FIRE IN THE COCKPIT During Climb out. Endeavor CRJ-900. REAL ATC
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 фев 2024
- On February 3, 2024.
An Endeavor Air Canadair Regional Jet CRJ-900 registration N320PQ, performing flight EDV4826 from Toronto Pearson International Airport (CYYZ) to New York John F. Kennedy International Airport (KJFK) during climb, about at 11000 feet, the pilots declared MAYDAY, reported electrical fire in the cockpit and requested immediate return to the airport of departure.
Main playlists:
EMERGENCY - • EMERGENCY
REAL ATC - • REAL ATC
CRASHES - • Crashes
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 #AIRTRAFFICCONTROLL #AVIATION 
Авто/Мото
... and that is how you declare an emergency.
ATC: "I don't know what you're talking about but it's approved..."
4826: "Oh wait, that second L is actually an I."
You don’t have to guess. Atc response is correct it is a mayday so priority is given whatever pilot wants. Pilot corrected accordingly to share his intentions without ambiguity
"ULLPI" or ULIPI (actual). I'm not a pilot but this exchange cracked me up.
I loved the demeanor of the lady controller
This is the first time I've heard "Mayday mayday mayday" and "declaring an emergency" in the same transmission. And it was the first transmission after the emergency started. And they also included their call sign and a brief description of the emergency. I'm seriously impressed. This has got to be a first.
I thought the same. Way to clear the frequency with the Mayday call and then start giving details
It's my understanding that "declaring an emergency" is redundant after "Mayday mayday mayday", but I've heard at least one ATC that was confused when that bit was left off.
@@johnmcleodvii True, but how many times have you heard ATC ask if an emergency is being declared after a Mayday transmission? This way all bases are covered and there should be no doubt.
Total professionalism on all sides! This is another training film on the proper way to declare an emergency. ATC got everything they needed on the first transmission and responded immediately with vectors. Also, not to be underestimated, ATC stayed perfectly calm, and kudos to the pilots, they did too. ATC: "copy your emergency. Turn left heading 260".
Good call. The takeaway I've learned form youtube accident investigation videos is NEVER stay in the air one second longer than you possible can if there's been a fire. It might not be out. It might start again. GET DOWN ASAP :D
Fire is one of the worst enemies of airplanes. I agree totally.
CRJ Windshield Heater: Hey, pilot, wanna see something funny?
Toronto the class act! Both ATC & Fire on point, with such clear/precise commands and professionalism.. I’m certain the flight crew couldn’t agree more.. Well done by everyone
I've listened to a lot of calls, but that was about as "textbook" as you get! Nicely done by all!
In all my years of flying, having an onboard fire is the pilots worst nightmare. Excellent job by ALL parties!
Wow. Talk about a textbook way to handle an emergency. Total professionalism from everyone. Excellent communication from the crew. ATC also brilliant. Congratulations to all involved.
It’s their job. What do you expect?
@@mcraft2240 ? Some ATC, and Pilots aren't professional or courteous to each other! 🤷♂
That’s about the most efficient handling of an emergency on both sides of the radio I’ve ever heard. 👏
Pretty common.
@@mcraft2240 I wish it was more common.
When you have a fire the objective is get on the ground asap not practice holding like this guy did! He put everyone on board in danger by delaying the landing!
these pro's just impress the hell out of me
Capt Joe or Mentor did a vid on windshield arcs, usually not a danger in itself, but now you have a wind screen without deicing. Nicely done.
8:06 “…there’s no temperature differential from your side to the co-pilot’s side…”
They all did such a great job. I know they have checks to run, but confirmed flareup/flames, get me on the ground NOW!
It appears fire is out…… not the way I’d handle it, that’s an immediate turn to the nearest runway.
Wow. Super-professional by all. This is a great example of how it is done.
Well this is terrifying. I’m always In awe of pilots and atc. 👏
Nice clear communication. Very nice. Very clear.
Perfect.
Burned shorts, oh no!
8:08 no temperature differential
@@flightforensics4523I believe they would be using a thermal imaging camera to compare both sides
Wasn't there just another CRJ with a windshield heater fire? Or am I thinking of this same incident?
Canada calm and professional
I’ve found the controllers at YYZ are usually very clear in their communication, they speak quickly but annunciation is very well done. YYZ isn’t the only one, but they are one of the clearest, to my ears at least
Love the Canadian accent from the Fire Captain on Red 11. Very matter-of-fact, and cool as a cucumber.
@@ScrewFlanders as a Torontarian and Southwestern Ontarian (border near Detroit, MI USA).... I always find it intriguing when I hear others say we have an accent.
I find those that are native to Ontario usually have the clearest, most precise pronunciation of the English language... compared to say, someone from Newfoundland, or Nova Scotia...
I travel to Detroit quite often, and they always tell me that they can tell I'm Canadian, by my accent... Yet, when I go back to Toronto to visit family, whenever I'm out shopping, I'm always asked where I'm from, and they assume I'm from the US, lol.
Just funny seeing someone say they detect an accent, when I don't detect one at all, lol
Cheers 😊
@@chefruggy8022
Not really different from the "average" American accent.
@@chefruggy8022 The differences _are_ subtle. It's almost more about cadence and emphasis than anything else. There _is_ one difference though that even my Austrian wife can hear: "out" is pronounced "owt" in the US, but as "oot" in Canada. Peter Jenning's "oot" would always get a smile from me.
BTW, I didn't mean it as a put-down: I actually like the Canadian accent. 😉
Wow! Listening to such clear and articulate comms at YYZ is quite refreshing compared to the usual American unintelligible babble.
😢no damage? False: when a electrical fire start , it's all the bundle. So yes, the electrical bundle need to be replace, in the mean time, all around the damage bundle, we check to be sure ni other issue haved apear.
It helps a great deal when the fire goes out in 30 seconds. If the fire intensifies.........
Oh yes Ullipee, now that's something entirely different from Ulpee.
I’m wondering if everybody involved is prior military. Pilots, ATC, Fire; everybody right on the ball. Everybody taking the initiative and a step ahead. All the basics and none of the bullshit.
When I took my type rating check ride in the B777 I was given a cargo fire 40 miles from destination, my fo suggested delaying vectors to run check list I over ruled him as the Captain we went directly to the airport and landed. During the debriefing the FAA inspector observing the check ride stated my decision was the better one over the FO’s
I'm old enough to remember the SwissAir crash near Halifax where time was a super critical issue. Our simulator training changed drastically after that. Where we used to assume "middle of the ocean" scenarios with a full troubleshooting procedure to isolate and restore as able (for learning purposes and for the 'what other choice except ditching?" do we really have?) ... Afterwards we did the 'Captain flies as fast as possible to nearest landing surface' while FO does whatever is possible in the time available kind of scenarios. I'd certainly agree with your choice too. ;-)
@@gcorriveau6864 Thank you! That check ride for me was over 20 years ago. The Swiss Air 111 was my reasoning for doing what I did knowing how the crew waisted precious time over making dumping fuel trying to prevent and over weight landing. They made a poor decision! However I benefited from that mistake and hopefully thousands of pilots did as well.
Great job Endeavor! Professional all the way. Just one thought. I might’ve just landed right away. No need to wait 5 minutes. Fires can destroy an aircraft in that time. Not judging. Just food for thought. Even if you think a fire is out, a relight can happen at anytime.
Exactly. This crew did a wonderful job but I would not delay a landing for a fire. I've had two ... for real (military). And they and Swiss Air have taught me not to delay a landing.
Question- when declaring mayday- who hears it ? Just the tower/ or other planes. Ty
Everybody on that frequency
All this is going on while i'm sitting back here watching Big Bang Theory re-runs...
Ulipi and the that’s fine comment was just indicating that they were under pressure and she didn’t need to know what it was at that time
I understand delays to do checklists on some emergencies, but why wait and delay your approach with a fire?
Because it does not help to create a worse situation by failing to correctly configure the aircraft. Also need to figure weight for landing distance etc.
Being in a hurry is a prime way to make a mistake which compounds your problems.
They were obeying rule 1: fly thd aircraft. Thats not a 172.
@@nattybumpo7156 I've been saying this for years after these videos started appearing on YT. Why do these pilots not brief an emergency return in case they need to perform one? Why don't you have a game plan? Any runway you took off from you can land on. It takes 30 seconds, and that's being generous, to put an approach into the FMS and execute it. You don't have to hurry. Don't be wasting your life on contacting company to let them know you're returning and what gate they need to plan for. Swiss Air 111. I will give kudos for these pilots because they donned their O2 masks and did a very good job handling this situation. My only gripe would have been to not delay.
@@nattybumpo7156 Depends on the pilot and their training honestly. Most airline pilots (myself included) would treat a fire as a "we need to be on the ground yesterday" situation.
I would've turned direct to the nearest runway, and tried to run the checklist as much as possible. If we get it done, great. If not, oh well, get the gear and flaps down and land the airplane.
Even if i had to divert and land on a short runway at a GA airport. I'd rather go off the end of a short runway at 20 knots than slam inverted nose first into terra firma at 500 knots because my flight controls melted while carefully and methodically running my checklist. Previous fire related accidents have shown that the airplane can be unflyable after as little as 10 minutes.
Granted, these guys seemed confident that the fire was out, and the results speak for themselves, so I say job well done.
Radar off? That's a new one. What happens if they leave it on? Microwave the Red Crew??
The radar can’t be operated when people are within 100 feet as it’s not safe for the body. It’s normally shut off anyway but fire crew just wanted to verify
Pretty much. Weather radars put out about 8KW of microwave energy, so if you're stood next to it you're going to get toasty quick.
Why did the plane make an oval on the map instead of proceeding straight to the landing runway?
they were running through their checklists and needed time.
Good job everyone. REAL ATC could you rotate the video so that north is up. Thanks
It is north up.
@@johanbroman3872 4826 turn right 360 is not straight up!
7:27 Can somebody explain why Radar Off? 🤔
Weather radar is extremely powerful and the radiation can be potentially lethal. Designs vary and on the CRJ it's only dangerous out to about 2 feet in front of the nose cone, but the firefighters simply want to make sure nobody gets injured or killed walking in front of the aircraft. Believe it or not it's happened with airline employees in the past.
Why would the Fire Fighters want the RADAR turned off?
So if they are outside in the front of the aircraft - they'd get zapped by radar radiation...
They obviously do not want to be microwaved while near the front of the aircraft ...
Maybe the want to have kids someday. 🙂
Yall don’t have to answer like he’s stupid. Not everyone works in this world and sometimes have honest questions
@@garrettboone4306Exactly. I know nothing about RADAR in aviation. I didn't realize that it was harmful since it's used in many other applications.
ULPI, ULLIPI, and there’s confusion? 😳
yeah.
ATC and pilots both have a lot going on in the background that we're not hearing on air so that's not a big deal - and they sorted it out - if I was getting 'nit picky' I'd have to remind the pilot that using Phonetic Idents would be more precise and avoid potential confusion. ;-)... you should hear the confusion over places like Riviere du Loup and Sioux Sainte Marie , and ... 🤣
I am not a pilot but I would not recommend diagnosing "fire is out" while in the air, it could be smoldering and flare up again. I would just get the plane on the ground ASAP and leave the diagnosing to others as to whether it is out or not. Reminds me of Swissair 111.
That's a good observation and I'll bet that the pilots here are in full agreement. Any perceived 'delay' getting on the ground was probably a case of "Keep it organized and Don't Make It Worse. Like: 1. it takes time to get down from altitude; 2. it takes time to prepare the landing runway data and brief the new landing scenario and ensuring that any over-weight / performance situations aren't present that could cause a different danger (i.e. go-around performance) / need to dump fuel? / landing distance vs. weight ... So - IF IT WAS still smoking there are, indeed, ways and reasons to take some valid short-cuts. If not - then (as the astronauts say: "Don't do nuthin' dumb" (to make it worse). I hope some of this information answers your question. Offered sincerely - cheers! ;-)
❌ fire
❌❌ fire + altitude
❌❌❌ fire + altitude + far out over water
Volume Warning...it's very low. 😉
This brings up an interesting discussion for all airline pilots.
I would've handled this differently, given that fires in flight can leave the airplane uncontrollable after as little as 10 minutes, I would have turned direct to the nearest suitable runway and landed as soon as the laws of physics would allow. Of course, try to run the QRH and get as much done as you can, but regardless of whether or not it's finished we're dropping the gear and flaps and landing right now.
Depending on the cirumstances, if I had to divert to a small GA airport I'd much rather run off the end of the runway going 20 knots than smack terra firma inverted at 400 knots because the fire melted my flight controls while I was carefully and methodically running a checklist.
Granted, these guys seemed confident the fire was local, and that it was out. Can't argue with the result which was a safe landing. Maybe if their situation were more severe they would have taken a different course of action.
Please do weigh in, I'd be interested in hearing your opinions.
Can't argue with the outcome but I would have made a different decision as well. I am training on the CRJ900 currently, and we are taught that fire is enemy #1. The time we were quoted was an average of 15 minutes before the aircraft becomes un-flyable. From an outside perspective, my call would have been to return immediately to the nearest suitable runway, and complete whatever checklists that could be done within that time, with the main focus being to configure the aircraft for landing and having a rapid deplanement if the fire seemed to persist. There has been more than one accident caused by not landing at the nearest opportunity when fire is a factor...
This is Red 5 standing by😁😁
Why doesn’t the tower know how many passengers on the plane? Same for hazmat, I’d have thought that would all be logged somewhere. Or is it just to confirm the info
The tower wouldn't have that information on hand, but they'd be able to get it quickly from the airline. However, "quickly" isn't the same as the instant answer that the crew can give them; the airline would take a few minutes to get them that information. There is also the possibility of a last-minute ticket or cancellation for both passenger(s) and cargo. The crew will have up-to-the-minute information, but the airline's central system may not have been updated yet.
Knowing the manifest & head counts of every plane in their airspace is not their concern. Not unless an emergency is declared.
@@sturmovik1274 makes sense, from an outsiders pov, it seems they are asking for information when the pilot would be in a pretty stressful situation, and then sometimes pilot gives fuel in hours , or pounds, or a shortening of pounds, then ATC ask for it again in whatever metric they want it in, and you often hear ATC asking apologetically for the information.
I guess its so infrequent this happens, that its ok, but just seems it could be a lot better with some sort of centralized system of plane data. Again, I know nothing about ATC and flying, that this could be implausible to happen
Good point
@@PlutogalaxyI get the system doesn't exist, and it shouldn't be a phone call, they should be able to type a flight number into a system and get that data instantly.. in an ideal world of course..
Endeavor 4826, I noticed you stopped deep throating the mic when it got serious. Not sure if you just communicate poorly on purpose at the beginning or ?
Why USA controller can not have such clear communication? Different controllers do not ask the same question over and over, do not ask to repeat because they forgot original answer after one more question. Do not ask after mayday, are you declare an emergency?
Not USA, Toronto is in Canada
Toronto is not a part of the United States...yet...
@@Whateva67Yes, that's why he used this video as an example of how US controllers should behave
Why commenter not type english structure so good?
How is it possible that the control tower doesn't know how many passengers and how much fuel are on the plane?
it’s not the controllers job to know the number of passengers, the amount of fuel, or whether the plane is carrying any hazmat material. It would be like expecting a policeman who stops an automobile on the freeway to know how much gas you have, how many passengers in the car, and what’s in your trunk.
@@jimosborne2 with all the electronic systems they have on board I thought that this data would catch the eye of the operators in the tower simply by pointing the mouse at the little drawing of the plane on the monitor
@@254lelemaybe someday they will be able to encode that information into the transponder but meanwhile they are having a very difficult time preventing runway incursions- there’s shortages of both ground radar and controllers. After they fix that- if they do- the entire nationwide tracking system must be upgraded to allow pilots to essentially self navigate. There’s quite a list of safety measures needed before what you are describing.
@@jimosborne2 We should create something called a flight plan which could list things like tail number, departure arrival and alternate airports, aircraft type, routing, requested speed and flight level, navigation equipment, emergency equipment, TCAS, RVSM, time enroute to every ATC or country region, endurance (fuel on board in time) and souls on board. If only we had those things. Rolls eyes.
@JohnSmith-zi9or wow. there are different flight plans. the flight plan that the approach controllers get just has callsign, type, CID, squawk, proposed time, requested altitude, departure airport, and a route that may be truncated if it's too long. asking SOB and fuel remaining in time is standard operating procedure.
*Promosm* ☹️
Bet it was just a lightning strike on the nose lol
They said it was the windshield heater that sparked. 6:03
Yes, I faced the same problem at an altitude of 35,000 and completed the trip notmaly because, as you said, the problem is in the outer windshield, but experience plays a role, as the problem does not require an emergency. But I believe that what we all learned from some of our hasty decisions later made us more experienced and knowledgeable .
Not in winter and -25c temps at 8000.
Nope, not in the winter when the high was like -10C
It's like you lit a wick of fire it stays for almost 15 seconds, and the reason is a shortage in the window heat circuit which is external not internal.
F the check lists - LAND
If you don't configure the plane correctly you won't land you will crash that's what those checklists they are doing are
Electrical Fire double Q 20 seconds! Only 16 minutes to get AC on ground. Example: Swiss Air flight 111 crashed while running extended check lists. There is is not much really. Ref speeds, gear and flaps if required and get the AC on the ground, not necessarily the airport!
US pilots could learn a lot from this flight crew on how to declare an emergency.
They are us pilots?
I mean they likely are American given the callsign but yeah that was very good RT for that part of the world. There was another incident a few weeks ago where there was a really good emergency call too.
You mean European pilots 😂? US pilots do this all the time and are professional with an emergency landing, i mean they get 1500H of training compared to Europe 250H
@@amxlopez8082 just listen to the difference in radio use though. American pilots and controllers tend to use a lot more non-stand phraseology and speak faster and less clearer. In Europe it's a lot more standardised.
US crews become very used to everyone around them speaking perfect English, simply because most do, being further away from countries that don't. Especially when you consider, as you say, they spend the first 1500 hours in light aircraft, probably rarely interacting with international flights. In Europe, it's a lot more important to get the RT spot on because of more language barriers. Obviously everyone speaks ICAO L4, but generally the comms are more standardised.
That's why we were praising this crew for the good use for the radio. e.g. many use pilots wouldn't bother with the "mayday, mayday, mayday" instead simply relying on a mumbled "declaring an emergency".
So we're not going to talk about the Canadian controller pretending she didn't know what nav point the American pilot was referring to at 4:11? No? OK. No passive aggression there at all, no sireee
maybe she really didn't know. she DID approve his request.
I only heard an honest point of miscommunication over a quickly pronounced IDENT during a busy event.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
-Ulpi? No idea what that is..
-Ulipi
-Oh yeah, know that very well..
Sure SOP's and all, but maybe Ask if they mean ulipi instead of beeing a smart/dumbass about ulpi.
Yeah, I don’t think she was being a smart ass at all. I think she handled it very well.
I guess, as far as she was concerned, it wasn’t close enough for her brain to make the connection. Sorry.
More DEI maintenance
Nothing ever went wrong before dei right? Absolute fool.
Everything was handled perfectly in this emergency. What are you talking about?
The ULLPI/ULIPI thing makes the controller look like a complete moron. These guys declared an emergency. How tf do you not know what they are talking about......
Because there are loads of different nav points around the area. He was pronouncing it wait an A rather than a U.
So controller should assume ULIPI? We all know what happens when you assume.
You have the benefit of seeing the text ULLPI vs ULIPI. When you hear ULLPI the “U” sound is short and can be “ALL” or “OL”. So you cannot presume that the person hearing knows it’s ULIPI (you-li-pee) spoken as ULLPI (all-pee). [insert pee jokes here]
@@keven3647 They knew exactly which runway the pilot wanted and I assume they are capable of reading an approach chart.
The 'you' vs 'ull' thing shouldnt be confusing for anyone, especially the tower. Imagine flying in and calling it ull-i-pi rather than you-li-pi and the controller's like "IdK wHeRe tHaT iS".
At most, they should have asked for confirmation with the right name, rather than act ignorant. An emergency isnt a time for semantic BS. It was just bad work on the controller's part.
Controller actually has other stuff going on outside of what we hear on the air - just as the pilots do. Not a problem - they sorted it out.