are slim...great high pronounciation of the e word or no.

Mountain? Molehill? Neither at all. A person with a problem, to which you may be able to provide some very limited assistance. The FA has a chance of doing something for the patient with an AED; you don't. If no AED is available, the patient might make it, might not; that's not the least concern of yours. Your mission is to fly safely and land. Advise ATC that you have a patient with chest pain, or that has collapsed, or whatever the case may be. Advise ATC you'll be landing xxx direct, and request a truck and an ambulance standing by. Wasn't that a challenge?

Before you get all boundup in hero-itis, remember something that a professional should remember; you didn't create the emergency, you didn't create the problem, you didn't make the challenge. You're only contributing what you can to the matter.

This thread has gone on for two years now, and referring back throughout this lengthy thread, I've stated over and over and over, do whatever is necessary to handle an emergency. An irrifutable truism to which you can take no exception. My statements have been correct, every one, and true. All have been consistant, accurate, and right. Contrary to your cockeyed view of things, most folks who have responded herein have recognized that fact and contributed to the thread, rather than arguing with reason and fact. Just you, and that goofy clown pilot character, and a few others. Doesn't speak highly for your efforts; drop it already. Have you a point to prove, or are you merely insecure? Enough is enough.

 

[Dumbledore]

(4) two flaps-up landings, ...

Let ME get this straight - YOU declared an emergency because you made a no-flap landing?!? That's a required maneuver to get a type rating, of which I have several. I have never "declared" an emergency in the sim for my no-flappers, nor have I ever been advised by the examiner that I should have. What's so tricky about it other than a short runway? Perhaps there was a better option with a longer runway that wouldn't have made it an emergency?

 

[minitour]

Let ME get this straight - YOU declared an emergency because you made a no-flap landing?!? That's a required maneuver to get a type rating, of which I have several. I have never "declared" an emergency in the sim for my no-flappers, nor have I ever been advised by the examiner that I should have. What's so tricky about it other than a short runway? Perhaps there was a better option with a longer runway that wouldn't have made it an emergency?

Emergency? No...not for flaps up...

Maybe let Tower know you might need the full length and if they ask, tell them why. But to declare an emergency for something required by the type rating (not to mention its in the PPL PTS) is kinda rediculous.

Flibmeister:
Well said Re: the "minimum fuel" thing.

Quite simply if you can't make it with the required reserve under the regs, just tell ATC "unable". I'm sure they'll ask why and you can tell them.

Perhaps they can clear you along your original route....or perhaps they'll just tell you to pick someplace to get gas.

Either way, if you have to declare an emergency right after you blast off due to minimum fuel, I would assume the controller might be marking the tape and you could have some paperwork to do once you get to wherever you're going....

Why not just take enough gas in the first place? Or at least know where (along a different route) you could go to get gas if you need it....seems pretty simple..

JMHO

-mini

PS
Thats not saying that if you have a real minimum fuel situation, you shouldn't tell ATC....maybe you got vectored all the way out to nowhere along your route and now you can't make it...so you tell them "hey we need ___ minimum fuel ___ left" I'm sure they'd be more than happy to help...

Okay I'm done...

 

[350DRIVER]

avbug, right on the money as always.


well stated.

3 5 0

 

[FracCapt]

Let ME get this straight - YOU declared an emergency because you made a no-flap landing?!? That's a required maneuver to get a type rating, of which I have several. I have never "declared" an emergency in the sim for my no-flappers, nor have I ever been advised by the examiner that I should have. What's so tricky about it other than a short runway? Perhaps there was a better option with a longer runway that wouldn't have made it an emergency?

First of all, unless you're familiar with his company GOM/FOM, you shouldn't assume that it doesn't state that they are required to declare for certain things. Would I declare for a no flap landing in the airplane I currently fly? Nope...I've had to make a couple, but just notified the tower we wouldn't be able to exit the runway quickly...but I have seen a Lufthansa B744 declare at LAX because they were landing no flaps/slats. Good thing they did...one of their brakes reportedly caught fire, but was quickly extinguished because there was a truck there within 30 seconds of when they stopped.

I think that some people are terrified of declaring. I'm not. I've done it a few times...engine failures, precautionary shutdown, engine fire, and primary hydraulic failure. It's not a big deal...and if it makes somebody feel better to declare for something that's way out of the ordinary, so be it. Deal with it.

But to declare an emergency for something required by the type rating (not to mention its in the PPL PTS) is kinda rediculous.

Simulated engine outs are required by the PPL PTS....so does that mean you won't declare an emergency if your engine quits?

Unless you're intimitely familiar with the aircraft that somebody else flies, I don't think you should be casting stones when they decide they need to declare for something. In some airplane, the approach and Vref speeds are 50 knots(or more) higher with no flaps...and the brakes aren't designed to handle that...so they could easily catch fire. Do you think a fire you believe will happen after landing is enough reason to declare an emergency? Hmmmm?

 

[501261]

Emergency? No...not for flaps up...

Maybe let Tower know you might need the full length and if they ask, tell them why. But to declare an emergency for something required by the type rating (not to mention its in the PPL PTS) is kinda rediculous.

That's idiotic, to simply state that! Why did the flaps die? In a lot of airplanes if you have no flaps, you have no hydraulics, no hydraulics, no normal gear extension, or normal brakes etc. How about airplanes with electrical flaps? What caused the flaps to die?

Ya, a no flap landing is something that MIGHT be considered an emergency.

 

[minitour]

That's idiotic, to simply state that! Why did the flaps die? In a lot of airplanes if you have no flaps, you have no hydraulics, no hydraulics, no normal gear extension, or normal brakes etc. How about airplanes with electrical flaps? What caused the flaps to die?

Ya, a no flap landing is something that MIGHT be considered an emergency.

So you manually put the gear down and roll to the end...keep the power high enough to keep you from stalling but low enough that you can kill it ASAP...

I'll give you "abnormal" but not emergency.

On the PPL ride they have you do a no flap landing for a simulated electrical failure...hell even on the ATP ride they're supposed to fail everything (flaps/gear extension/etc) at once. Is that an emergency? Not really...but definately Abnormal...

Is it something I'd want tower/ATC (so they don't sequence you behind something big and slow) to be aware of? Most surely!

Is it something I'd drop the "E" for? Not likely...

-mini

*edit*
FracCap:
I will agree that if it makes you feel better/safer to declare then by all means do so...and if its in your Company book then yep...its not worth losing a job over three words...and you're right...there's nothing really "wrong" with declaring if you need to...but I've heard lots and lots of talk about people landing no flaps and it didn't seem to be an issue...

*double edit*
Nah...you guys are right...and I'm not being sarcastic.

If I was in that situation (flying a 74) and had no flaps (trailing or leading) I'd be declaring too...and it really wouldn't matter if I had 2 or 3 miles of pavement...I'd want the trucks rolling and I'd want priority...

I guess the reality is it is a case-by-case basis...

Just like some people consider radio failure an emergency, some don't (even in IMC)...it just depends on what YOU feel at the time is worthy of being considered an emergency...

Great points on the no flap thing...I was wrong.

 

[Flyin Tony]

I ran out of gas 2 times. Thank god that the plane has 4 tanks. I just switch to a full one and kept going