737 off runway, Pearson Toronto

Gary Drescher wrote:

Peter Wrote:
Does PAN-PAN declare an emergency in US airspace as far
as ATC is concerned?

Yes, "mayday" and "pan-pan" are recognized internationally, according to the
Pilot/Controller Glossary.

Gary, that doesn't answer my question. Does ATC treat a PAN-PAN as an
emergency?


--
Peter

Happy Dog wrote:

"Peter R." wrote in

That seems to be cutting it really close. Does anyone know if company
rules
usually require more than the FAA mins?

Do company rules apply when a pilot declares an emergency?

? And, who declared an emergency?

We are discussing the KLM 747 that had a low fuel emergency. According to
Gary D., the KLM did declare an emergency by stating PAN-PAN. I am still
unsure of whether this is considered an emergency.

I was hopeful one of the ATC regulars here would answer definitively as to
whether PAN-PAN is considered an emergency by ATC, but at least one of them
is too busy demonstrating his intelligence by nit-picking the trivial
threads to offer his expertise here.

--
Peter

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Gary Drescher wrote:

Peter Wrote:
Does PAN-PAN declare an emergency in US airspace as far
as ATC is concerned?

Yes, "mayday" and "pan-pan" are recognized internationally, according to
the
Pilot/Controller Glossary.

Gary, that doesn't answer my question. Does ATC treat a PAN-PAN as an
emergency?

They do if their emergency procedures are consistent with the AIM and the
P/CG (and it would be surprising if their procedures were blatantly
inconsistent with those sources for something so basic and important).

According to AIM 6-1-2a, an urgency condition is an emergency. And according
to the P/CG and AIM 6-3-1c and 6-3-2a3a, "pan-pan" declares an urgency
condition to ATC in order to obtain emergency assistance.

http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/aim/index.htm

--Gary

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
We are discussing the KLM 747 that had a low fuel emergency. According to
Gary D., the KLM did declare an emergency by stating PAN-PAN. I am still
unsure of whether this is considered an emergency.

I was hopeful one of the ATC regulars here would answer definitively as to
whether PAN-PAN is considered an emergency by ATC,

Peter, could you explain your uncertainty? Do you see any room for ambiguity
with regard to the AIM passages I cited to establish that "pan-pan" declares
an emergency? (If so, could you elaborate?) Or are you just doubting, for
some reason, that ATC actually complies with the emergency procedures
outlined in the AIM? (If so, do you doubt that with regard to "mayday" too,
or just with regard to "pan-pan"?)

--Gary

Peter,

Does ATC treat a PAN-PAN as an
emergency?


ATC can grade you as an emergency any time anyway, even without your
declaring it.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote:

Peter,

Does ATC treat a PAN-PAN as an
emergency?


ATC can grade you as an emergency any time anyway, even without your
declaring it.

Good point.

--
Peter

Gary Drescher wrote:

Peter, could you explain your uncertainty? Do you see any room for ambiguity
with regard to the AIM passages I cited to establish that "pan-pan" declares
an emergency? (If so, could you elaborate?)

What is this, a test?

Seriously, my uncertainty has to do with the "if A equals B and B equals C,
then A must equal C" logic used in the AIM.

In other words, one reads in the AIM chapter that you posted earlier that
an urgent situation equals an emergency, but then one has to go to the
glossary to discover that PAN-PAN equals an urgent situation.

Why not simply state in the chapter you referenced that "announcing
PAN-PAN" will be treated as an emergency by ATC?

Perhaps the real problem is that I am over-analyzing this.

--
Peter

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 01:19:58 GMT, Maule Driver
wrote:

The alternative would have been something like, "KLM: we have a low
fuel emergency, request diversion for immediate landing",

Surely EMERGENCY is a more serious call than PAN? All the P-word does
is tell everyone: shut up and listen to what I have to say.


I thought P-P-P was equivalent to "MAYDAY", which (I thought??) is an
abbreviation for declaring an emergency.

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
What is this, a test?

Nope, just sincerely trying to understand the basis of your question.

Seriously, my uncertainty has to do with the "if A equals B and B equals
C,
then A must equal C" logic used in the AIM.

You're uncertain that if A=B and B=C, then A=C?

In other words, one reads in the AIM chapter that you posted earlier that
an urgent situation equals an emergency, but then one has to go to the
glossary to discover that PAN-PAN equals an urgent situation.

Actually, the P/CG is just one place you can discover that "pan-pan"
declares an urgency condition. As I later posted, it's also in AIM 6-3-2
("Obtaining Emergency Assistance"), clause a3a. But even if it were only
stated in the P/CG, it's still clearly stated, so I don't see where any
uncertainty arises.

Why not simply state in the chapter you referenced that "announcing
PAN-PAN" will be treated as an emergency by ATC?

That's essentially what 6-3-2a3a says, although 6-1-2a in conjunction with
the P/CG makes it clear too.

Perhaps the real problem is that I am over-analyzing this.

Seems to me that the problem is your reluctance to accept the transitivity
of 'equals'. That kind of puts a crimp in any attempted analysis.

--Gary

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...
"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...
Surely EMERGENCY is a more serious call than PAN? All the P-word does
is tell everyone: shut up and listen to what I have to say.

I thought P-P-P was equivalent to "MAYDAY", which (I thought??) is an
abbreviation for declaring an emergency.

No, "mayday" and "pan pan" are entirely distinct. See the AIM clauses that
have been cited throughout this thread.

--Gary