Maybe I’m imagining this but it SEEMS like whenever ATC asks the pilots for souls and fuel, if the pilots give fuel in hours, ATC asks for pounds. If pilots give fuel in pound, ATC asks for time remaining. What gives?
They do need both I think, endurance to know how much time they have left to work the problem and weight for the fire brigade at the airport to know the potential of the situation upon landing. Not sure though.
Idk why they care about how many lbs are onboard. Its not like they're going to start doing burn rate calculations. Time makes much more sense from a controllers pov. My 2 cents.
@@highflyerl23 Speaking strictly from a firefighting/ARFF standpoint, this is important to us. Knowing remaining fuel helps with knowing if he’s going to land heavy (hot brakes) and estimating fire load. Based on that information, we can be prepared before he’s even on the ground.
ATC is constantly striving to assist, however, this sometimes leads to making the situation worse. Well, it's just the nature of their job. Still think that Fuel in lbs is a bit to anal though. Brickyard (E-170/E-175) driver @ IND. 🤔👨🏽✈️✈🌍
As a non pilot observer, I believe that fuel in pounds would be more helpful. ATC is gathering information should the landing not go as planned, this information is passed to emergency services. 2.5 hours of fuel means what? 8500lbs would be a lot better information IMO.
Y’all can debate the declaration I’m wondering why they didn’t immediately mention the bird strike? That’s critical especially if you hit it on or over the runway. Don’t want anybody else running over or ingesting FOD.
Because they're macho USA aviators who always somehow feel that they're going to be emasculated if they immediately declare a 'pan pan', or 'mayday', or even somehow admit that they have any issue whatsoever and prefer to keep ATC guessing and making endless calls to painstakingly extract information a bit at a time! It's about time that the authorities clamped down on this sort of disregard of international communication norms which waste time and potentially waste lives. We were always taught in Europe that 'clear and swift communications save time, confusion and lives'....... I know the adage of 'aviate, navigate, communicate', but this was not that level of crisis whereby that totally applied!
@@paulsinclair3401 Or, maybe...just maybe its only an assumption they've hit a bird and on reflection came to realize a bird strike might be the best cause for their issues rather your blind and illogical assumption they must be "macho USA aviators". Isnt that the more reasonable assumption?
You realize this happened at night, right? Tell me how easy it is to see birds in the dark. It was probably something they didn’t immediately know and came to the conclusion of for the failure.
Just tell tower, when they give you the next frequency, that you think you hit something at about 100ft. Easy to do and washes your hands of the problem if there is debris on the DER.
I'm not sure if the pilot is calm or cocky. Should have declared as soon as they had a flight control issue. Note that ATC declared on their behalf before the flight crew finally declared.
RPA FO here, why the rush to declare? Flaps/slats aren't a primary flight control, and our checklists dictate several steps to take first to troubleshoot a flap/slat failure before deciding if we want to declare. In this crew's case they weren't on fire, both engines are operating, they had plenty of fuel, and the airplane was controllable.
@@PhoenixKS But they have no way on earth of knowing if the flap will partially collapse, detach, and/or get tangled in the aileron. It's not like they can include "take a stroll along the wing and check the damage" in the checklist! And if that happens and you end up making a semi-controlled off-field or off-runway landing, far better for all concerned if the rescue crews are already on alert and in their vehicles. As a UK trained pilot, I simply do not understand the reluctance to declare in the US (or their disregard for the two levels of alert endorsed by ICAO). For me, it is "PAN PAN" as soon as I have any issue at all, and then up or down from there. "PAN PAN" alerts the controllers that it is no longer a routine flight, and is going to need more (and preferably faster) attention than a routine one. It also allows rescue crews to be put on alert in plenty of time.
@@markor2476 Actually I think a "PAN-PAN" call would have been warranted here, but that's me armchair-quarterbacking (although I'm actually sitting in an office chair but I won't tell anyone else if you won't). My initial comment above about "declaring" was in regards to an emergency declaration. I think a PAN-PAN call should be used for anything a PIC thinks is urgent enough to warrant it. This crew got about 80+ percent of the benefit of a PAN-PAN call when they made their initial call to departure and asked to level off at 5,000'. I think the most important thing here is that this crew got all their passengers and fellow crewmembers back down on the ground safely, and they went to bed that night better pilots than they were when they woke up that morning.
business jet carrying four people crashed in El Cajon shortly after taking off from John Wayne Airport on Monday evening, Dec. 27, and authorities said they found no survivors. Reports are saying pilot asked for different runway and brighter lights...then heard "screaming and cursing" Wonder if you are able to review this incident.
And again the pilot has to be asked multiple times if he is declaring an emergency. I don't get it why they keep ATC in the dark, panpan panpan panpan we need to level off at 5000 can't possibly be to much to say, I mean because he didn't he had to say his request 3 times and surely lost more time.
Because they're macho USA aviators who always somehow feel that they're going to be emasculated if they immediately declare a 'pan pan', or 'mayday', or even somehow admit that they have any issue whatsoever and prefer to keep ATC guessing and making endless calls to painstakingly extract information a bit at a time! It's about time that the authorities clamped down on this sort of disregard of international communication norms which waste time and potentially waste lives. We were always taught in Europe that 'clear and swift communications save time, confusion and lives'....... I know the adage of 'aviate, navigate, communicate', but this was not that level of crisis whereby that totally applied!
Panpan isn't really something any American is taught or uses. He waited to declare an emergency because it tells you when to when running the QRH. On something like an engine fire it's early in the checklist, like once you blow the bottle, but on minor things like flaps getting stuck, it's towards the end if the troubleshooting doesn't work. And as always aviate, navigate, communicate.
What I do not understand why so cryptic? why not state the issue "Departure we are having an issue with the flaps we believe we may have hit a bird and need to level off at 5 to run the checklist." Now everyone is on the same page and ATC can handle you accordingly. Seriously boys don't make ATC drag the information out of you just offer it up and be done with it. And yes I fly for the airlines.
I won't claim they should have declared emergency; that's on them. What should have been rapidly communicated by the flight crew though was "suspected birdstrike on the runway during takeoff roll" or "suspected birdstrike at 100' altitude on climbout" so ground crew can go check and clear for carcass/remains on the runway, or maybe scatter a flock. Either way, the flight crew shouldn't forget ATC isn't just pestering them for the sake of it, they're concerned and responsible for the next aircraft taking off on that runway too.
Because they're macho USA aviators who always somehow feel that they're going to be emasculated if they immediately declare a 'pan pan', or 'mayday', or even somehow admit that they have any issue whatsoever and prefer to keep ATC guessing and making endless calls to painstakingly extract information a bit at a time! It's about time that the authorities clamped down on this sort of disregard of international communication norms which waste time and potentially waste lives. We were always taught in Europe that 'clear and swift communications save time, confusion and lives'....... I know the adage of 'aviate, navigate, communicate', but this was not that level of crisis whereby that totally applied!
@@EdOeuna I speak from 33 years of experience and can tell you it is that simple. While you may not need to declare an emergency there is also no need to be cryptic. Good CRM includes ATC. No need to keep them guessing or like you say play some Parlour game.
Because they're macho USA aviators who always somehow feel that they're going to be emasculated if they immediately declare a 'pan pan', or 'mayday', or even somehow admit that they have any issue whatsoever and prefer to keep ATC guessing and making endless calls to painstakingly extract information a bit at a time! It's about time that the authorities clamped down on this sort of disregard of international communication norms which waste time and potentially waste lives. We were always taught in Europe that 'clear and swift communications save time, confusion and lives'....... I know the adage of 'aviate, navigate, communicate', but this was not that level of crisis whereby that totally applied!
Because the checklist states that it is up to pilot discretion to declare an emergency or not. So probably some discussion on if they wanted to or not. Boston has long runways, and depends on how high your approach/landing speed is.
the runways are not very clearly marked on this radar. you can orient yourself by looking at the yellow lines by BOS and matching to the runways. the plane landed in 22l
A90 signifies the Boston TRACON, F is the controller's position. The positions are also represented by the letter in the data tag, eg. "D" or "F." The aircraft with the contoller's respective letter are under that controller's control.
@@VASAviation I understand, but that's the question - I'm just curious why the reception is different coming from just that one controller vs the others. Could that one be physically located somewhere else, significantly further from the receiver used for this recording?
@@DaddyBeanDaddyBean Probably more to the point is that the aircraft have a direct line of sight to the receiver while the ground station is much more borderline - it would be much clearer from the aircraft with which it is designed to be communicating than to another ground station listening in.
They don’t even know if they hit anything, so seem reluctant to retract the flaps. I’m sure the Embraer will let you know if you have a flap jammed or asymmetrical flaps quickly enough. How about retracting the flaps on departure and seeing if there is a problem, then reacting to the problem. They could probably continue the flight unless the flaps are partially extended. There seems to be too many what it’s and unknowns with this, and the few are reacting to them.
Bird strikes playlist: ruclips.net/p/PLi0SM524ylKXVsEnBrHPThbPdLSHpkUcl
Really love the new edits with showing the approach fixes. Nice touch!
Appreciate it
@@VASAviation Your videos are getting better. I also like the approach fixes and arrows as they help up AvGeeks get the bigger picture. 👍
Maybe I’m imagining this but it SEEMS like whenever ATC asks the pilots for souls and fuel, if the pilots give fuel in hours, ATC asks for pounds. If pilots give fuel in pound, ATC asks for time remaining. What gives?
They do need both I think, endurance to know how much time they have left to work the problem and weight for the fire brigade at the airport to know the potential of the situation upon landing. Not sure though.
@@markor2476 that makes sense. Thanks!
@@markor2476 they also need weight in case the airplane needs go burn fuel if its too heavy for landing
Man the 'BIG BLUE ARROWS' sure help Identify Who is Commutating with ATC. LOVE IT.
And again….pilot reported fuel in time remaining and ATC subsequently requested pounds. Happens. Every. Single. Time.
Idk why they care about how many lbs are onboard. Its not like they're going to start doing burn rate calculations. Time makes much more sense from a controllers pov. My 2 cents.
@@highflyerl23 Speaking strictly from a firefighting/ARFF standpoint, this is important to us. Knowing remaining fuel helps with knowing if he’s going to land heavy (hot brakes) and estimating fire load. Based on that information, we can be prepared before he’s even on the ground.
ATC is constantly striving to assist, however, this sometimes leads to making the situation worse. Well, it's just the nature of their job.
Still think that Fuel in lbs is a bit to anal though.
Brickyard (E-170/E-175) driver @ IND. 🤔👨🏽✈️✈🌍
As a non pilot observer, I believe that fuel in pounds would be more helpful. ATC is gathering information should the landing not go as planned, this information is passed to emergency services. 2.5 hours of fuel means what? 8500lbs would be a lot better information IMO.
@@TheWabbit agreed, 2.5 hrs on a EMB145 vs 787 would be very different amounts of fuel.
Props on staying so calm.
Good morning everyone
Good morning!
Good afternoon, sir ☃️
Evening here
Goodmorning😊
Y’all can debate the declaration I’m wondering why they didn’t immediately mention the bird strike? That’s critical especially if you hit it on or over the runway. Don’t want anybody else running over or ingesting FOD.
Because they're macho USA aviators who always somehow feel that they're going to be emasculated if they immediately declare a 'pan pan', or 'mayday', or even somehow admit that they have any issue whatsoever and prefer to keep ATC guessing and making endless calls to painstakingly extract information a bit at a time!
It's about time that the authorities clamped down on this sort of disregard of international communication norms which waste time and potentially waste lives.
We were always taught in Europe that 'clear and swift communications save time, confusion and lives'....... I know the adage of 'aviate, navigate, communicate', but this was not that level of crisis whereby that totally applied!
@@paulsinclair3401 Or, maybe...just maybe its only an assumption they've hit a bird and on reflection came to realize a bird strike might be the best cause for their issues rather your blind and illogical assumption they must be "macho USA aviators".
Isnt that the more reasonable assumption?
You realize this happened at night, right? Tell me how easy it is to see birds in the dark. It was probably something they didn’t immediately know and came to the conclusion of for the failure.
Damn I figured you'll be the first to post about the Learjet that crashed yesterday in California. It's posted everywhere exept here
Why did the pilot take so long to declare a possible birdstrike? Surely that information may be critical to other aircraft.
He probably double parks...
Just tell tower, when they give you the next frequency, that you think you hit something at about 100ft. Easy to do and washes your hands of the problem if there is debris on the DER.
Aviate, navigate, communicate. Communication with ATC comes last, only when you've got time. They're busy up front with other tasks.
@@adamleverson8329 - you speak to tower shortly after getting airborne. Just tell them then. ANC doesn’t really apply here.
Once again, standardization in fuel remaining (albeit time, lbs, gallons, etc.), would be useful, versus ATC having to fish for it.
God bless ATC!
Great job
I'm not sure if the pilot is calm or cocky. Should have declared as soon as they had a flight control issue. Note that ATC declared on their behalf before the flight crew finally declared.
Aviate, navigate, declare
RPA FO here, why the rush to declare? Flaps/slats aren't a primary flight control, and our checklists dictate several steps to take first to troubleshoot a flap/slat failure before deciding if we want to declare. In this crew's case they weren't on fire, both engines are operating, they had plenty of fuel, and the airplane was controllable.
@@PhoenixKS But they have no way on earth of knowing if the flap will partially collapse, detach, and/or get tangled in the aileron. It's not like they can include "take a stroll along the wing and check the damage" in the checklist! And if that happens and you end up making a semi-controlled off-field or off-runway landing, far better for all concerned if the rescue crews are already on alert and in their vehicles.
As a UK trained pilot, I simply do not understand the reluctance to declare in the US (or their disregard for the two levels of alert endorsed by ICAO).
For me, it is "PAN PAN" as soon as I have any issue at all, and then up or down from there. "PAN PAN" alerts the controllers that it is no longer a routine flight, and is going to need more (and preferably faster) attention than a routine one. It also allows rescue crews to be put on alert in plenty of time.
@@PhoenixKS If you wouldn't use panpan in this scenario, when would you? It can't possibly be only used for a heart attack of a passenger.
@@markor2476 Actually I think a "PAN-PAN" call would have been warranted here, but that's me armchair-quarterbacking (although I'm actually sitting in an office chair but I won't tell anyone else if you won't). My initial comment above about "declaring" was in regards to an emergency declaration. I think a PAN-PAN call should be used for anything a PIC thinks is urgent enough to warrant it. This crew got about 80+ percent of the benefit of a PAN-PAN call when they made their initial call to departure and asked to level off at 5,000'.
I think the most important thing here is that this crew got all their passengers and fellow crewmembers back down on the ground safely, and they went to bed that night better pilots than they were when they woke up that morning.
This happened at night? Interesting.
Smooth Operators, all.
business jet carrying four people crashed in El Cajon shortly after taking off from John Wayne Airport on Monday evening, Dec. 27, and authorities said they found no survivors. Reports are saying pilot asked for different runway and brighter lights...then heard "screaming and cursing" Wonder if you are able to review this incident.
And again the pilot has to be asked multiple times if he is declaring an emergency. I don't get it why they keep ATC in the dark, panpan panpan panpan we need to level off at 5000 can't possibly be to much to say, I mean because he didn't he had to say his request 3 times and surely lost more time.
People are so quick to declare before information is gathered. These pilots did what they needed to and did it properly.
If the FAA felt it was something that needs to be addressed, they would have by now.
Because they're macho USA aviators who always somehow feel that they're going to be emasculated if they immediately declare a 'pan pan', or 'mayday', or even somehow admit that they have any issue whatsoever and prefer to keep ATC guessing and making endless calls to painstakingly extract information a bit at a time!
It's about time that the authorities clamped down on this sort of disregard of international communication norms which waste time and potentially waste lives.
We were always taught in Europe that 'clear and swift communications save time, confusion and lives'....... I know the adage of 'aviate, navigate, communicate', but this was not that level of crisis whereby that totally applied!
@@VladimirNicolici I do not agree with that.
Panpan isn't really something any American is taught or uses. He waited to declare an emergency because it tells you when to when running the QRH. On something like an engine fire it's early in the checklist, like once you blow the bottle, but on minor things like flaps getting stuck, it's towards the end if the troubleshooting doesn't work. And as always aviate, navigate, communicate.
go ahead and call pan pan, bird strike....
What I do not understand why so cryptic? why not state the issue "Departure we are having an issue with the flaps we believe we may have hit a bird and need to level off at 5 to run the checklist." Now everyone is on the same page and ATC can handle you accordingly. Seriously boys don't make ATC drag the information out of you just offer it up and be done with it. And yes I fly for the airlines.
I won't claim they should have declared emergency; that's on them. What should have been rapidly communicated by the flight crew though was "suspected birdstrike on the runway during takeoff roll" or "suspected birdstrike at 100' altitude on climbout" so ground crew can go check and clear for carcass/remains on the runway, or maybe scatter a flock.
Either way, the flight crew shouldn't forget ATC isn't just pestering them for the sake of it, they're concerned and responsible for the next aircraft taking off on that runway too.
If only it was that simple. These situations seem to play out like a parlour game.
Because they're macho USA aviators who always somehow feel that they're going to be emasculated if they immediately declare a 'pan pan', or 'mayday', or even somehow admit that they have any issue whatsoever and prefer to keep ATC guessing and making endless calls to painstakingly extract information a bit at a time!
It's about time that the authorities clamped down on this sort of disregard of international communication norms which waste time and potentially waste lives.
We were always taught in Europe that 'clear and swift communications save time, confusion and lives'....... I know the adage of 'aviate, navigate, communicate', but this was not that level of crisis whereby that totally applied!
@@EdOeuna I speak from 33 years of experience and can tell you it is that simple. While you may not need to declare an emergency there is also no need to be cryptic. Good CRM includes ATC. No need to keep them guessing or like you say play some Parlour game.
@@Omensan You are correct. I will add good CRM includes ATC.
It kind of surprises me how reluctant US pilots are to declare pan-pan's.
What’s the reason to declare Pan-Pan because of a bird strike?
Did he get the services he needed?
The US doesn't historically differentiate between a PAN and a MAYDAY, it's either an emergency or it isn't.
Because they're macho USA aviators who always somehow feel that they're going to be emasculated if they immediately declare a 'pan pan', or 'mayday', or even somehow admit that they have any issue whatsoever and prefer to keep ATC guessing and making endless calls to painstakingly extract information a bit at a time!
It's about time that the authorities clamped down on this sort of disregard of international communication norms which waste time and potentially waste lives.
We were always taught in Europe that 'clear and swift communications save time, confusion and lives'....... I know the adage of 'aviate, navigate, communicate', but this was not that level of crisis whereby that totally applied!
Why does it sound like the pilots are reluctant to declare an emergency?
Because the checklist states that it is up to pilot discretion to declare an emergency or not. So probably some discussion on if they wanted to or not. Boston has long runways, and depends on how high your approach/landing speed is.
You never hear of bird strikes at KBOS. Interesting
We have tons of geese around here so I am surprised if strikes are that rare
There was another santee crash. All 4 on board died. Airport code KSEE. RIP
Am I misreading the runways at BOS? - looks like they didn't land on the marked runways
the runways are not very clearly marked on this radar. you can orient yourself by looking at the yellow lines by BOS and matching to the runways. the plane landed in 22l
Another crash near Santee... KSEE again. Looks like fatal. 😞
If I was declaring an emergence you would know it, in the mean time please try and accommodate a simple request. Thank you.
1000x this
What does "A90 F" and similar designations mean for some of the controllers?
A90 signifies the Boston TRACON, F is the controller's position. The positions are also represented by the letter in the data tag, eg. "D" or "F." The aircraft with the contoller's respective letter are under that controller's control.
Great job to all involved. Speculation as to why radio reception is so bad for one controller, but only that one? E.g. shortly after 7:05.
Radio reception
@@VASAviation I understand, but that's the question - I'm just curious why the reception is different coming from just that one controller vs the others. Could that one be physically located somewhere else, significantly further from the receiver used for this recording?
@@DaddyBeanDaddyBean Probably more to the point is that the aircraft have a direct line of sight to the receiver while the ground station is much more borderline - it would be much clearer from the aircraft with which it is designed to be communicating than to another ground station listening in.
Can't get your flaps up?? That sounds like a personal problem.
Another crash at KSEE in San Diego. Learjet this time
I miss ripit's.
They don’t even know if they hit anything, so seem reluctant to retract the flaps. I’m sure the Embraer will let you know if you have a flap jammed or asymmetrical flaps quickly enough. How about retracting the flaps on departure and seeing if there is a problem, then reacting to the problem. They could probably continue the flight unless the flaps are partially extended. There seems to be too many what it’s and unknowns with this, and the few are reacting to them.
👍✈✈👍
RIPIT lol