EMERGENCY Delta Airlines Airbus A320. Engine Oil Leak After Departure at JFK. REAL ATC
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 авг 2022
- 13 JUN 2022
A Delta Air Lines Airbus A320 registration N362NW, performing flight DAL655 from New York John F. Kennedy International Airport (KJFK)
to Austin-Bergstrom International Airport (KAUS). During climb out of Kennedy Airport requested to stop at 17000 feet, reported a maintenance issue and requested return to the airport of departure. Later the crew declared an emergency and reported oil leak on number one engine.
If you enjoyed please support channel by subscribing and hitting the notification bell to get notified on new uploads.
Source of communications: www.liveatc.net (usage permission)
#REALATC #ATC #ATCCOMUNICATIONS #a320 #emergencylanding #oilleak #deltaairlines #realatc 
Авто/Мото
Pilot: The engine is on fire, the yoke is unresponse, the copilot has been knocked out, there's vomit on my pants, and we've just gone through and uncontrolled spin
ATC: Are you declaring an emergency?
Not as if there is a specific short word the pilot could use to indicate that they are declaring an emergency. Something like aprilday? Or juneday? Or maybe something in between?
😂😂😂😂😂😂!!!!
There's never a Jiffy Lube around when you really need one.
Just like jiffy lube they forgot to put the plug back in. This is screaming maintenance error.
People down in the town must be thinking "It's raining oil!"
Do you think you can find the ATC for American Airlines flight 2091, LAX-MCO from June 19th. They had an incident where they lost all electrical power and had to divert to PHX. I knew someone on the flight is how I know about that one. Thought there might be some interesting ATC recording for that flight.
My monkey brain at 4:15 went "how can they only have 25.3 pounds of fuel on board, that's nothing" before realizing that was in thousands because airplanes carry more than 2 seconds of fuel.
Yeah, I always find it amusing when they do that. They mean 25.3 *thousand* pounds of fuel, but say 25.3 pounds. Pretty big difference there...
we all have those moments, friend.
25 pounds? I can carry that :P
Beautiful work on graphics, visuals. Great channel!
I think ATC should get souls and fuel via a phone call with dispatch - especially if they expect to ask multiple times. Pilots are rarely this task-saturated and now that they finally are, being peppered for info that can be gleaned from company is really a safety of flight issue. They're running checklists, they're shutting down engines, etc etc. The feds should change this practice.
the pilots decide if and when to answer.. good controllers understand the workload issue and do not ask every minute
Seems the case 90% of the time with issues either copying the numbers, aircrew reply is not in the exact form requested (gallons vs pounds ... emergency responders can easily calculate) or data is not forwarded to the next controller. Being a commercial rated pilot i view this ongoing issue as a major distraction at a critical time, having to stop troubleshooting a failed system to read then change gears and re-read indicators to acquire requested information. Please controllers, take the information provided on the first request and go with it. Establish procedures so this question will not have to be answered multiple times by a stressed aircrew.
Agree. That info could/should easily be included in flight plan. Fuel could easily be calc by flight data to within reasonable qty. Flight aware published data for examples shows aircraft location, heading , altitude and speed every minute of the flight. As far as ARF is concerned is there a practical difference between 23000 lbs and say 26000 or 21000? You still have to get the BIG trucks out.
A good technique to mitigate this distraction is to write the souls on board on your yoke clip scratch pad so you have it at a glance. This minimizes having to hunt for it in your flight paperwork when an emergency arises. The fuel can be quickly read from the EICAS screen. These items can then be found with a quick glance. Those two questions will always be asked so best to be prepared.
@@flyboy124 For each flight at SWA, the last thing the ops agents do before exiting the jet is hand the pilots a napkin with souls onboard and names of the cabin crew.
Issuing speeds to an emergency is ridiculous as is not keeping their runway clear. One of those departures blowing a tire or aborting right in front of a single engine transport cat jet is stupid.
First, no one knows if they shut the engine down, no one knows if they made a single engine landing, and the request to taxi to the gate is indicative they made a normal landing in normal configuration. Second, this crew had to be asked several times if they were an emergency aircraft! Imagine that! Well dont imagine it, because this happened in reality, a crew had to be asked several times all the way up to the final approach control sector-if they were an emergency aircraft! Insane! And once they land they just want to goto the gate, no concern for leaking oil or potential fire hazard. The reason this crew was given a speed restriction was probably due to the necessity of clearing up ground traffic prior to their arrival to accommodate a runway shutdown. The reason they had to slow was because they failed to command the situation. Delta pilots have suspect judgement. Fuel dumping at low altitude over densely populated area with 3-4 pilots in cockpit, go-around with ground spoilers deployed, rtb without declaring an emergency over potential engine seizure.
@@36thstreethero "Second, this crew had to be asked several times if they were an emergency aircraft!"
What are you talking about? When they initially told ATC about the problem, ATC asked if they were declaring an emergency. They said no, because they were still figuring out what the problem was. When Approach asked if they were declaring an emergency, they said yes.
"Imagine that!" Yes, you'll have to. Because you literally imagined it.
Just gonna shut down JFK every time someone has a maintenance issue and has to return. You should get a job there. Make it all safe and stuff.
You are so correct. Upon getting the emergency signal, the tower, by rights, should cede control over to said aircraft. Let them do what THEY need to do to get the big bird to roost!
@@36thstreethero "Delta pilots have suspect judgment"..... Looks like somebody didn't get past the interview
Nice video my friend ✈️👍🏼
Um, hey Jack, did you get an extra engine oil plug from parts when we overhauled that engine on the Delta A320 yesterday? I just found this one in the parts washer basket under the brush.
Safely on the ground is always the best result to hear. . . 👍✈✈👍
Honestly the best result to hear is everybody timely at destination :D
All I can think of is “Sir, your oil drain plug is stripped, do you want us to replace it?”
“Nah, I’m good!”
i'm confident it will not fail me at the exact wrong moment.
Yeah? This is the place that changed my oil last time, how did it get stripped?
Ha, Jiffy Lube stripped my Camry's oil plug a couple of weeks ago. Btw, I flew that airplane N362NW about 20 years ago. The "NW" stands for Northwest now with Delta after the two airlines merged.
That was well covered. Note for the editor. Your chyron said DAL665, not 655. Otherwise, job well done.
And that matters because?
I havent heard "chyron" in years.
@@RandyDBPFilms He watches CNN. How are your eyes?
At one point, they called them Delta 455, but the pilot responded anyway.
I was confused. Also at one point they both say "Delta 455"
If it wasn't for the subtitles, I would not get many of the words over the radio!
I like the fact that they still report "souls on board". With all the craziness of today its nice to think people are still considered souls.
A lot of aviation terms can trace their origin back to the days of ocean going navigation being the main mode of transport between continents. Thus you still get "Souls on board" etc terminology being used today.
@@Falkirion 👍👍
I've heard "persons on board" a few times.
Anyway I'm sure it's simply for historical reasons.
Revenue on board...
It is a lot less spiritual than you are thinking...It's simply a shorthand way to connote a living person rather than just any person, living or dead, as aircraft(other than airliners) can often also be carrying deceased persons who can technically still be called people. well, that's what I heard in an aviation video at least
Was the affected engine shut down? I didn't catch it on the Tx if it was.
Direct to flirt.
"Damn, ATC - are you single, your voice sound so hot I'd write your number down anytime."
i find it amazing that the controllers cannot pass along fuel and souls from one person to another.
Fuel level doesn't stay static though does it.
I find it amazing that the procedure of clearing an aircraft to land while they run departures on the same runway is acceptable. Logically, if there's an aircraft on the runway, you're not clear to land. If you're #2 in the queue to land, you can't be cleared to land. Being cleared to land means that the runway is yours and anything obstructing that is a violation.
@@johnamydaniel i know that but they dont burn that much fuel in 5 minutes
Agreed. Also, not sure with the logic of assigning a designated airspeed to an emergency aircraft running on one engine. Let the pilots decide what speed is best for the configuration they are being forced into by the emergency. Proper call would be "Speed at your discretion'".
@@CRCinAU "Being cleared to land means that the runway is yours and anything obstructing that is a violation."
Because, obviously, you know how to ATC more han ATC does. Cleared to land means that they have permission to land, not that the runway has been cleared. If the runway was still occupied when the Delta flight got close, their clearance would be revoked. (Which seems pretty poor for a declared emergency, but that's a separate issue.)
Very informative, but I noticed one strange quirk. when ATC was transferring from one frequency to another, he mentioned that the change-to frequency is aware of the issue. Then he said they may ask you again for fuel and souls on board. If they were aware of the issue wouldn't it seem logical for the info on fuel and souls have been provided as well? And there is no indication as to whether the oil leak was contained in the engine housing or not. Seems like an oil leak that produced a quantity of near zero shortly after takeoff would have been discovered during the pre-flight.
This seems to happen often, and I wonder if pilots get as frustrated as I do when they're asked for the same information two or three times.
It really does seem like the kind of thing that should be a phone call
Raging speculation.
@@CastlegarGlenn So? That is part of the job. No biggy except for you.
@@RLTtizME very well might be a big deal if you're trying to keep a dying plane in the air. the extra workload is unnecessary.
An Eastern L 1011 lost all three engines out of MIA because oil plugs were not put back in! May 5 1983. they managed to get one started and landed but I thought ditching would have been better because if that engine quit over crowed Miami, and that was a real possibility, it would have been a big disaster - but they made it
Not completely accurate, they were put in, but missing the o-rings.
4:25 I feel like we get a moment in the head of ATC here. Just one word, roger, but the way he said it says a lot.
I wish there was better communication between different controllers for the souls on board count, it feels like one more piece of information that the pilots are having to recall while taking on a huge workload that could be handled with a phone call between people sitting in chairs that don't crash on the ground, and frankly, once it's been said once it's not relevant unless it goes up or down.
The game Telehpone comes to mind as a possible reason why it’s asked from controller to controller.
Oil leaks can happen to anybody at any time. When they do, you just have to wing it (very grim). Cheers!
Reminds me of a similar one from the other day... Sure we have no engine but otherwise everything is ok.
If you're talking about the LH 747, losing an engine on a 747 is a much less serious problem than losing one on an A320. Personally, I still tend to think it should be treated as an emergency aircraft, but losing 1 of 4 engines is quite different from losing 1 of 2 engines. Of course, either of those is much less serious than losing 1 of 1 engines. - haha
Towards the end of that broadcast I swear I heard the engine fire alarm. 🤔
Yep, absolutely there at 5:43
It’s the Master Warning (level 3: red warning light with continuous repetitive chime, specific sounds or a synthetic voice). Engine fire is only one of the reasons it can go off (also things like dangerous configuration, excess cabin altitude, stall, overspeed, etc). Requires immediate action. A level 2 is indicated by an amber warning light with a single chime. Level 1 is just an amber warning light. Good spot, though!
@@RomeoJulietCharlie Thanks for the correction! Learn something new every day.
Anyone else get the feeling the first controller didn't want to deal with the flight? I'm sure he had loads going on though.
We have so much technology nowadays yet we still have radios in these multimillion dollar airplane that sound like Walmart walkie-talkies. Absolutely crazy.
The radio in the plane itself generally sounds much better than this. The issue is that the feed is coming from a receiver that's not very good or whose antenna isn't well positioned.
Who knows where this recording comes from? The radios on an aircraft are very clear sounding.
Come on Delta guys. Declare the emergency. wtf are you doing? You have a problem that requires you to return. WTF are you afraid of declaring an emergency. There is absolutely no penalty and it just ads confusion. Declare the emergency, state the reason, proceed to land. If you need to cancel an assigned altitude then you need to declare the emergency.
It's very likely the controller was puzzled by the crew's need to return before the crew had completed their assessment of the situation. They were doing what you're supposed to do- flying the jet and analyzing the malfunction. The flight didn't need any special handling, just a deviation from the filed flight plan. Often that happens, the situation is resolved, and the flight proceeds as planned. By the time they asked, the crew had determined it was an emergency. I just wrapped 30 years with Delta. There's no reluctance to declare an emergency when needed. NYC airspace is crowded and fast paced, and ATC is equally busy.
@@gerardmoran9560 Hi Gérard. ..
Not well handled ATC wise.
Fly the aircraft indeed but get the controller in the loop ASAP with an engine out PAN call...especially around JFK...one of busiest airspace anywhere!!
They are good when they know exactly what your problem is and don't have to drag it out of you in stages...they will know immediately that you want to stop climbing/descend and divert/return with urgency and there is no immenent threat to life....
Safety first in that airspace.
Except not on pax/fuel....that suprised me..!!??
Fix your hat, you're on guard, they shoulda declared, now get off my lawn.
Why don't pilots make the controllers' lives easier and just declare the emergency at the beginning?
Because it takes time to determine if it’s an emergency or not
He flew a giant figure eight sprinkling engine juice as he went.
Lol master warnings goin off in the base turn me thinks they shut it off so it didnt fail when on short final so the plane would be stable
A lot of Master warnings, sounds very weird to me…
I want to know why ATC doesn’t pass Souls on Board and Fuel Remaining along. What is the point if they don’t somehow annotate that and share it along.
Not always enough time to.
@@saxmanb777 that's most likely the reason, but it seems like there should be a software solution, like highlight the aircraft on the scope, and add notations to it or something. I suppose we aren't quite there yet!
What do you mean? They certainly do pass it along. The controller is communicating that information to other controllers as well as personnel equipment on the ground
@@jakeoesterreich8037 What is NOT being passed along apparently is the status of souls on board and fuel remaining in pounds. OTHERWISE the controller would pass it along instead of saying the next controller may ask you for fuel and souls.
Your used to being told what to do and never say no.
Back in the day we would have said "133 Sob's" not anymore
"25.3 pounds"
Me: low fuel 😶
I'd have expected that they check the engine after leaving the runway. Might avoid spilling oil all over the runways and taxiways.
I think you’re equating this to a car or truck oil leak, it’s almost never like that - if the qty was reaching zero in the air, we can assume they shut that engine down… any actual leak remnants would have been blown away or burned off. I doubt you’d see much of anything beyond what’s on the engine cowling.
@@EstorilEm Almost certainly true... but given the potential for damage to other planes that could occur in that one-in-ten-thousand chance that it's *not* true, I have to say I'm with @Navek on this.
We don't know when the leak started, it might not have been spilling oil on the runway.
@@EstorilEm correct, and they don't hold that much oil anyway
@@HiddenWindshield What’s the one on ten thousand chance you speak of? Another aircraft ingesting a drop of oil? Oh god no! The horror! Lol.
Airport ops are trained just like pilots, they have their protocols and procedures they’ve got to follow after a given incident. FOD inspections are part of their SOP, I guarantee you they did everything by the book and all was fine (without unnecessarily impacting other flights and costing the industry tens of thousands due to even a temporary closure.)
I'm not a pilot! Why do pilots in these clips try so hard to NOT say what their problem is?
Yeah I notice that too. Maybe they are worried about the paperwork or their jobs or reputation.
Maybe because they weren't sure of nature of said problem at the time?
Alpha males like to keep the information to themselves because they don't want lesser mortals telling them what to do.
@@Volodimar Correct, they were busy diagnosing the issue to determine if it would be an emergency.
If you’re an emergency, say the word mayday!!
amend altitude
Did they dump fuel?
A320s dont dump fuel and do not have the facility to do so. Aircraft only have to dump fuel if they are over max landing weight. Smaller aircraft like A320S, 737s , ERJs and CRJs can be fuelly fuelled and will still not be overweight.
Wide bodies such as 767s, 777s, 747s , A330s etc can dump because their max TOW can exceed their max landing weight.
@@pauldunn5978 Thx!
Holy smokes no wonder Sully ditched in the river .. he didn't want to deal with ATCs shit
25.3 pounds of fuel remaining .... boy .... fuel is approaching zero too !!!
Not sure if this is sarcastic 😊 25.3 is shorthand for 25,300 lbs of jet fuel
Exactly, why not specify that it's thousands?
@@2004JETTA LOL I know, just a dumb joke
@@AlessioSangalli industry lingo, perhaps? Similar to frequencies? ATC May say contact ground in 129.4 and pilot responds with 29.4.
Well you know, because of today's cost of fuel, they had to make some cutbacks to stay profitable!
(joking) :)
Worstflights I’ve had are on delta the professions.
Why 'souls on board' rather than 'persons on board'?
Souls is all living people including crew. Rescue workers need a way to know if all living people have been evacuated. The cargo could include transport of caskets which may be considered people, but rescue workers should not risk injury to search for those people.
It was obvious they were going to land safely and the only reason I listened to the end was to find out what the diagnosis was, how much danger they were in, etc. Disappointed.
No danger in flight, unless the other engine decided to quit, there's no problem what so ever flying on 1 engine.
Possible problems on the ground might be overheated wheel brakes since they would only have hlaf the usual engine reverse braking.
There was a lot (virtually all) ground vehicle conversation missing from this video, they migt have had firetruck out just in case.
Damn mechanics forgot to tighten the oil drain plug.
What happened to landing at the nearest suitable airport?
The complete reg says "nearest suitable airport *in point of time* so if returning to JFK would take the same amount of time as descending to an airport closer (say PHL), JFK would have been just fine. Not that the FAA ever measures thus kind of stuff. If a 3 or 4 engined aircraft fails one, they can keep going to the destination if the PIC considers it just as safe as landing at the nearest suitable.
They landed in New York, that's what they did... Why can't the pilot just do what they think is best?
They follow FAA approved, manufacturer reviewed airline operational procedures, where there's a difference between landing "as soon as possible" and "as soon as practicable" for different issues.
That return was to a suitable airport....that they knew.
Is it the nearest?
Is it suitable ?
Maybe suitable is preferable?
You have to define suitable especially regarding facilities and weather etc etc etc...
If they just left an airfield that was deemed suitable for departure then maybe it's suitable for a return .
This issue is how they did it...!?
Never a dull moment with Delta.
So many of their planes are falling apart and are so old.They fly the snot out of those planes thats for sure. Im glad im not with them
Pos AirBus!
I thought bad communication between ATC controllers causing aircraft to repeat information was at few airports, looks like the majority of American airports have this problem though. On a side note, let me know if I’m wrong but aircraft refuel in kg’s right? Why do they ask for fuel in pounds. Cause I’ve heard about a few problems in the past when they were moving from fuelling in pounds to kilograms?
Ah in magical America, they use pounds in aviation. I.e. weight of the plane and fuel etc.
@@vatnsfjord Bunches of bananas then.
The ICAO correct answer is fuel in hours and minutes. I don't know what a controller does with fuel quantity.
@@KB4QAA I suppose it's for the fire service so they know how much fuel or fire to expect in case of a leak or accident. Why pounds still confounds me though. Like just take whatever the pilots give you and calculate yourself. You have nothing to worry about, pilots who declare an emergency have a lot better things to do than convert fuel or even push a button to see it. Double confirm which unit they used and that's enough.
I'll wager they do know how many people, the system says, are on what flight they think they are communicating with.. the redundancy helps both to verify they are communicating with whom they think, and to ensure everyone involved is freshly aware of the gravity of the circumstance.. .is why Souls instead of people.. Thank you all very much... but please be careful with the badmouthing of my peoples' ways... they are better than you.. it is proven.. and has been proven for a long time.
"Souls" is a term full of life and caring. Planes can also carry coffin(s) with the dearly departed. In a crash the information of souls actually makes it plain to the rescuers the total number of persons who must be found and saved.
4:20 25.3 pounds of fuel? Sorry sir. You won't reach the airport 😂
Personally, I think I'd be more concerned about their fuel quantity. An A320 would burn through 25.3 pounds of fuel in a few seconds. - lol
Are you declaring an emergency?
No. Not at this time..... we’d like to return to Kennedy
Err... what the reason?
Never you mind! (We’ve told you we want to return to Kennedy: make it happen and we’ll sort that out later!)
That was a really strange series of communications.
And have to say it again.... throwing a mayday or a pan-pan when they decided it was emergency would have helped. (Awaiting the WE DON’T DO THAT IN AMERICA crowd to arrive).
Oh give me a break, you asked for it so… believe it or not, us Yanks invented modern ATC and run more than 6x the air traffic than the UK.
He hadn’t RUN THE DAMN ECAM ACTIONS YET or checklist items, but preemptively wanted to stop the climb (ie climb power) out of caution due to dropping oil qty.)
So no, he can’t declare an emergency yet, but he did eventually once actions were taken and (presumably) the no1 engine was shut down.
What am I missing here? In the US us “Yanks” don’t just throw around pan pan pans because we think it sounds cool.
In all honesty, I’m sure UK and US flight crews would have done exactly the same thing, you just seem to be clueless about CRM and checklist items / protocols, and threw in a useless / unnecessary bit about how things are done in the US. 🤦♂️
Controllers want to know if a flight is in emergency ASAP because they can basically do whatever they want after that point as far as vectoring other aircraft; the incident aircraft wants to wait as long as possible till the issue is verified so they don’t look like idiots when filling out the inevitable boatload of paperwork which follows an emergency declaration. Im not saying the paperwork influenced their actions, but they’re going to follow protocol and checklists / ECAM actions before blindly declaring an emergency, which is EXACTLY what they did.
No help at all. Inert. A trivial obsessive trope and harangue. No difference whether used or not. Outcome always the same. Silly isn’t it when you think about it really.
What does it mean "mayday"? The airplane was fine, they just decided to go back to be on the safe side, it's not like the airplane was on fire or they lost a wing.... Come on they could have arrived at destination of they really wanted
@@AlessioSangalli These people are obsessed with Mayday and Pan Pan.
@@RLTtizME OCD types
I am like number 340
To any pilot or ATC reading this, why do they use the term “souls on board “ and not “people on board”?
Sounds like they gonna perish... it sounds negative to me.....
Based back in the days of airplanes borrowing terms from naval days
Real deal ,agree withvu about sayg people on board instead of souls,it would make me feel 👍 like we might not make it when ur thousands of feet upnin plane✈️
It's a piece of bogus American 'gravitas'.
It removes ambiguity, people could be considered passengers but not crew or forget off-duty crew (who are not customers or crew), or it could include dead people as planes may be used to transport caskets, or due to the oddities of language and routine business terms it could mean everyone other than the pilot/radio operator. (The people in addition to himself, "I have three people on board" is a reasonable statement from an owner-operator of a small airplane that has 4 souls onboard.)
Rescue workers need to know when they have evacuated all of the living, and not risk themselves for those who are already dead.
The Pilots forgot to declare the emergency (-_-)
It's a good thing the ATC asked it....
It is not required.
Delta with its 24 years old planes…..
It is absolutely astounding to me how badly transcribed the captions are.
Translated? What from American to English?
With only 25 pounds of fuel left, why did not the 'plane crash?
Why aren’t the delta pilots asking for the longest runway 31 L is 12000 feet. 22 l is short and 22 right has a displaced threshold which makes it almost really short. Come on you pro delta boys get your fking azz in control. Probably why I never got hired at delta I think and control my own airman ship.
Hi 57
In JFK.!!.
You must be joking...
You want a runway change for this event.....
Imagine the disruption and delay....and what was the wind direction??
22L and 22R are completely adequate for small passenger jets with an engine out.....
America pilots are allergic to Mayday Mayday mayday lol or declaring emergency in general lol
Because it is a EuroBrit affectation. Silly and redundant.
Not required to say mayday in the US. Not really trained for it.
Mayday is to clear the radio chatter and get attention, it serves no purpose when actively communicating with ATC and operating by instrument flight rules.
@@mytech6779 It used to be “spatula” but that was thought to be too dramatic.
@@saxmanb777 We just don't like it sweetie.
“Engine number one oil is approaching zero”…well is the engine running? Why not declare an emergency right away? We have seen several times over in recent times, that Delta pilots have suspect judgement. Just go back to the 777 dumping fuel, fast forward to the A220 attempting a go around at MSP with ground spoilers deployed and now this…
ATC had to guess what this crew wanted because the pilots didnt command the situation. “Can you accept a heading?” “Are you declaring an emergency?””Whats the reason for the return?”
Overall this is another poor example of Delta pilot decision making. And its becoming kore and more evident these guys need retraining, from a widebody with 3-4 pilots, down to the smallest aircraft they operate.
"well is the engine running?"
Obviously, yes. If it was out, they would have said so.
"Why not declare an emergency right away?"
Because they hadn't yet determined that they were in an emergency situation.
“Can you accept a heading?” “Are you declaring an emergency?””Whats the reason for the return?”
These are all standard questions. Nothing to be alarmed or critical about.
What kind of idiot pilot even takes off with only 25.3 pounds of fuel in a jet that large?
It’s shortened for the thousands, it’s actually 25,300lbs of fuel
You’ve got to be kidding right
@@varietychillin9632 I was wondering if any one would take that seriously.
@@josephalberta1145 Of course they'd take it seriously
It's in the task description of all armchair pilots.
That’s the amount of Gins in the galley.