As I explain more fully below in a separate comment, I respectfully disagree Victor. Every partial engine failure can become a total engine failure, and there are many cases of pilots thinking that they have their issue stabilized who later find out that the problem was more serious than they thought at first. Therefore, when good VFR conditions exist like this, I cannot recommend that pilots forego the chance to arrive over the airport with altitude to spare and instead go a few miles out and to a low altitude. From the information presented in the video, I do NOT think that it was a good job by either the pilot or by ATC.
@@andyasdf2078 I am sure we both agree that the most important thing is he kept his cool, worked the problem and made it to the airfield. IMO, it is a matter of degree. Highly led to partially to somewhat to noticeably. Etc. But words can do funny things! Right?
🚨Speaking as both an air traffic controllers and as a CFI, I am astounded that the airplane was vectored out to the west in these conditions. As far as most pilots and all ATC should be concerned, in my opinion ALL partial engine failures in single engine airplanes can quite possibly turn into a total engine failure at a later point. This won't always happen, but we need to plan for the worst and hope for the best. If the weather was IFR then it's a tough call, but in great VFR conditions like this (winds variable 6 knots, visibility 10, few clouds 7000), ATC should vector a pilot like this just right of direct to the airport when the plane has this much altitude. That puts the airport at the pilot's 11 o'clock position which lets them see the airport easily, and the pilot can then decide how to gently spiral down and land on the runway of their choice, which can be done whether the engine fails entirely or not. By taking the airplane well out to the west and to a low altitude, if the engine continues running then we get lucky. But if the engine fails entirely, the pilot has gone from a distance/altitude situation where the airport is within gliding distance of the plane to one where it is not. And if that happened, not only are we putting the airplane's occupants at risk, we put people on the ground at risk who live in that area roughly 1 mile to 3 miles northwest of VRB airport. As much as I harping on my fellow controllers here, I'm actually imploring my fellow pilots even more. If you have a situation like this and it is VMC, you are the pilot in command and you get to tell controllers in a situation like this that you want essentially direct to the airport and then will spiral down. Please do NOT accept a vector away from the airport that puts you down low like this. If it's IFR and you "need" to make an instrument approach then your hand might be forced. But not when it's VFR. What was done appears to go EXPRESSLY against the lesson we should have learned from the fatal crash of Bonanza N375B in 2013, as explained by the NTSB in Safety Recommendation Report ASR1604 "Emergency Training for Air Traffic Controllers." Finally, because I am active FAA I am required to point out that these are my personal opinions and do not represent official FAA policy. Having said that, I help teach controllers how to respond to various inflight emergencies and I want to be clear that what happened here does not at all represent what I want to see us controllers do in this kind of situation.
Not to mention the beechcraft bonanza a36 that went down in Westchester earlier this year. They barely ran out of altitude before the runway, perhaps if they hadn't descended things might've been different
@@thehair9236 I think that one at HPN was really tough because the weather was something like 300 foot overcast. In such a situation, spiraling down over the airport is not a good option if the engine remains running. That's why I distinguish between IFR and VFR technique.
Agreed. And to the PIC authority point pilots need to use that authority and tell ATC what they need, then do it. I was with a student in a Cessna Cardinal RG one day and we had a gradual partial power loss while leveling at 5,000’ after departing. I declared a mayday, turned back to my departure airport without asking for it (but did tell ATC in the mayday call) and rejected a descent to 3,000’. When ATC advised another airport was closer to us (even more so with strong winds aloft) we accepted that and called the field in sight. After once again rejecting a descent to 3,000’ we arrived over the alternate airport having only lost 300’. Fly your airplane! You have the emergency authority to do what you need to. Don’t ask permission but DO keep ATC in the loop as to what you are doing and what you need from them. Controllers do their job and they do it well but they can’t fly your plane for you.
I just hit 480 hrs. 2 days ago at 3500(3000 agl) my rpm dropped from 2500 to 2000. Closest airport 14 NM. Knew I couldn't make the airport so put the nose into headwind and had my field picked out. Looked at the gauges and saw all green. Trouble shooting things and at 2000 ft(1500 agl) I realized it was carburetor ice. Turn carb heat on and 20 secs later got full power and continued on. 1st emergency declaration ever for me. It's interesting that you don't have time to panic. You take out the checklist and figure things out. I thank God it played out well.
He got down safe but I wouldn’t have accepted a descent or vectors away from the field with an engine problem. I would’ve went direct to the airport, overhead for the high key position, flameout pattern.
I'm assuming there is some audio we didnt hear where they asked for the RNAV approach otherwise there's no reason the pilot would have been ready for it had he only been expecting the visual.
@@anthonyd5189why do you assume the audio is edited to remove key communications? I am skeptical because the host of this channel has a history of telling us when anything is edited or trimmed.
@@jimosborne2 Some of the intro is missing? The pilot is responding to a conversation that isn't recorded - that's why it's assumed, because it happened.
Mayday 3x, declared the emergency, stated the issue, told ATC exactly what they needed, announced his emergency status with every check-in, maintained his composure, and landed safely. This guy is a pro.
My father was pilot in command on this flight, a CFI with over 16,000 hours, while the copilot, Chris, was working the radio. It was tense for sure. As it turned out, after the annual inspection, one of the intercooler boots dislodged, causing the surge in engine power. On another prior occasion, the magnetos on this particular aircraft failed, necessitating an emergency landing; it wasn’t his first rodeo with this aircraft unfortunately.
Good job to this pilot - I really like that he told the controller directly what he needed. I see (well, hear) a lot of pilots on this channel who aren't as assertive as they probably should be during an emergency (but hindsight is 20/20, so no judgement!) Keep up the great work, @VASAviation :)
I’m not a pilot but am nonetheless an expert because I watch aviation channels😊 But seriously, I’ve noticed something in similar situations. If you’re not careful some of these ATCers will have emergency pilots fumbling around for the latest ATIS and prematurely throwing away altitude that they may need later.
As others have said: VFR conditions. Single engine aircraft having engine issues should NOT descend until they can glide to field. When he descended to 3000 and then did the RNav, if that engine quit, he would be toast. Even light twins shouldn’t descend until above traffic pattern. Altitude is energy, giving up energy limits options.
This is how it is done declare an emergency early and often at the first sign of engine trouble. Even though he stabilized it still was showing signs of failure.
Controllers probably knew it’s a single engine, why are they giving them descends and establishing them on an instrument approach when weather is VFR?! Makes no sense. Glad they made it but best thing to do is keep them as close to the airport as possible. Once an engine shows trouble, you should treat it as if it’s going to happen again. And the pilot did ask for final after he let them take him way out there. I hope we can all take away something from this, as pilots and controllers.
Only reason would be if the pilot asked for it. I'm sure there's missing audio where that discussion happened. Why else would the pilot have been ready for the RNAV approach vs the visiual? As far as taking him "way out there"...he was vectoring him towards the IF for the approach.
@victorsierra41, totally agree, beeline to the airport while stepping him down in altitude. And, again, why put extra work on the pilot lby placing him onto the RNAV approach? Perhaps, controller was in a "CYA" mode.
He needs to know what the conditions are. There could have been a strong crosswind or something else he'd really want to know about. A strong headwind would have affected his approach for a deadstick landing, if it came to that.
Yes and no. If there is something vital that will affect handling of the aircraft then ATC should indeed warn the pilot. If not, let the pilot ask for ATIS information if they want it. Keep communications to the minimum and edit out what is not essential to safety. It isn't just about not distracting the pilot, it is that their ability to absorb information is likely to be degraded, so things need to be short and sweet.@@cageordie
So…. I’m the pilot talking in this video. I’m a new pilot. I was right seat. Left seat was an experienced pilot. But his PTT button was inop during this flight (I know, right?). There’s few things that didn’t come through in this video. First, the first airport atc gave us was Okeechobee. Not ideal, and once the engine stabilized we requested more suitable. If I were PIC I would have landed in Okeechobee. Second, we did not descend as instructed. We held our altitude. I probably should have stated that and I think I may have, but that transmission (just like the Okeechobee airport parts) was omitted. The reason for the engine rollback was the plane had just gone through annual and they replaced the turbochargers as one was leaking a bit of oil. When they were installed, the induction hose wasn’t installed correctly and came off during climb out at FL 12 (for FL 20). Once we descended to around 8,000 the engine ran correctly (as it didn’t need the turbos or not as much at that altitude). Again, I’m a new pilot (but in my 50’s) so am not an expert in the engine details. As a commenter said, I was a little shaky at first but in listening to this for the first time since the flight I am pleasantly surprised how I did. Not perfect but….
He took it right back home to where it was born, in Vero Beach. I spent some time there in 1990, there was always a lot of GA traffic at Vero, with 2 big flight schools and Piper.
Whenever a single engine gives trouble it needs to be treated as a complete failure. Failed engines don't negotiate, so don't try to count on them working at all.
The pilot kept himself, his aircraft and everyone around him safe. Nicely done. He deserves some praise at the end of the day, but I'm guessing he's feeling a bit crap about his aircraft failing like that.
Weather was good VFR. With potential engine failure, - why - did pilot of N6908P not tell ATC he would remain as high as he can and proceed - direct - to KVRB? Then a descending circling approach over the airport to landing so as to stay within gliding range. Exorcise your emergency authority not just do what’s convenient for ATC. Glad it worked out.
I Have couple of Qs / Observations 1) why descends and vectors away from the airport? Fly them straight overhead descend in turns above the airfield for additional safety 2) from where they declared emergency, were they closer to Fort Pierce KFPR than KVRB? 3) Both the other aircrafts manoeuvring outside Delta should have been asked to move elsewhere.If I am an emergency aircraft I dont want the additional work of having to scan for traffic as in VFR it is PIC s responsibility to stay clear of traffic
In a situation like this I want vectors DIRECTLY to the nearest airport and I want to maintain altitude until over the airport. No need to see the countryside via other vectors, even if the engine restarts. Help me get down safely. My love affair with this airplane is over.
Come over to X52 and go soaring with me buddy! You passed right overhead our traffic pattern. Great job! Next time, stick to your guns to stay high and overhead. If it's VFR conditions and you don't need to shoot an approach - don't! Stay high and overhead while you can. Otherwise you could find yourself gliding to a field in a Malibu. Let's leave that for us glider junkies. I'd like to offer you an honorary glider flight. 😅 For real. Give Treasure Coast Soaring Club a call and tell them Jason sent you.
I am glad this worked out but there is no freaking way I am accepting a descent (faster than best glide) or vectors away from an in range airport when my single engine's performance is questionable. Even in our twin with one engine still working good, I'd make ATC give me direct to the airport.
Genuinely curious why you would instruct someone with an emergency to descend? I guess they are used to dealing with multi engine commercial emergencies? Pilot made the right call asking to stay at altitude. I just remember the bonanza accident in NYC. Complied with a descent from 5 or 6000 to 3000 with a dead cylinder emergency.
Many mentioned it in the comments already but some of the instructions given by atc should not have been given. Every descent should have been at pilot’s discretion so as to maintain altitude in case of a total engine loss, the vectors should never be going away from an airport in this particular situation. A single engine aircraft with engine problems should always be tracking towards the airport.
Here's my understanding IMHO. The pilot declared an emergency and was (and remained on a IFR flight) until landing. The field was VFR. If you have an engine issue and declared emergency, you want to fly direct above the field and lose altitude and land safely. All this vectoring and headings + altitudes were dangerous. The pilot is lucky not to have lost the engine while maneuvering around following ATC instructions. Once you declare an emergency you're in control of your situation! Just say what you need to do and do it!
I congratulate this pilot and ATC for a great outcome. However, for future consideration, in an emergency situation like this, I am PIC and would not allow ATC to control my ( descent) altitude. I would rather be high if my engine stops than low. I also would have gone direct to the airport- and circled to land - since the clouds were 7000 broken. If you’re shooting an approach and outside the marker at 3000 or 2500 feet and the engine seizes, you’re likely not making the runway- especially in a headwind.
Do you have the ATIS? Seriously? No way I would have taken vectors or any decent instructions if I was having engine trouble. Get me to the airport direct and I'll stay high and circle if I have to but no way am I giving up altitude with engine trouble.
Welcome to the new FAA where us controllers have to make sure you have all the information otherwise it's our ass on the line if something happens. Trust me, as much as I love reading NOTAMs to pilots even after they tell me they have them, it's required by law that I read them to you because if you crash and I didn't read them, its my fault you crashed.
Oooo, he didn't give his fuel in pounds, kilograms, liters, gallons, number of atoms, numbers of quarks, amount of Newtons of energy, number of Ergs, the unladen weight of an African Swallow, and the amount of free space in his tanks in BigMacs.
Anyone else catch that the wrong skyflight apologized? Why didn't the controller get those skyflights way the F away? Or did one of the SkyFlights (the female voice) voilate the ATC's order? Can you imagine you're trying to land a crippled aircraft and ATC says "yeah actually we're going to have to amend our instructions to KEEP YOU AWAY FROM ANOTHER AIRCRAFT?!" No, THAT aircraft needs to stay away from ME, sir.
IMHO the controller should have kept the other aircraft further away. The pilot was busy handling the emergency, looking for traffic was an unnecessary distraction.
"With you"? Who else would you be with? If you weren't with them, how would they know? You're broadcasting on the frequency for that controller, so you're automatically with them.
I am astounded when controllers issue a descent to aircraft with questionable engines let alone vector them out away from the field in VFR conditions. That plane should stay as high as possible until over the field. Never give up any altitude. Ever.
I'm not an ATC; but single engine aircraft, engine problems , vectored all over creation after a may-day....oh my goodness. thumbs down... all the 'explanations' don't cover a poor job. Shame on you
![[REAL ATC] Turkish B77W is HIT BY SEVERE TURBULENCE | Multiple Injuries](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cxniygV1o_0/mqdefault.jpg)
Good job by everyone!
thx for the upload!
As I explain more fully below in a separate comment, I respectfully disagree Victor.
Every partial engine failure can become a total engine failure, and there are many cases of pilots thinking that they have their issue stabilized who later find out that the problem was more serious than they thought at first. Therefore, when good VFR conditions exist like this, I cannot recommend that pilots forego the chance to arrive over the airport with altitude to spare and instead go a few miles out and to a low altitude. From the information presented in the video, I do NOT think that it was a good job by either the pilot or by ATC.
@@zidoocfi that vector away to the west was definitely not convenient
Good job by VAS too. Thanks for the video.
@@Republic3D thanks for watching
He sounded understandably highly distressed at the first call. But kept his cool, worked the problem and made it down safely. Good job pilot.
He sounded highly distressed all the way down to be honest, but yeah agreed. Wish it was temperature +28 where i am though lol
@@andyasdf2078 I am sure we both agree that the most important thing is he kept his cool, worked the problem and made it to the airfield.
IMO, it is a matter of degree. Highly led to partially to somewhat to noticeably. Etc. But words can do funny things! Right?
He sure did sound distressed on the first call, I was the controller he declared with 🤦🏻♂️
@@ericlevine7915 Good job on keeping YOUR cool and helping him.
@@ericlevine7915does your stress level rise in a situation like this? Or is it just another day at work?
🚨Speaking as both an air traffic controllers and as a CFI, I am astounded that the airplane was vectored out to the west in these conditions. As far as most pilots and all ATC should be concerned, in my opinion ALL partial engine failures in single engine airplanes can quite possibly turn into a total engine failure at a later point. This won't always happen, but we need to plan for the worst and hope for the best. If the weather was IFR then it's a tough call, but in great VFR conditions like this (winds variable 6 knots, visibility 10, few clouds 7000), ATC should vector a pilot like this just right of direct to the airport when the plane has this much altitude.
That puts the airport at the pilot's 11 o'clock position which lets them see the airport easily, and the pilot can then decide how to gently spiral down and land on the runway of their choice, which can be done whether the engine fails entirely or not. By taking the airplane well out to the west and to a low altitude, if the engine continues running then we get lucky. But if the engine fails entirely, the pilot has gone from a distance/altitude situation where the airport is within gliding distance of the plane to one where it is not. And if that happened, not only are we putting the airplane's occupants at risk, we put people on the ground at risk who live in that area roughly 1 mile to 3 miles northwest of VRB airport.
As much as I harping on my fellow controllers here, I'm actually imploring my fellow pilots even more. If you have a situation like this and it is VMC, you are the pilot in command and you get to tell controllers in a situation like this that you want essentially direct to the airport and then will spiral down. Please do NOT accept a vector away from the airport that puts you down low like this. If it's IFR and you "need" to make an instrument approach then your hand might be forced. But not when it's VFR.
What was done appears to go EXPRESSLY against the lesson we should have learned from the fatal crash of Bonanza N375B in 2013, as explained by the NTSB in Safety Recommendation Report ASR1604 "Emergency Training for Air Traffic Controllers."
Finally, because I am active FAA I am required to point out that these are my personal opinions and do not represent official FAA policy. Having said that, I help teach controllers how to respond to various inflight emergencies and I want to be clear that what happened here does not at all represent what I want to see us controllers do in this kind of situation.
Not to mention the beechcraft bonanza a36 that went down in Westchester earlier this year. They barely ran out of altitude before the runway, perhaps if they hadn't descended things might've been different
@@thehair9236 I think that one at HPN was really tough because the weather was something like 300 foot overcast. In such a situation, spiraling down over the airport is not a good option if the engine remains running. That's why I distinguish between IFR and VFR technique.
Agreed. And to the PIC authority point pilots need to use that authority and tell ATC what they need, then do it.
I was with a student in a Cessna Cardinal RG one day and we had a gradual partial power loss while leveling at 5,000’ after departing. I declared a mayday, turned back to my departure airport without asking for it (but did tell ATC in the mayday call) and rejected a descent to 3,000’. When ATC advised another airport was closer to us (even more so with strong winds aloft) we accepted that and called the field in sight. After once again rejecting a descent to 3,000’ we arrived over the alternate airport having only lost 300’.
Fly your airplane! You have the emergency authority to do what you need to. Don’t ask permission but DO keep ATC in the loop as to what you are doing and what you need from them. Controllers do their job and they do it well but they can’t fly your plane for you.
Failure of the PIC to assert control of the situation and request the safest course of action.
@@markor2476 he did asked for direct vectors, for a single engine that should mean the shortest final even if he has partial power
I just hit 480 hrs. 2 days ago at 3500(3000 agl) my rpm dropped from 2500 to 2000. Closest airport 14 NM. Knew I couldn't make the airport so put the nose into headwind and had my field picked out. Looked at the gauges and saw all green. Trouble shooting things and at 2000 ft(1500 agl) I realized it was carburetor ice. Turn carb heat on and 20 secs later got full power and continued on. 1st emergency declaration ever for me. It's interesting that you don't have time to panic. You take out the checklist and figure things out. I thank God it played out well.
He got down safe but I wouldn’t have accepted a descent or vectors away from the field with an engine problem.
I would’ve went direct to the airport, overhead for the high key position, flameout pattern.
I'm assuming there is some audio we didnt hear where they asked for the RNAV approach otherwise there's no reason the pilot would have been ready for it had he only been expecting the visual.
@@anthonyd5189why do you assume the audio is edited to remove key communications? I am skeptical because the host of this channel has a history of telling us when anything is edited or trimmed.
@@jimosborne2might just be missing audio due to receiver limitations
@@jimosborne2 Some of the intro is missing? The pilot is responding to a conversation that isn't recorded - that's why it's assumed, because it happened.
@@lyanerisspeculation
Mayday 3x, declared the emergency, stated the issue, told ATC exactly what they needed, announced his emergency status with every check-in, maintained his composure, and landed safely. This guy is a pro.
And the response he got was to maintain altitude 🤦
I wouldn't get in an airplane with this guy as PIC.
why@@markjarvis21
My father was pilot in command on this flight, a CFI with over 16,000 hours, while the copilot, Chris, was working the radio. It was tense for sure. As it turned out, after the annual inspection, one of the intercooler boots dislodged, causing the surge in engine power. On another prior occasion, the magnetos on this particular aircraft failed, necessitating an emergency landing; it wasn’t his first rodeo with this aircraft unfortunately.
Good job to this pilot - I really like that he told the controller directly what he needed. I see (well, hear) a lot of pilots on this channel who aren't as assertive as they probably should be during an emergency (but hindsight is 20/20, so no judgement!) Keep up the great work, @VASAviation :)
Thanks for watching
I like that he makes a clear readback. Good job, everybody safe.
I’m not a pilot but am nonetheless an expert because I watch aviation channels😊
But seriously, I’ve noticed something in similar situations. If you’re not careful some of these ATCers will have emergency pilots fumbling around for the latest ATIS and prematurely throwing away altitude that they may need later.
As others have said: VFR conditions.
Single engine aircraft having engine issues should NOT descend until they can glide to field.
When he descended to 3000 and then did the RNav, if that engine quit, he would be toast.
Even light twins shouldn’t descend until above traffic pattern.
Altitude is energy, giving up energy limits options.
This is how it is done declare an emergency early and often at the first sign of engine trouble. Even though he stabilized it still was showing signs of failure.
Controllers probably knew it’s a single engine, why are they giving them descends and establishing them on an instrument approach when weather is VFR?! Makes no sense. Glad they made it but best thing to do is keep them as close to the airport as possible. Once an engine shows trouble, you should treat it as if it’s going to happen again. And the pilot did ask for final after he let them take him way out there. I hope we can all take away something from this, as pilots and controllers.
Only reason would be if the pilot asked for it. I'm sure there's missing audio where that discussion happened. Why else would the pilot have been ready for the RNAV approach vs the visiual? As far as taking him "way out there"...he was vectoring him towards the IF for the approach.
@victorsierra41, totally agree, beeline to the airport while stepping him down in altitude. And, again, why put extra work on the pilot lby placing him onto the RNAV approach? Perhaps, controller was in a "CYA"
mode.
Pilot: "We are having major engine issues here... need to land NOW!"... Controller: "ok.. do you have the ATIS sir?" DOH!!
I thought the same lol
He needs to know what the conditions are. There could have been a strong crosswind or something else he'd really want to know about. A strong headwind would have affected his approach for a deadstick landing, if it came to that.
Yes and no. If there is something vital that will affect handling of the aircraft then ATC should indeed warn the pilot. If not, let the pilot ask for ATIS information if they want it. Keep communications to the minimum and edit out what is not essential to safety. It isn't just about not distracting the pilot, it is that their ability to absorb information is likely to be degraded, so things need to be short and sweet.@@cageordie
If this was a crash and ATC doesn’t verify pilot has wx, FAA gets sued due to greedy lawyers
The controller had it ready to read though. I think "Do you have ATIS" meant "let me read it for you".
So…. I’m the pilot talking in this video. I’m a new pilot. I was right seat. Left seat was an experienced pilot. But his PTT button was inop during this flight (I know, right?). There’s few things that didn’t come through in this video. First, the first airport atc gave us was Okeechobee. Not ideal, and once the engine stabilized we requested more suitable. If I were PIC I would have landed in Okeechobee. Second, we did not descend as instructed. We held our altitude. I probably should have stated that and I think I may have, but that transmission (just like the Okeechobee airport parts) was omitted. The reason for the engine rollback was the plane had just gone through annual and they replaced the turbochargers as one was leaking a bit of oil. When they were installed, the induction hose wasn’t installed correctly and came off during climb out at FL 12 (for FL 20). Once we descended to around 8,000 the engine ran correctly (as it didn’t need the turbos or not as much at that altitude). Again, I’m a new pilot (but in my 50’s) so am not an expert in the engine details. As a commenter said, I was a little shaky at first but in listening to this for the first time since the flight I am pleasantly surprised how I did. Not perfect but….
Good job from eveyone espescially the pilot for being calm and talking clearly to the ATC !
If I have engine trouble, I'm coming in high and circling the field to lose altitude. Not coming in at 1500'.
He took it right back home to where it was born, in Vero Beach. I spent some time there in 1990, there was always a lot of GA traffic at Vero, with 2 big flight schools and Piper.
I don’t know if it was coincidental or plan, but Vero Beach was one of the best spots for that plane to go
Whenever a single engine gives trouble it needs to be treated as a complete failure. Failed engines don't negotiate, so don't try to count on them working at all.
The pilot kept himself, his aircraft and everyone around him safe. Nicely done. He deserves some praise at the end of the day, but I'm guessing he's feeling a bit crap about his aircraft failing like that.
Weather was good VFR. With potential engine failure, - why - did pilot of N6908P not tell ATC he would remain as high as he can and proceed - direct - to KVRB? Then a descending circling approach over the airport to landing so as to stay within gliding range. Exorcise your emergency authority not just do what’s convenient for ATC. Glad it worked out.
VAS always brings proper content❤
Thank you!
I Have couple of Qs / Observations
1) why descends and vectors away from the airport? Fly them straight overhead descend in turns above the airfield for additional safety
2) from where they declared emergency, were they closer to Fort Pierce KFPR than KVRB?
3) Both the other aircrafts manoeuvring outside Delta should have been asked to move elsewhere.If I am an emergency aircraft I dont want the additional work of having to scan for traffic as in VFR it is PIC s responsibility to stay clear of traffic
In a situation like this I want vectors DIRECTLY to the nearest airport and I want to maintain altitude until over the airport. No need to see the countryside via other vectors, even if the engine restarts. Help me get down safely. My love affair with this airplane is over.
As a CFI I think spiral descents are not trained enough and might be a better option than vectors here and there to the runway
Thx so much for your job. Really great job done so far! Love your channel!
Come over to X52 and go soaring with me buddy! You passed right overhead our traffic pattern. Great job! Next time, stick to your guns to stay high and overhead. If it's VFR conditions and you don't need to shoot an approach - don't! Stay high and overhead while you can. Otherwise you could find yourself gliding to a field in a Malibu. Let's leave that for us glider junkies.
I'd like to offer you an honorary glider flight. 😅 For real. Give Treasure Coast Soaring Club a call and tell them Jason sent you.
It'd be hard to pick a better airport than VRB to land a broken Piper.
Loud and Clear.
I am glad this worked out but there is no freaking way I am accepting a descent (faster than best glide) or vectors away from an in range airport when my single engine's performance is questionable. Even in our twin with one engine still working good, I'd make ATC give me direct to the airport.
Genuinely curious why you would instruct someone with an emergency to descend? I guess they are used to dealing with multi engine commercial emergencies? Pilot made the right call asking to stay at altitude. I just remember the bonanza accident in NYC. Complied with a descent from 5 or 6000 to 3000 with a dead cylinder emergency.
I was listening this next to my Alexa... "Have you an emergency?", it says. No. PA-46 pilot did a great job.
Many mentioned it in the comments already but some of the instructions given by atc should not have been given. Every descent should have been at pilot’s discretion so as to maintain altitude in case of a total engine loss, the vectors should never be going away from an airport in this particular situation. A single engine aircraft with engine problems should always be tracking towards the airport.
Best place to land a piper with maintenance issues
I am confused as to why he was sent that far out on an RNAV....
We need vectors, Victor!
Here's my understanding IMHO. The pilot declared an emergency and was (and remained on a IFR flight) until landing. The field was VFR. If you have an engine issue and declared emergency, you want to fly direct above the field and lose altitude and land safely. All this vectoring and headings + altitudes were dangerous. The pilot is lucky not to have lost the engine while maneuvering around following ATC instructions. Once you declare an emergency you're in control of your situation! Just say what you need to do and do it!
I congratulate this pilot and ATC for a great outcome. However, for future consideration, in an emergency situation like this, I am PIC and would not allow ATC to control my ( descent) altitude. I would rather be high if my engine stops than low. I also would have gone direct to the airport- and circled to land - since the clouds were 7000 broken. If you’re shooting an approach and outside the marker at 3000 or 2500 feet and the engine seizes, you’re likely not making the runway- especially in a headwind.
Do you have the ATIS? Seriously? No way I would have taken vectors or any decent instructions if I was having engine trouble. Get me to the airport direct and I'll stay high and circle if I have to but no way am I giving up altitude with engine trouble.
Welcome to the new FAA where us controllers have to make sure you have all the information otherwise it's our ass on the line if something happens. Trust me, as much as I love reading NOTAMs to pilots even after they tell me they have them, it's required by law that I read them to you because if you crash and I didn't read them, its my fault you crashed.
ForeFlight… because you will never need vectors to save your life.
My home airport!!
Oooo, he didn't give his fuel in pounds, kilograms, liters, gallons, number of atoms, numbers of quarks, amount of Newtons of energy, number of Ergs, the unladen weight of an African Swallow, and the amount of free space in his tanks in BigMacs.
Anyone else catch that the wrong skyflight apologized? Why didn't the controller get those skyflights way the F away? Or did one of the SkyFlights (the female voice) voilate the ATC's order? Can you imagine you're trying to land a crippled aircraft and ATC says "yeah actually we're going to have to amend our instructions to KEEP YOU AWAY FROM ANOTHER AIRCRAFT?!" No, THAT aircraft needs to stay away from ME, sir.
Why do they need dewpoint?
To evaluate for potential icing.
IMHO the controller should have kept the other aircraft further away. The pilot was busy handling the emergency, looking for traffic was an unnecessary distraction.
Sounds like pressurized mag problem. As soon as he descended engine would’ve run fine.
"With you"? Who else would you be with? If you weren't with them, how would they know? You're broadcasting on the frequency for that controller, so you're automatically with them.
I am astounded when controllers issue a descent to aircraft with questionable engines let alone vector them out away from the field in VFR conditions. That plane should stay as high as possible until over the field. Never give up any altitude. Ever.
Atis deeze nutz
Who will listening the ATIS with no engine?
I thought he was going to call for an Air Force jet escort there for a minute with how he reacted/sounded.
I emailed you someone busting a bravo in Phoenix did yo uget it?
Negative. Verify vasaviation1@gmail.com
I also emailed regarding my near miss with a helicopter coming out of Naples a couple weeks ago.
Also verify vasaviation1@gmail.com , don't forget the "1"
I'm not an ATC; but single engine aircraft, engine problems , vectored all over creation after a may-day....oh my goodness. thumbs down... all the 'explanations' don't cover a poor job. Shame on you
Why are they descending a aircraft with engine problems, should be pilots discretion. I have higher expectations for ATC as a controller.