If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#131
|
|||
|
|||
ATC Handling of Low-Fuel American Flight
Mxsmanic wrote:
I thought simulators didn't count. Why do you think that? |
#132
|
|||
|
|||
ATC Handling of Low-Fuel American Flight
"Sam Spade" wrote in message
... Any action taken by a pilot in command after declaration of an emergency is not subject to modification or second guessing by ATC or anyone else until after the flight is terminated. After that, the conduct of the PIC is fairly open to critique and review and, in some cases, sanctions. But, while the flight is still on-going the PIC is supposed to be given the priority he requests. If that does not work then the PIC should, if necessary, rephrase it as a demand. There is no omnipotence involved. If there was, then the PIC would not be subject to review and possible sanction after the fact. Just for the sake of a slightly expanded discussion: -What happens in your world when there are multiple emergencies but only one runway? -What happens if the closest emergency's problem is one that would make the single runway unusable for longer than the other emergencies can wait? Doesn't happen very often but it *does* happen. BT-DT. As for the incident that prompted this thread, while it sure looks like the controller involved stepped on his dick, considering that "nooze" reports excreted by the "bubble headed bleach blond" seldom, if ever, contain all the facts (if any facts at all) I don't have much faith that I'm getting the whole complete story :-/ |
#133
|
|||
|
|||
ATC Handling of Low-Fuel American Flight
KP wrote:
Just for the sake of a slightly expanded discussion: -What happens in your world when there are multiple emergencies but only one runway? Never happened in my world. -What happens if the closest emergency's problem is one that would make the single runway unusable for longer than the other emergencies can wait? First come, first served. Doesn't happen very often but it *does* happen. BT-DT. It is not pertinent to the type of airport that started this thread. As for the incident that prompted this thread, while it sure looks like the controller involved stepped on his dick, considering that "nooze" reports excreted by the "bubble headed bleach blond" seldom, if ever, contain all the facts (if any facts at all) I don't have much faith that I'm getting the whole complete story :-/ The tape recording and the fact AAL wrote to the FAA is good enough for me. |
#134
|
|||
|
|||
ATC Handling of Low-Fuel American Flight
"Sam Spade" wrote in message
... KP wrote: Just for the sake of a slightly expanded discussion: -What happens in your world when there are multiple emergencies but only one runway? Never happened in my world. And therefore it never has or will? It has happened and when it did someone other than one of several "pilots in command" of the several emergency aircraft made the decision on who's first and who got what. When it happens again, and it will, the decisions will again be made by someone else. Sometimes (not often, but sometimes) that someone is ATC. -What happens if the closest emergency's problem is one that would make the single runway unusable for longer than the other emergencies can wait? First come, first served. So even though the first emergency has plenty of gas but the nature of his emergency means he'll tie up the airport for longer than the second emergency can afford to wait it's still "first come - first served?" I guess you can be glad you weren't "Number Two in the Emergency Pattern" in an A-7 with a rough running engine waiting while the "first emergency" DC-3 dragged itself down final on one engine. Or in the "second" emergency F-106 at High Key behind the "first" emergency B-52 with one engine shut down. Doesn't happen very often but it *does* happen. BT-DT. It is not pertinent to the type of airport that started this thread. But it is pertinent to the statement "Any action taken by a pilot in command after declaration of an emergency is not subject to modification or second guessing by ATC or anyone else until after the flight is terminated." As for the incident that prompted this thread, while it sure looks like the controller involved stepped on his dick, considering that "nooze" reports excreted by the "bubble headed bleach blond" seldom, if ever, contain all the facts (if any facts at all) I don't have much faith that I'm getting the whole complete story :-/ The tape recording and the fact AAL wrote to the FAA is good enough for me. IOW your PT program consists of running off at a keyboard and jumping to conclusions :-/ It could well be in this instance the controller screwed-up. As I said it sure looks like it from here. But any real determination will be made by facility management, QA, and perhaps outside investigators who will all have access to all the information. It's just that I've been involved in doing enough incident investigations to know that tapes don't always tell whole story and a complaint letter from the aircraft operator doesn't constitute factual evidence. Not to mention the so-called accuracy of reports on any even semi-technical subject by today's media would be laughable if it weren't for the number of sheep who swallow them hook, line, and sinker :-( |
#135
|
|||
|
|||
ATC Handling of Low-Fuel American Flight
KP wrote:
"Sam Spade" wrote in message ... KP wrote: Just for the sake of a slightly expanded discussion: -What happens in your world when there are multiple emergencies but only one runway? Never happened in my world. And therefore it never has or will? It has happened and when it did someone other than one of several "pilots in command" of the several emergency aircraft made the decision on who's first and who got what. When it happens again, and it will, the decisions will again be made by someone else. Sometimes (not often, but sometimes) that someone is ATC. Most air carrier airports have more than one runway. That is why it never happened in my world. I also flew a lot of light-twin turboprop into a single runway airport as you suggest. We always carried fuel for nearby airports because of the distinct possibility the runway could have a disabled aircraft on it at our arrival. -What happens if the closest emergency's problem is one that would make the single runway unusable for longer than the other emergencies can wait? First come, first served. So even though the first emergency has plenty of gas but the nature of his emergency means he'll tie up the airport for longer than the second emergency can afford to wait it's still "first come - first served?" I guess you can be glad you weren't "Number Two in the Emergency Pattern" in an A-7 with a rough running engine waiting while the "first emergency" DC-3 dragged itself down final on one engine. Or in the "second" emergency F-106 at High Key behind the "first" emergency B-52 with one engine shut down. No one can anticipate the future second emergency at the time the first emergency is declared. USAF operations are far more volatile than most civil operations. Doesn't happen very often but it *does* happen. BT-DT. It is not pertinent to the type of airport that started this thread. But it is pertinent to the statement "Any action taken by a pilot in command after declaration of an emergency is not subject to modification or second guessing by ATC or anyone else until after the flight is terminated." Perhaps it is pertinent but it does not change the fact that the PIC calls the shots in an emergency, not ATC. Good judgment is a presumption on my part; thus a pilot with an emergency is not going to insist on a runway that is closed.~ |
#136
|
|||
|
|||
ATC Handling of Low-Fuel American Flight
"KP" nospam@please wrote in message . .. Just for the sake of a slightly expanded discussion: -What happens in your world when there are multiple emergencies but only one runway? -What happens if the closest emergency's problem is one that would make the single runway unusable for longer than the other emergencies can wait? A USAF pilot called for a priority landing because his F-100 was running "a bit peaked." ATC told the fighter pilot that he was number two, behind a B-52 that had an engine out. "Ah," the fighter pilot remarked, "The dreaded seven-engine approach." |
#137
|
|||
|
|||
ATC Handling of Low-Fuel American Flight
KP writes:
So even though the first emergency has plenty of gas but the nature of his emergency means he'll tie up the airport for longer than the second emergency can afford to wait it's still "first come - first served?" I guess you can be glad you weren't "Number Two in the Emergency Pattern" in an A-7 with a rough running engine waiting while the "first emergency" DC-3 dragged itself down final on one engine. Or in the "second" emergency F-106 at High Key behind the "first" emergency B-52 with one engine shut down. This isn't the military. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#138
|
|||
|
|||
ATC Handling of Low-Fuel American Flight
Sam Spade writes:
Perhaps it is pertinent but it does not change the fact that the PIC calls the shots in an emergency, not ATC. Good judgment is a presumption on my part; thus a pilot with an emergency is not going to insist on a runway that is closed.~ I dunno ... Dean Martin did. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#139
|
|||
|
|||
ATC Handling of Low-Fuel American Flight
Sam Spade writes:
Why do you think that? That's what most people here seem to believe. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#140
|
|||
|
|||
ATC Handling of Low-Fuel American Flight
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"KP" nospam@please wrote in message . .. Just for the sake of a slightly expanded discussion: -What happens in your world when there are multiple emergencies but only one runway? -What happens if the closest emergency's problem is one that would make the single runway unusable for longer than the other emergencies can wait? A USAF pilot called for a priority landing because his F-100 was running "a bit peaked." ATC told the fighter pilot that he was number two, behind a B-52 that had an engine out. "Ah," the fighter pilot remarked, "The dreaded seven-engine approach." And then he said "switching to guns." Matt |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Handling Characteristics of the Flight Design CTSW | John | Piloting | 9 | March 14th 07 03:38 AM |
American Flight 191 - Recovery Procedure | Rick Umali | Piloting | 17 | November 5th 06 03:35 AM |
Angel Flight fuel discounts | John Doe | Piloting | 4 | January 20th 06 01:24 PM |
Passenger attempts to hijack American Eagles flight | C J Campbell | Piloting | 5 | January 11th 04 04:04 PM |
American Safety Flight Systems seat belts -- Help! | Paul Millner | Owning | 1 | July 7th 03 10:10 PM |