Interesting tidbit

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
BruceK said:
As a layman, I1d have thought that calling Mayday, as I understand it the ultimate distress call, would be "a big deal". Perhaps I should read it another way, and it`s just the aftermath,that is not "a big deal".
Contrast a current inquiry into a Saab340 passenger plane which had a propeller detach mid flight from one of its 2 engines as the crew were in the process of closing the engine down due to severe vibration caused by the prop coming loose. The crew called a PAN PAN and continued on route 100km to Sydney,landing successfully. On landing it was found the departing propeller had not caused any aircraft damage in the process.
The crew have been greatly praised,and as far as I`m aware,not criticized for their choice of distress call.
I hope not, but one day I might have to consider an emergency call from my boat. The discussion is interesting as to what call, if I decided to make one, would be made.
Click to expand...

You are getting into the semantics and adding a little emotion. Yes MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY of an airplane on fire unable to hold altitude is a big deal. But a controller forcing your hand into an emergency fuel situation is less of a deal...which is what it sounds like happened here. And a propellor departing a SF340 would absolutely positively be considered an EMERGENCY!!!! Now while declaring an emergency in an airplane that is still in controlled flight is not necessarily the same is yelling out MAYDAY three times....but it means the same thing.

How would it go in the states in this same SF340 situation???....:

"(ATC) Center, this is TWA 1234 we have lost a propeller on one engine. We have shut that engine down. We are declaring an emergency."

Notice the word MAYDAY is never spoken. MAYDAY or PAN PAN is used to get the attention of the provider on that frequency. So if you are already talking to them, it most likely will not be necessary. Now if you are flying along in a single engine airplane and the engine quits and you are not talking to anyone, then MAYDAY is necessary to get the attention of whoever is the "owner" of that frequency in hopes of getting some assistance or at least no where to go looking for you after you crash.

A PAN PAN can still be an emergency. I think that is where the semantics comes in...and how the article was written or reported. ANd also the slang/semantics as it relates to Australia. I seriously doubt this aircraft ever said the word MAYDAY...but the Aussie controllers labelled it as a "MAYDAY". In the US we would have just called it an emergency aircraft. And I don't think we would have shut down the city for it either but I do not know that for sure.

PS....in our checklists, the serious malfunctions will almost always say "Land at the nearest SUITABLE airport.". I put "suitable" in bold because it is up for interpretation. But if your SF340 pilots passed over a suitable airport and "continued on" to SYD, they could get into a heap of trouble. At the very least they would be asked to explain the basis of their decision. But 100km is not that far in an airplane. A good example as it relates to my operation:

If I were coming in from the west coast into Houston and lost an engine 100 miles west of Austin, if I overflew Austin and continued to Houston, I am willing to bet I would be asked to explain that decision. And if I didn't have a good explanation, then the FAA could escalate it to enforcement action.
 
Last edited:
Baker said:
You are getting into the semantics and adding a little emotion. Yes MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY of an airplane on fire unable to hold altitude is a big deal. But a controller forcing your hand into an emergency fuel situation is less of a deal...which is what it sounds like happened here. And a propellor departing a SF340 would absolutely positively be considered an EMERGENCY!!!! Now while declaring an emergency in an airplane that is still in controlled flight is not necessarily the same is yelling out MAYDAY three times....but it means the same thing.

How would it go in the states in this same SF340 situation???....:

"(ATC) Center, this is TWA 1234 we have lost a propeller on one engine. We have shut that engine down. We are declaring an emergency."

Notice the word MAYDAY is never spoken. MAYDAY or PAN PAN is used to get the attention of the provider on that frequency. So if you are already talking to them, it most likely will not be necessary. Now if you are flying along in a single engine airplane and the engine quits and you are not talking to anyone, then MAYDAY is necessary to get the attention of whoever is the "owner" of that frequency in hopes of getting some assistance or at least no where to go looking for you after you crash.

A PAN PAN can still be an emergency. I think that is where the semantics comes in...and how the article was written or reported. ANd also the slang/semantics as it relates to Australia. I seriously doubt this aircraft ever said the word MAYDAY...but the Aussie controllers labelled it as a "MAYDAY". In the US we would have just called it an emergency aircraft. And I don't think we would have shut down the city for it either but I do not know that for sure.

PS....in our checklists, the serious malfunctions will almost always say "Land at the nearest SUITABLE airport.". I put "suitable" in bold because it is up for interpretation. But if your SF340 pilots passed over a suitable airport and "continued on" to SYD, they could get into a heap of trouble. At the very least they would be asked to explain the basis of their decision. But 100km is not that far in an airplane. A good example as it relates to my operation:

If I were coming in from the west coast into Houston and lost an engine 100 miles west of Austin, if I overflew Austin and continued to Houston, I am willing to bet I would be asked to explain that decision. And if I didn't have a good explanation, then the FAA could escalate it to enforcement action.
Click to expand...

Excellent post! As a former ATC and FAA pilot, I wouldn't change a word...although I might change the spelling of "propellor". :hide:

I twice declared an emergency as a pilot and never had to file any paperwork. It really wasn't a big deal as it was justified and precautionary in nature. Once was an unsafe landing gear indication that resulted in a dead stick landing (My Uncle and Godfather's favorite Cessna 210! :facepalm:) and another was an engine failure on approach in a Lear 60, which is almost a non-event. Both ended with a happy ending. :D

As an Air Traffic Controller, I declared emergencies several times for small General Aviation pilots who were too overwhelmed to do it for themselves. Some were Min Fuel, some were landing gear, all were out of an abundance of caution.

In my experience, it's never a problem declaring an emergency on either side of the equation. The only negative possibility is NOT to declare if you think you need (or might soon need) the assistance. Out of an abundance of caution, I would always recommend alerting the authorities of a potential problem before it becomes a larger issue for you.
 
Interesting posts, very informative, thank you.
Sydney Airport must deal successfully with aircraft in need of special accommodation. If not there would be more media reports of emergencies or worse still, aircraft falling out of the sky. That doesn`t happen, the system must work.
The complicating feature of Sydney Airport is location. Pacific Ocean one side,housing everywhere else, except for the massive Kurnell fuel storage and (? ex) refinery nearby. As a result, there is a curfew from 11pm-6am by virtue of the Sydney Airport Curfew Act 1995 (Federal Legislation). Exceptions exist for certain specified low noise aircraft. An over water approach is quieter for residents, but weather won`t always allow that.
I suspect there is sensitivity about potential to game the legislated curfew. Residents are only too aware of landings during curfew. The Airport should obey the law, just as it should grant exceptions for genuine need. Information of contravention reaching the public sector is rare, which I expect is why this event received publicity, but I`m aware that not long ago an airline was fined for landing after 11pm when refused permission and directed to divert.
 
Curfews are not all that uncommon. There are some in the states...Orange County likely the most restrictive. I just flew in and out of Toronto...the same 2300-0600 curfew there. It is more common on other countries because we value our freedom a bit more over here....;) :angel: And have the attitude of, if you don't like the noise, don't move next to the damn airport. Of course, Orange County is in the Socialist Republic of California so that is why it goes over there...:)
 
FlyWright said:
I was asked about fuel efficiency by a fellow pilot just before I retired 6 years ago so I did a calculation using the Learjet 60 and my 34 Californian LRC numbers. Both came out to about 2.2 NM/USG...but the boat is a whole lot more fun when the engines are shut down.
Click to expand...

I don’t know Al. I think it depends on where you shut down the Lear’s engines. I bet it’s a lot of fun to shut them down at about a thousand feet AGL. That’ll pucker your butt.
 
Baker said:
Curfews are not all that uncommon. There are some in the states...Orange County likely the most restrictive. I just flew in and out of Toronto...the same 2300-0600 curfew there. It is more common on other countries because we value our freedom a bit more over here....;) :angel: And have the attitude of, if you don't like the noise, don't move next to the damn airport. Of course, Orange County is in the Socialist Republic of California so that is why it goes over there...:)
Click to expand...
The surprise about the Sydney curfew is it comes not from airport rules, regulations, or anything easily changed, but by Act of Parliament which requires amending legislation for change.
Victoria State`s Melbourne Tullamarine Airport, out of town, runs 24hrs. Because of the State Govt in power, some call Melbourne "Moscow on the Yarra" (The Yarra is a muddy stream which runs through Melbourne, claimed to be a river, the Govt I`d best not say).
 
BruceK said:
Interesting posts, very informative, thank you.
Sydney Airport must deal successfully with aircraft in need of special accommodation. If not there would be more media reports of emergencies or worse still, aircraft falling out of the sky. That doesn`t happen, the system must work.
The complicating feature of Sydney Airport is location. Pacific Ocean one side,housing everywhere else, except for the massive Kurnell fuel storage and (? ex) refinery nearby. As a result, there is a curfew from 11pm-6am by virtue of the Sydney Airport Curfew Act 1995 (Federal Legislation). Exceptions exist for certain specified low noise aircraft. An over water approach is quieter for residents, but weather won`t always allow that.
I suspect there is sensitivity about potential to game the legislated curfew. Residents are only too aware of landings during curfew. The Airport should obey the law, just as it should grant exceptions for genuine need. Information of contravention reaching the public sector is rare, which I expect is why this event received publicity, but I`m aware that not long ago an airline was fined for landing after 11pm when refused permission and directed to divert.
Click to expand...



I’m wondering here if there is a controller in the tower during the hours Sydney airport is under curfew? I would think not although the area center and approach controllers likely are working. So do they leave the runway and approach lights on?

I did note in reading the news release that the landing time for the aircraft in question was 0630. So I don’t think he was trying to bust curfew. Likely just ensuring he didn’t get stuck in an early morning traffic hold and needed to inform controllers he might need to jump the line in that case.
 
San Diego Lindbergh Tower had (has?) a night curfew but manned the tower 24/7 for emergency and exempted aircraft such as law enforcement ops.

HopCar said:
I don’t know Al. I think it depends on where you shut down the Lear’s engines. I bet it’s a lot of fun to shut them down at about a thousand feet AGL. That’ll pucker your butt.
Click to expand...

During my annual simulator sessions, I used to request a no-notice deadstick landing exercise to practice a no-engine landing from 3000 ft near an airport. That was long before Sully taught us that we could land on the water!

It's a challenge but I always made the airport.
 
Last edited:
I think Sydney is staffed 24/7. Specified "quiet" aircraft can use it outside the 11pm-6am curfew so it has to be, and I think it would be anyway, for safety and emergency purposes, like air ambulances,and the Royal Flying Doctor Service(RFDS).
We are getting a second international/domestic Sydney airport about 80km west of Sydney, won`t be finished for some years yet. Supposed not to have a curfew, but local residents think otherwise.
 
FlyWright said:
During my annual simulator sessions, I used to request a no-notice deadstick landing exercise to practice a no-engine landing from 3000 ft near an airport.
Click to expand...

Did that once..... ANC from 6000 in a 737.....Worked out. Did you know you can slip one of those?
 
tiltrider1 said:
TBO is time between overhaul. Many parts on an aircraft have a fixed number of hours before a mandatory overhaul. If you know the overhaul cost then you know how much money each flight hour costs. Some parts are on condition of meeting a specification, surprisingly these parts are pretty predictable as to when they won’t meet condition, operating environment can have a huge affect on how long they last.

Helicopters are extra special with all the gearboxes, servos and even rotor blades having life limits between 1500 hrs and 2500 hrs for most components. Back in the 90’s it would cost us $250,000 to overhaul a turbomecca engine that would have a TBO of 2500 hours, then you still had the transmission, drive shafts, gearboxes, rotor blades and so on. I believe our TBO cost was close to $500 an hour for a 7pax+pilot Astar.
Click to expand...

I had a friend who was a copter pilot and he described a helicopter as "several thousand unrelated parts flying together in close formation." LOL
 
Baker said:
Curfews are not all that uncommon. There are some in the states...Orange County likely the most restrictive. I just flew in and out of Toronto...the same 2300-0600 curfew there. It is more common on other countries because we value our freedom a bit more over here....;) :angel: And have the attitude of, if you don't like the noise, don't move next to the damn airport. Of course, Orange County is in the Socialist Republic of California so that is why it goes over there...:)
Click to expand...

Don't know much about Orange County and the area around John Wayne Airport (especially west thereof), do ya?
 
John Wayne has the wildest ride on its noise abatement procedure. Here's a video that shows the aggressive angle on the initial climb to altitude, then a reduction of power at a level intermediate altitude until reaching the coastline. It's all about containing the noise footprint.

The best part is from 7:30-10:00. As they reach the coastline, you'll hear them power up and, as the speed increases, the flaps retract for a more normal climb.

When done 'properly', you can give the passengers a reduced G experience at the intermediate level off. It can be fun or nauseating....depending on your preference.

 
Last edited:
FlyWright said:
When done 'properly', you can give the passengers a reduced G experience at the intermediate level off.
Click to expand...

When done properly the passengers don't notice a thing, nor do they need to. It's a tight but by no means "abnormal" procedure.
 
oscar said:
Did that once..... ANC from 6000 in a 737.....Worked out. Did you know you can slip one of those?
Click to expand...

We used to slip the LJ-60...even in flight demos. It was quite a hoot.

oscar said:
When done properly the passengers don't notice a thing, nor do they need to. It's a tight but by no means "abnormal" procedure.
Click to expand...

You must have worked for an airline...
 
Last edited:
oscar said:
When done properly the passengers don't notice a thing, nor do they need to. It's a tight but by no means "abnormal" procedure.
Click to expand...

When done properly, you work for a company that has a fleet that is quiet enough not to have to all of that stuff. Yes, the United 737 fleet no longer has to do all of those shennanigans!!! I am pretty sure the Airbus fleet still does. Not sure if SWA still has to do that stuff. THe craziest thing is we bring -800s in there now and we use every inch of that runway. I feel like we are doing a total buzz job when taking off out of there in an -800.
 
Last edited:
Baker said:
THe craziest thing is we bring -800s in there now and we use every inch of that runway. I feel like we are doing a total buzz job when taking off out of there in an -800.
Click to expand...

You're not looking for logic or common sense in this business are you? ;)
 
Uh oh, I’m on the wrong forum.
 
It's amazing how many pilots gravitate to boating and visa versa and how many do both.

As a retired airline guy, the posts by Baker and FlyWright at pretty accurate.

I've declared an emergency many times, and min fuel many times over the year and it's never been an issue, both in the airline business and general aviation. The company reports were dirt simple, and what ever agency wanted a report, was pretty simple, too. Like the fire department wanted a report on why they had to roll the trucks, and often it would be filled out before I signed it.

Not once was there any issue. Now, for me, it there's ANY doubt that the flight can continue safely for any reason, I'll declare. I can always cancel the emergency.

I did that Sydney run out of San Francisco many times. One does have to be careful with fuel on that one because there's not a lot of alternates once you get close.... actually none. So careful fuel monitoring was not just a nice idea, it was mandatory. Fortunately, for me, never had an issue and found the Aussies were great to work with.

Now, in the mentioned flight above, I'd be nervous with flying that light twin from LA to Sydney. They call that an ETOPS operation, "Extended Twin engine Operation Over Sea". It should be Engines Turn Or People Swim.

I much prefer four engines where an engine failure is a minor inconvenience not a catastrophic emergency.
 
Seevee, apart from the A380 and some remaining B747s we see mostly twin engine longhaul planes coming here. Lauda was an early adopter,with a B767(later777) service between Sydney and Vienna. Fastest service to Europe,quick refuel stop, and even faster when Lauda himself was flying the plane.
 
BruceK said:
Seevee, apart from the A380 and some remaining B747s we see mostly twin engine longhaul planes coming here. Lauda was an early adopter,with a B767(later777) service between Sydney and Vienna. Fastest service to Europe,quick refuel stop, and even faster when Lauda himself was flying the plane.
Click to expand...

Bruce,

Ya, times are changing. The old trusty 747 is pretty much retired. She was a great plane, and pretty efficient. Never had to off load pax or cargo to make it and no ETOPS rules. Miss that plane......
 
Seevee said:
Bruce,

Ya, times are changing. The old trusty 747 is pretty much retired. She was a great plane, and pretty efficient. Never had to off load pax or cargo to make it and no ETOPS rules. Miss that plane......
Click to expand...
Qantas still actively flies them while gradually replacing them with 787s. Qantas missed the B777 generation altogether. They now fly the 787 from Perth to London nonstop and I think are planning Sydney - New York, with them or maybe an A350. After a near death financial experience Qantas is again generating strong profits, and dividends.
I can`t/won`t pay for Qantas longhaul,now it`s a 787 or A350 with an Asian carrier. The new planes are good but upstairs on a 747 was so quiet...
 
Seevee said:
It's amazing how many pilots gravitate to boating and visa versa and how many do both.

As a retired airline guy, the posts by Baker and FlyWright at pretty accurate.

I've declared an emergency many times, and min fuel many times over the year and it's never been an issue, both in the airline business and general aviation. The company reports were dirt simple, and what ever agency wanted a report, was pretty simple, too. Like the fire department wanted a report on why they had to roll the trucks, and often it would be filled out before I signed it.

Snip
Click to expand...
In 34 years of airline flying I've declared min fuel one time. Taking off out of PHX (Phoenix) during the summer when the OAT restricted Takeoff weight that limited the amount of fuel we could carry. Aircraft was a Airbus 321 and we knew before takeoff that we would be min fuel. There are no forms to fill out and ATC does not give you priority but the designation of min fuel makes ATC aware that your fuel situation does not allow off course routing or holding. Emergency fuel is a different issue and different rules are followed. I'm glad I never had to go down that path.
 
Good to see you back in these waters, Timjet. I hope this means you're buying another boat.
 
Thanks for the kind words Al. We have no plans for a boat. My wife is not a boater and she was very kind to follow me on our 7 years of power boat ownership. We have a motor home and have been using it pretty much like we used the boat - a lot. She loves it. For me I wouldn't hesitate to consider a boat again but as they say, happy wife happy life.
 
Baker said:
Curfews are not all that uncommon. There are some in the states...Orange County likely the most restrictive. I just flew in and out of Toronto...the same 2300-0600 curfew there. It is more common on other countries because we value our freedom a bit more over here....;) :angel: And have the attitude of, if you don't like the noise, don't move next to the damn airport. Of course, Orange County is in the Socialist Republic of California so that is why it goes over there...:)
Click to expand...
Socialist? Don't like it there? Don't live there just like you can choose not to live near an airport. If California is such a bad place to live, why is is that California continues, as it has for decades, experienced a net in migration? I wouldn't choose to live there but lots of folks seem to like it, more and more every day.
 
psneeld said:
Friends of mine were on duty at USCG AIRSTA Miami listening to the radio traffic between the U2 and air traffic control...they related the story to me the next day...pretty impressive.
Click to expand...

I was an air traffic controller in Kansas, and was monitoring 243.0 when we heard the mayday from a U2 over the Florida Keys. about 3 1/2 hours later, he reported in over Kansas City at 28,000 feet and landed in Kansas City.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

rgano
An old acquaintance going on the block
Replies
3
Views
695
rgano
rgano
Adopo
Supreme Court Upholds Back-Door Denials of Boat Insurance Claims
Replies
6
Views
1K
SteveK
SteveK
guitarjesus
Some Suggestions for Boat Search
Replies
9
Views
447
lwarden
lwarden
RickyD
How many things can go wrong in one day???
Replies
14
Views
2K
Dougcole
Dougcole
Roger Long
Tow Request - What would you do?
2 3 4
Replies
90
Views
7K
rgano
rgano

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom