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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Inflight Emergency -- Definition
Thought I'd break this subject out of the Landout Laws thread. I have
no opinions to share on this topic, but would like to read yours as regards off airport landings during cross country flight. However, I suggest review the FARs and AIM for the FAA's definition of emergencies, pilot responsibilities, and emergency operations. Most of this is available online. Search Google for "Airman's Information Manual Emergency Operations." I'll look forward to your informed comments. This has the potential to be a very short thread! ;-) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Airman's info manual didn't have much to offer.
FARs have: 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes; general a.. Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes; b.. (a) ·Anywhere. ·An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface. §91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command. (a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft. (b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency. Those are the only things that seem remotely on point (in a quick check during lunch). Neither suggests any different treatment of ships w/onboard power vs. ships using external power (sailplanes). I wasn't able to find any info on what the landowners legal responsibilities are in the case of an emergency landing that is not also an accident investigation site. "Chris OCallaghan" wrote in message om... Thought I'd break this subject out of the Landout Laws thread. I have no opinions to share on this topic, but would like to read yours as regards off airport landings during cross country flight. However, I suggest review the FARs and AIM for the FAA's definition of emergencies, pilot responsibilities, and emergency operations. Most of this is available online. Search Google for "Airman's Information Manual Emergency Operations." I'll look forward to your informed comments. This has the potential to be a very short thread! ;-) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Chris OCallaghan" wrote in message om... Thought I'd break this subject out of the Landout Laws thread. I have no opinions to share on this topic, but would like to read yours as regards off airport landings during cross country flight. However, I suggest review the FARs and AIM for the FAA's definition of emergencies, pilot responsibilities, and emergency operations. Most of this is available online. Search Google for "Airman's Information Manual Emergency Operations." I'll look forward to your informed comments. This has the potential to be a very short thread! ;-) Might want to get a copy of the AIM and do a little reading. Here is an excerpt from Chapter 6: a. An emergency can be either a distress or urgency condition as defined in the Pilot/Controller Glossary. Pilots do not hesitate to declare an emergency when they are faced with distress conditions such as fire, mechanical failure, or structural damage. However, some are reluctant to report an urgency condition when they encounter situations which may not be immediately perilous, but are potentially catastrophic. An aircraft is in at least an urgency condition the moment the pilot becomes doubtful about position, fuel endurance, weather, or any other condition that could adversely affect flight safety. This is the time to ask for help, not after the situation has developed into a distress condition. b. Pilots who become apprehensive for their safety for any reason should request assistance immediately. Ready and willing help is available in the form of radio, radar, direction finding stations and other aircraft. Delay has caused accidents and cost lives. Safety is not a luxury! Take action! Ivan |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The section implies a requirement (tacit, at least) to communicate a
distress or urgency, since both these situations indicate an uncertain outcome. I've never heard a broadcast of mayday or pan, pan, pan prior to an out landing (though I don't listen to 121.5). Do sailplane pilots typcially declare an emergency before an outlanding? So many pilots indicated in the farmer relations thread that an outlanding is an emergency, I'm confused as to whether we should be declaring them. I can't recall an outlanding (I've had roughly 75) where I didn't have time to broadcast a pan, pan, pan. Of course, I never have. From time to time I call other pilots to inform them of an outlanding (mine or someone else's). But this has alway been a matter of convenience. I'm looking for some validation here from those convinced that an outlanding is an emergency. Do you truly treat it as an emergency in as much as the AIM and FARs detail emergency operations? Or is this an emergency of convenience, living in the gray of the regs so long as it suits the pilot's need to retrieve his glider? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Here's a thought - how do you think the FAA would view a pilot who routinely
puts himself into a position in which he must delcare an emergency? A landout is not an emergency, in my view it is just a landing at a location other than an established airport. Ivan "Chris OCallaghan" wrote in message om... The section implies a requirement (tacit, at least) to communicate a distress or urgency, since both these situations indicate an uncertain outcome. I've never heard a broadcast of mayday or pan, pan, pan prior to an out landing (though I don't listen to 121.5). Do sailplane pilots typcially declare an emergency before an outlanding? So many pilots indicated in the farmer relations thread that an outlanding is an emergency, I'm confused as to whether we should be declaring them. I can't recall an outlanding (I've had roughly 75) where I didn't have time to broadcast a pan, pan, pan. Of course, I never have. From time to time I call other pilots to inform them of an outlanding (mine or someone else's). But this has alway been a matter of convenience. I'm looking for some validation here from those convinced that an outlanding is an emergency. Do you truly treat it as an emergency in as much as the AIM and FARs detail emergency operations? Or is this an emergency of convenience, living in the gray of the regs so long as it suits the pilot's need to retrieve his glider? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Todd, I think we are beginning to mix the question of is an outlanding an
emergency an when should an emergency be declared. Please see below: "Todd Pattist" wrote in message ... "Ivan Kahn" wrote: Here's a thought - how do you think the FAA would view a pilot who routinely puts himself into a position in which he must declare an emergency? I don't see that the FAA's concerns about the pilot affect whether an outlanding justifies deviation from an FAR. The point I am trying to make is that IF you view an outlanding as an emergency, then the FAA will rightly take a dim view of any pilot who routinely put themselves into such a position. "Declaring" an emergency is certainly recommended if you need to deviate from the FARs. . A landout is not an emergency, in my view it is just a landing at a location other than an established airport. You are ignoring the most important facet of the question - the pilot's intent. Again, see above - if every outlanding is by definition an emergency the FAA will take a dim view of that. Assume a small dirt field inside the edge of some FAR prohibited or controlled airspace. If you take off with the intent of entering that airspace and landing in that field, you are violating an FAR and can lose your license. If you did not intend to land there, but do so because there is no lift, you were justified in deviating from the applicable FAR to the extent required for safety under FAR 91.3. In your example, declaring an emergency in this case is needed because you need to deviate from an FAR - but not because you are simply landing out. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Todd Pattist" wrote in message ... "Ivan Kahn" wrote: Todd, I think we are beginning to mix the question of is an outlanding an emergency an when should an emergency be declared. Please see below: I don't see any mixture, but I'll try to make my points clear. 1) An outlanding required by lack of lift is legally an "emergency" under the FAR's which justifies deviating from any FAR to the extent required by safety. I appeciate your view, but I disagree, an outlanding is not an emergency. If you find that you need to deviate from an FAR, no matter what the reason, that would be an emergency. 2) An intentional landing in the same field, where not required by lack of lift is not an "emergency" under the FAR's and does not justify deviating from the FAR's. Agree, since one could choose not to land, 3) There's no requirement to "declare" an emergency, but you should communicate whenever you think it will improve safety. To the extend that we consider the words delcare and communicate to mean the same thing, I agree. But one can certainly have an emergency without communicating, which is what I meant when I used the word declare. Sorry for that confusion. The point I am trying to make is that IF you view an outlanding as an emergency, I don't think your attitude is relevant. That was not atittiude, your original reponse seemed to me to miss the point I was trying to make and so I was trying to highlight the operative word which is that if, by defination an outlanding is viewed as an emergency that some undersible FAA views might then follow. then the FAA will rightly take a dim view of any pilot who routinely put themselves into such a position. If I understand you, you are advocating not calling it an "emergency" so the FAA will look on us kindly? IMHO, if the FAA objected to outlandings, they would do so no matter what the pilot thought about it. I do not believe it to be an emergency to begin with. My statement is that if it were then the FAA would take a dim view of outlanding as a standard practice since glider pilots would be engaging unsafe practices. "Declaring" an emergency is certainly recommended if you need to deviate from the FARs. . I see no advantage to making any kind of formal declaration, except where needed to obtain some assistance. Even then, I'd probably just advise of my problem and ask for the assistance I wanted. Assuming you are not requesting assistance, then I agree but by declaring you will alert others to your problem and also have it on record should the FAA question you later/ Again, see above - if every outlanding is by definition an emergency the FAA will take a dim view of that. Baloney. They don't care what we *think* it is - they care what it really is. In your example, declaring an emergency in this case is needed because you need to deviate from an FAR - but not because you are simply landing out. So whether it's an "emergency" depends on whether you need to break a rule? That's ridiculous. You get to break the rule *because* it's an emergency, not because you made some radio announcement or because you wanted to beak the rule. Whether a pilot is in an emergency condition does not depend on his radio declaration. I think you are trying to read a lot more into what I have said then exists. The beginning and ending of my view is that an outlanding is not, by definition, an emergency. Todd Pattist - "WH" Ventus C (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Ivan Kahn" wrote: then the FAA will rightly take a dim view of any pilot who routinely put themselves into such a position. If I understand you, you are advocating not calling it an "emergency" so the FAA will look on us kindly? IMHO, if the FAA objected to outlandings, they would do so no matter what the pilot thought about it. I do not believe it to be an emergency to begin with. My statement is that if it were then the FAA would take a dim view of outlanding as a standard practice since glider pilots would be engaging unsafe practices. My take on it: - an outlanding is not in itself an emergency, it is a routine (though undesired in any particular instance) fact of flying anything with an unreliable source of energy. - being denied the use of a suitable landing area *would* create an emergency. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Under German law, this legal right is straightforward:
With a glider, the right do an outlanding is granted regardlelss who owns the field. The owner of the field has no right whatsoever to prevent the evacuation of the outlanded glider from his field. The conterpart is that all damages are covered by the glider's insurance, and that the pilot of the glider must communicate his name and the insurance contract number/contacts to the owner of the field. On the other hand, if you intend prior to take off that you will land in a certain field, without authorization of both the owner of the field and aviation authorities, you better forget about it. -- Bert Willing ASW20 "TW" "Todd Pattist" a écrit dans le message de ... Bruce Hoult wrote: My take on it: - being denied the use of a suitable landing area *would* create an emergency. I'm comfortable with this definition. Of course, I consider a "suitable landing area" to be one that is known to be landable and where I have the legal right to land. As a consequence, I don't consider a landing at such a place to be an "outlanding." If the necessity to land does not give us the right to claim an "emergency," then I see no justification for smashing up some poor farmer's crops no matter how smooth his field is and no matter how safely we can land on his young plants. Todd Pattist - "WH" Ventus C (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Well, the idea is the same in Germany. And for a sailplane on x-country the
necessity is supposed to be given. -- Bert Willing ASW20 "TW" "Todd Pattist" a écrit dans le message de ... "Bert Willing" wrote: Under German law, this legal right is straightforward: But it is not so straightforward in the U.S. A pilot does not have the right to use and potentially damage the farmer's property unless he can claim necessity in order to avoid potentially more significant loss of life or injury to person or property. That risk to life and property is the basis for the right in the U.S. to make an outlanding. Todd Pattist - "WH" Ventus C (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.) |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Emergency Parachute questions | Jay Moreland | Aerobatics | 14 | December 3rd 04 05:46 PM |
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons | Curtl33 | General Aviation | 7 | January 9th 04 11:35 PM |
Military jet makes emergency landing at MidAmerica | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 1st 03 02:28 AM |
Emergency landing at Meigs Sunday | Thomas J. Paladino Jr. | Piloting | 22 | August 3rd 03 03:14 PM |
First Emergency (Long Post) | [email protected] | Owning | 14 | July 23rd 03 02:46 AM |