Broken windshield at 37000 feet. Neos Boeing 787 Dreamliner requests to descend ASAP. Real ATC
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 июн 2024
- THIS VIDEO IS A RECONSTRUCTION OF THE FOLLOWING SITUATION IN FLIGHT:
08-OCT-2023. A Neos Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner (B789), registration EI-NEW, performing flight NOS789 / NO789 from New York John F. Kennedy International Airport, NY (USA) to Milan Malpensa Airport (Italy) was about 60 miles east of Boston at altitude 37000 feet when the flight crew declared PAN-PAN, reported cracked windshield, requested to descend below 10000 feet as soon as possible and return to the airport of departure, New York Kennedy Airport.
Join me on Patreon: / you_can_see_atc
#realatc #aviation #airtrafficcontrol
_______________
Timestamps:
00:00 Description of situation
00:17 Climb to 37000 feet. PAN-PAN. Windshield is broken. Moonflower 789 needs to descend ASAP.
04:32 Moonflower 789 was transferred to the frequency of Boston Approach
06:40 The pilots established communication with New York Approach
08:29 The flight crew contacts JFK Tower controller
09:17 Landing. Communications on the ground
_______________
THE VALUE OF THIS VIDEO:
THE MAIN VALUE IS EDUCATION. This reconstruction will be useful for actual or future air traffic controllers and pilots, people who plan to connect life with aviation, who like aviation. With help of this video reconstruction you’ll learn how to use radiotelephony rules, Aviation English language and general English language (for people whose native language is not English) in situation in flight, which was shown. THE MAIN REASON I DO THIS IS TO HELP PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND EVERY EMERGENCY SITUATION, EVERY WORD AND EVERY MOVE OF AIRCRAFT.
SOURCES OF MATERIAL, LICENSES AND PERMISSIONS:
Source of communications - www.liveatc.net/ (I have a permission (Letter) for commercial use of radio communications from LiveATC.net).
Map, aerial pictures (License (ODbL) ©OpenStreetMap -www.openstreetmap.org/copyrig...) Permission for commercial use, royalty-free use.
Radar screen (In new versions of videos) - Made by author.
Text version of communication - Made by Author.
Video editing - Made by author.
HOW I DO VIDEOS:
1) I monitor media, airspace, looking for any non-standard, emergency and interesting situation.
2) I find communications of ATC unit for the period of time I need.
3) I take only phrases between air traffic controller and selected flight.
4) I find a flight path of selected aircraft.
5) I make an animation (early couple of videos don’t have animation) of flight path and aircraft, where the aircraft goes on his route.
6) When I edit video I put phrases of communications to specific points in video (in tandem with animation).
7) Together with my comments (voice and text) I edit and make a reconstruction of emergency, non-standard and interesting situation in flight.
Laminated glass under pressure makes a hell of a bang when it cracks so that would have been quite a surprise to the pilots
Yeh I was thinking that must have been one hell of a code brown situation.
It happens all the time on airliners, it's not a big deal at all.
True @@michaelallen1396 on a 707 the outer glass pane was not structural. Flight could be continued if broken layer could be cleared with wipers, A flight could be dispatched per CDL with the outer pane missing if vision was not effected. The strength is the inner layers.
We, also, were on that flight. Hearing the word “exploded” was pretty shocking. The pilot, crew and attendants did a great job. The pilot at one point told everyone that we were returning “low and slow.” As I recall he let us know that it was lucky we weren’t far out over the Atlantic and he said JFK was planning on our arrival.
What happened on the ground after we collected our luggage was a total disaster! But the pilot who spoke in Italian first, was excellent.
First off, c'mon, is that not a cool name or what?! Moonflower 789?! That's so awesome. Also, I wish all ATB were as clear and precise as this controller is. LOL Great job by everyone though. Professional and calm. And considering what the problem was, that's pretty awesome as well. :)
Moonflower is a beautiful name.
I was on this flight and the pilot told everyone, "My windshield has exploded and we obviously cannot continue." He actually said 'exploded'. I was sitting near the front and took a picture of the windshield when they opened the cockpit doors when we landed: It was like a large spiderweb... not just cracks. Everyone on the flight remained very calm, but Neos did very little for everyone when we landed. We booked on Emirates and left a few hours later.
And comments here are wondering why we didn't land at Logan... we flew right over the area and I wondered the same thing, seeing Nantucket (I think) below us.
I’m so glad you’re safe. From a flight attendant.
The ground crew for Neos probably didn't have any contingency plan in place because when a flight takes off it's assumed that it's not going to turn around. This happened to me on a flight from Mexico City to Los Angeles. We were the last flight to Los Angeles at the end of the day around midnight. We had to turn around due to pressurization issues. When we landed nobody from the airline was there because everybody had already gone home when the flight took off. There were no baggage handlers to unload the bags either. Compounding the issue was that it was an international flight and we weren't allowed into the terminal until we went through immigration, which most of their staff had gone home too since no other international flights were scheduled to land until the early morning. They kept us in a small waiting area until they could find an immigration officer to process us.
@rafaelm.2056 I get that, but Neos isn't even accessible by phone on Sundays (day of our flight) and, even then, it's only 8 hrs/day, opening at 10am the next day. This, according to their website and our actual experience. I recognize they can't plan to have people on site, but to absent by phone 16 hrs/day six days a week and entirely absent on Sundays was a surprise.
Neos: Voli Low Cost. What-e ar-e you-e e-xpecting-e? If-e you-e wanting-e to-e fly-e diamond-e shpecial-e service-e book-e a good-e airline-e-e.
The pilot was so polite.
He really was. Thank you for your help every single time. I got the feeling approaching JFK he was concerned about the emergency vehicles and what not because of potential cost and so forth.... I am not sure how this reflects back on the airline that has an emergency.
I don't think that's an issue, those ERF usually have credit card machines in their vehicles, they could just pay the fee at the gate with the company card. @@J0hnS1111
Both of them :)
I’m surprised they didn’t immediately descend to 10000.
Fortunately the laminated glass cockpit windows have several layers. There most likely would have been a un-shattered layer still maintaining structural integrity. While this was not likely a risk of “blowing out,” this was a good call and most safe action to return to their originating airport to have it checked out. Professional crew and ATC for sure.
Really professional job by the crew and all ATC personnel involved. Outstanding work
Nice, really professional by the flight crew very impressed - declared their pan pan. Clarified what they needed and the descent also when things were missed/they weren't completely clear (like the runway clearnace to cross wasn't heard they clarified it, very well done.
A shattered outer pane on a cockpit windshield looks terrifying but the inner pane is about 2 inches thick, it's stronger than the aluminum fuselage, there is zero chance it will fail. This is not an emergency situation. The incovenient part is the landing must be done by the pilot with an un-shattered windshield and if it's in IFR that can be a problem because the Captain is supposed to do all landings in CAT 3 conditions.
Good work by the flight crew. They missed the (not that clearly instructed) "cross 31L at kilo", didn't read it back (that the controller "let slip") and they did NOT make any assumptions before they crossed.
of all the ATC in this video, she's the only one who doesn't speak slowly and clearly enough. She may think she's doing a good job racing through instructions because she's dealing with so much activity at JFK, but instead she needs to repeat herself multiple times (and even then it's not all that clear what she's saying). She needs to slow down just a tad to eliminate the need for multiple repeats. Especially considering how many of her "customers" aren't native English speakers.
Seems like both parties understood language challenges and handled them with extreme professionalism!
Not sure about the 787, but every jet I've flown as a structural inner pane and a heated, outer pane. The outer pane often cracks/shatters, and it's really not a serious emergency. Use the "Ink pen trick"; put your pen on one of the cracks, and if it touches, it's the inner pane. If it doesn't, you can easily see the thickness and determine its the outer pane and enjoy that sigh of relief!
I have been line maintenance for 34 years, I've seen maybe 10 windows shattered, all on the outer layer, it's an annoyance not an emergency. They always change the window before it flies again.
*Very professional all around.* Well done!
I was impressed by the way that the various area controllers passed the baton, so to speak, as they crossed the Boston and Providence control areas on the way back into JFK. Very clear communications, the pilot was very polite, thanking everyone along the way. A team effort by multiple controllers, who were tasked with moving a lot of other planes out of their way. As an emergency airport, a lot of other planes were getting new instructions to clear out airspace - and I'm sure the other pilots didn't complain - they'd want the same VIP treatment if they have an emergency someday.
Final ATC needed to tell everyone in the background to SHADDAP
Great communication by all control and aircrew
US ATC really does have a strong preference for a flight either being full emergency or not at all
That’s like saying you’re kind of pregnant or not pregnant
@@v1rotate391 I suppose pan-pan means "we could become pregnant up here at any time"
@@needleonthevinyl: Yes. Pan Pan Pan is "we have a serious situation, but not a full emergency yet". That warrants higher priority / more attention, to help them proceed, and in case an emergency is called, but doesn't escalate things unnecessarily. Seems like a well thought out system.
He sounds so disappointed with his emergency designation.
Just thank heaven they are ok.
JFK Tower ATC speaking so fast. Even me who is fluent in English was confused when I had this running in background, if not for the subtitle. Probably needs to speak slower, it’s an international airport
you have to change the speed to .75 so you can understand everything
Approach sounds like the controller from the "miracle on the Hudson" flight.
6 is afraid of 7 because 789!
Is it normal to go through multiple approach controllers? Or is that because of their lower than usual altitude or emergency routing ?
It would be because of their altitude. Responsibility is split by altitude as we as geographical area.
Sitting in my armchair I'd think that declaring an emergency instead of PAN and told ATC I was rapidly descending to 10,000! Every pound of cabin pressure I can get off that windscreen is a major plus. I'm going to do that ASAP and let ATC clear the way.
But also keeping airspeed somewhat low as early on it's uncertain if wind pressure or cabin pressure will cause an ultimate failure.
Curious what they didn't land at Boston, Logan. Seemed so much closer.
My take on that: it wasn't an emergency but pan-pan so didn't have to land ASAP and their company has operations at JFK and not at Boston Logan
@@spiest78: Seems right. The pilot normally gets to choose in such situations, and the pilot called for JFK. Likely costs and convenience are key when it isn't an actual emergency, re what the airline would want (and their rules for their pilots).
Boston was a lot closer, but we were at high altitude and it would have taken the same time to BOS or to JFK. Plus, the priority was getting the plane below 10.00 ft in order to eliminate any depressurization problems
for a broken windshield they were CALM!!!!
Why is atc goving speed limitations to an emergency aircraft? 🤔
How can I obtain permissions to use the aviation audios for a Spanish RUclips channel for learning purposes? Please help me
You need to check if you’re able to record VHF conversations. I know that some European counties forbid recording of VHF which is why there are so few events like this one recorded over Europe.
Why didn’t they land in Boston? Boston not able to take that size of aircraft?
Neos doesn't operate in and out of Boston. Easier to go back to JFK where they probably have personnel/contracted personnel who can fix the windscreen and also ground personnel to help passengers deal with getting new flights to Italy
After getting down to FL100 the broken windshield is not really that big an emergency, so landing at an airport where your company operates makes much more sense, both economically and logistically speaking
"You can expect your request to them."?!?
I’m curious as to why they returned to JFK, and didn’t divert to Boston? Seems as though they were far closer to Logan.
They have there own maintenance crew at JFK . Going to Boston would be a more expensive fix / replacement
@@nightrider9060 Thanks for that explanation!
Why did ATC request a minimum speed on two occasions when 789 was approaching JFK?
Probably spacing for other aircraft in the patterns.
spacing for traffic. note that the requested minimum was well below their actual speed in both cases.
Is that NY controller the same guy from the “Miracle on the Hudson” incident? I think so! Same voice. Can anyone confirm? He’s awesome!
When ATC doesn't understand what hypoxia is and doesn't seem to care!
If it was Mayday then yea, they would have dropped immediately - but pan pan was called.
Inner window panes were most likely still fine - and realistically no issues to fly on - but for safety : return
So do windshields sometimes spontaneously shatter?
Yes
Sometimes that happens.
Why??
@@msjdb723 small cracks, dings can compromise the structural integrity, then when the plane reaches altitude the pressurization will cause it to fail. However they will never completely fail, just shatter and the plane has to land.
@@msjdb723Not exactly spontaneously... There was a "little" help from air pressure difference between in an out of the airplane 🙂 If there was previously some tensions in windshield, for example due to incorrect maintenance, the additinal tension from pressure difference could be too much for windshield.
Why not clearance straight to FL10k?
These videos show only the aircraft which is the subject of the video. Rest assured there is plenty of other traffic in the vicinity, especially in this region, it's just not depicted on this video. The controller, IF AIRSPACE WAS CLEAR BELOW, might then issue a clearance "descend, pilots discretion, one zero thousand". But he can't do that and endanger the traffic below the pan pan until that lower traffic clears and presents opportunity for a descent.
@@user-xr4jp4lz1p Thanks for that. This is why I couldn't be a pilot. Even in video games my situational awareness of that 3rd dimension has always been terrible. I can't tell you how many times I've CFIT in flight sims.
had i been at the controls, my first comment to center wd have been, Moonflower is declaring and descending to 10k…get everyone out of my way…..
Funny how many random internet commenters think they have more expertise than commercial pilots. When they have no clue about the airline required procedures, etc.
Very much like flat earthers insisting they know more than all of NASA, all of astrophysics, etc.
I find it kind of odd the controller didn’t clear them to 10k when the pilot advised they need 10 or less in case of decompression. Honestly the pilot should have just done it and told the controller.
No idea, but it sounds like the controller was on top of things, and he probably had his reasons. The pilot could've also asserted PIC privileges.
They were vectored off the route and given each descent step before they needed it. There might have been other traffic to be sure they were clear of.
ATC ensuring clearance from traffic while descending. Notice that the pilots requested descent, without starting. Finally, according to the video at least, all descent clearances after the first came before they reached the previous clearance, so they never leveled off. All in all, ATC accomdated their request perfectly.
The pilot had a descend all the way down. ATC cannot clear them to below 10 before coordinating traffic below them. Plus, it's a precautionary descend, not that dramatic. you won't want to do a full emergency descend to startle your passengers. And this is real life, not your flight sim where you just reposition down to 10K.
@@UnshavenStatue in a situation such as this, I feel the descent should have been initiated prior to contacting ATC (ATC should have been an afterthought really). TCAS can give a good confidence in avoiding other cruising aircraft. Then once a solid descent is established let ATC know what you’re doing and work with them.
Was this on HF or VHF?
0:38 We are descending to 10000 feet ATC, figure it out
When telling the aircraft to start descending, what does " descend *level 260* " mean?
It means to descend to an altitude of 26,000 feet.
@@linuspoindexter106 Thank you!
level is 100 feet times the number of feet. So level 260 is 26,000 feet. Flight level is the nomenclature used, at least for commercial flights.
In aviation, altitudes are referenced "one thousand", "one one thousand" etc through "one seven thousand". Beginning at 18000' and above - altitudes are referenced as "Flight Level". "Flight level one eight zero" etc. "Flight level 370" would mean 37000 feet. Often controllers have said the phraseology "flight level" so many tens of thousands of times, they are speaking it so fast that "flight level" begins to sound like "level". No worries though, taken in context of the situation, the pilots know exactly what was said/meant.
8000 pounds of fule and 8 hours, Dreamliner burns aprox 1000 pounds of fule an hour?
80,000 pounds
Really? You can't spell "fuel"? Is English your first language?
Besides, it was 80,000 pounds of fuel, and they said it twice. So no, it burns more like 10,000 pounds of fuel an hour.
There are reasons flying is expensive and causes a LOT of pollution.
@@rogergeyer9851 한국어는 제 첫 번째 언어이고, 영어는 제 두 번째 언어입니다....
Another 787 local vendor outsourcing screw up. They never learn.
I feel an emergency aircraft shouldn't get mininum speeds told by approach for spacing to the next aircraft, especially with a broken windshield.
It was NOT a full emergency, hence not a Mayday. Completely different rules for a Mayday, when the pilot gets to make the calls, depending on what's needed for best chances for a safe resolution.
Why would the pilot allow his windshield to crack at 37000 ft. I would not have let that happen in my 787 Dreamliner.
Thats why I always travel in my flying dishwasher.
Why does NASA allow the earth to be roughly spherical vs. flat? /s
Good job all. I would have declared mayday and requested minimum safe altitude and Vref + 20 and Boston immediately if not sooner
Are you a professional commercial pilot? Because you likely would have followed airline procedure UNLESS a true emergency call is appropriate, or you may well be looking for another job, or get a big ding on your performance review, etc.
Why is there ALWAYS one of them, meaning ATC, that has to talk much faster than everyone else. They just manage to make things difficult!!. Seems like they think they're really cool, and it just shows how much better they are than everyone else.
Reality is, in many cases, they are a safety issue. But in todays world they can do what they want to do and the union has their back!!
Have you ever flown in the NY airspace? She probably slowed down from her normal delivery! It can be challenging. 🙂
He is so close to Boston why go all the back to JFK and waste fuel...
Probably because JFK is where they have maintenance and the ability to obtain spare parts.
Moonflower? What is this, My Little Pony or something?
does MLP have jets with fractured windshields??
!!!
More great Boeing quality workmanship.
A sub contractor.
frying pan, frying pan, frying pan
🍳🍳🍳
A broken windshield is not an emergency, the outer layer cracks from a windshield heat failure, there is no chance the inner panel will crack, they should have just flown the route and landed normally.
@@comcfi There's 2 layers, the inner layer is sufficient to hold pressurization, there's zero chance it will break- the heated pane on the exterior can fracture all day, the only consequence is vision obstruction, the right seater can do the landing no problem.
@@michaelallen1396 I’ve experienced both layers cracking very recently. It most definitely is an emergency situation, even if one layer cracks. The procedure at least on my aircraft requires O2 masks, smoke goggles, slow depressurization, emergency descent, and diversion.
@@comcfi Just curious did you have a bird strike because in 33 years I've seen 4 or 5 cracked outer panes but neve an inner. None of them called an emergency, just an early alert. Tell me what your QRH says or is it pilot discretion to call an emergency.
@@michaelallen1396 Correction: outer layer only, just monitor, but for both layers, which happened to me, QRH requires masks, goggles, emergency descent, depressurization, diversion, etc. We were in the flight levels, so it wasn’t a bird strike.
@@comcfi Both layers yes that is definitely an emergency but like I said I've never seen it in 33 years of line maintenance.
he didnt even say mayday?
It wasn't a life threatening emergency so just Pan-Pan rather than Mayday. They hadn't lost cabin pressure which would have been Mayday.
He did say spatula tho.
This is a non-issue~
Well, not exactly, but the ATC who declared an emergency for just that got a bit carried away indeed.
The emergency would have been if the windshield had actually broken down completely, IMHO
There is no difference in treatment between PAN and MAYDAY in the US.
@@julienb5815 The outer pane of an airliner windscreen is very hard glass designed for scratch resistance, but it is not very thick. The real strength comes from the heated multi-layer inner glass, which not only holds in the 8.6 PSI pressure differential [multiply 8.6 by the window square inch area to get an idea how strong it actually is....], but is the primary resistance force against bird strikes. It is about 30-35 mm thick.
I was flying a Dash-8 one night over Vermont and a bird I'm guessing the size of a pigeon hit the windscreen directly in front of my face, the glass held without any damage. We were traveling 210 knots/242 mph at the time. The sudden impact and very loud noise startled the hell out of me!
@@N1120A Yeah, typically. ATC these days is a mess-
Once ATC hears pan pan, it's a full emergency
Its not uncommon for that to happen. I have had a few shatter inflight in the last 30 years of flying jets. Never had one loose pressurization. Normally its the temperature controller that makes them shatter .
Well, it is a Boeing product, if anything, we should at least be happy the whole damn ship didnt fall out of the sky...
Yes, because Boeing is known for crashing daily. How do you expect to be taken seriously?
You are so wacky.
I mean, at least front didn't fall off...
PPG Aerospace makes the windshields for the 787. Not Boeing or a mom & pops company. And it obviously stayed within engineering specs as it didn’t suffer complete failure. Airbus also outsources their windows. Just like the vehicle you drive outsources their windshields. But don’t let me stop you from being a smart ass.
@philipketchum1407 OH MY GOD!!!!😯😯😯😱😱😱 Thank you SO much for educating me on that point! That TOTALLY explains EVERYTHING! I had suspected all along those darn PPG produced windshields were to blame. Has nothing to do with airframe flex or rigidity specs. If you ask me, I think those winshields are to blame for every issue Boeing is experiencing...including the airframe and fuselage Tech's going on lunch break and using dope in the parking lot, then of course returning to the line. Damn PPG windshields...hey, I think they are to blame for 737 Max MCAS issues too! Philip, you Sir, are an ABSOLUTE genius!👍👍👏👏🎉🎊 🎆🎇 Here is your medal and trophy 🥇🏆And a pumpkin too!🎃
We, also, were on that flight. Hearing the word “exploded” was pretty shocking. The pilot, crew and attendants did a great job. The pilot at one point told everyone that we were returning “low and slow.” As I recall he let us know that it was lucky we weren’t far out over the Atlantic and he said JFK was planning on our arrival.
What happened on the ground after we collected our luggage was a total disaster! But the pilot who spoke in Italian first, was excellent.