As an ARFF Firefighter (Airport Rescue & Fire Fighting) I can tell you a controllers main reason for asking for fuel load in a none low fuel emergency is for us. Our truck carry between 1500 and 3000 gallons of water. We can convert to foam via a foam concentrate we mix into the water. The more fuel you have the more foam we will need if your fuel tanks rupture. We use foam even in the absence of fire because it floats in the leaking fuel and keeps it from being able to ignite. Us knowing how much fuel is onboard gives us that heads up to calculate if we have enough resources. Hours of fuel does not tell us the actual volume because we don’t know the aircraft consumption rate. We have ti have it in pounds or gallons for our calculations. Food for thought for pilots who give it in hours.
See that's what I originally thought and then Kelsey said it was for Time so I was like "yeah I can see that" but I always thought it was for the guys on the ground.
Maybe ATC would have been better phrasing it back. "I heard you call Mayday, can you confirm the nature of your emergency and ...." That way you confirm it and don't look like you weren't listening. Much like how pilots read back instructions. I'd prefer to hear ATC use the same phrase rather than declaring an emergency. If ATC hears an emergency is prefer they confirm it with are you calling a Mayday? That's what I'd do on Ham radio which uses the phrases Mayday and Pan Pan distress and urgency.
I work in healthcare and had a major emergency declared to me last week for the first time in a 15 year career. I did a bit of a double take and asked to confirm. I passed it on down the procedure of all the different people I had to inform who have their own emergency procedures, and some of them did the same. We have emergencies every day, just not "major" emergencies. Those are normally reserved for CBRN attacks.
Pilot and instructor at a US legacy airline here. If, in the sim during an emergency, my students ask for vectors-I’ll give them. But I have them consider asking for a hold. If I’m in an actual emergency and was going to do an immediate return, that’s exactly what I’m going to ask for. If I were in the situation in the video in my aircraft, we’d have many minutes of checklists to run (rev unlocked, shutdown, overweight). If I’m on vectors, the checklists are going to be constantly interrupted by ATC instructions (hdg changes, etc). Each one of those changes has to be input by the pilot flying and then verified by the pilot monitoring. The pilot flying also has to devote more attention to flight path management (where are we?) If I get a hold, it takes 30 seconds (if that) to enter it in the FMS. Once I’m in the hold…I’m done. Now the PF has more available bandwidth to devote to helping the PM go through all these checklists and formulate a plan. When my students use the hold strategy, the whole emergency invariably goes far smoother.
I did catch how the pilots asked for time to go through the checklist, so the hold pattern, and perhaps the way they spoke made the ATC agent think it wasn't as big as a deal as it arguably and debatably was, at least at the time of the mayday call. Obviously they are all in a very stressful situation(s), and remaining calm is and should be something the one in control is doing at the time, and while we all have a varying degree of calmness when it comes to difficult situations, there is something to be said how panic in voices/actions can lend itself to everyone understanding the gravity of the situation as soon as it rears its head. Now that doesn't mean everyone will pick up on it, or that the situation will be handled with urgency, nor would I want the Pilot flying/in command to be panicky, but yea giving how nuanced things can be, sometimes calmness (aka do as little intervention as possible or very calculated changes) is the way to go, and other times panic (button mashing and/or 'screaming' so more level heads can possibly intervene and guide others to safety)/aka the path to the greatest outcome. - Albeit panic more often than not just leads to worse outcomes/pure chaos and having chaos especially when lives are on the line is quite a recipe for disaster.
Also going into a Hold avoids the risk of Terrain or being forgotten by the controller, therefore letting the crew prepare more comfortably. It also lets you stay closer to the runway.
From the European ATC perspective I don't agree with what You said about fuel. If we ask for "fuel on board", we want the kilograms or tonnes. The only purpose of that information is to pass it to the firefighters. Since it is you, who have the emergency, we don't need to know how long CAN You fly. We want to know how long you WANT to fly. If you need immediate return, you will get it. If you need 10 minutes for the checklist, you will get it. If you need 2 hour for fuel burning You will get it. If we need to know how long you can fly there's an other word in phreseology: "endurance". "Report endurance" - the answer must be in minutes/hours. And we rarely would use that in an emergency. It happens in "weather situations. Or in our unit's case - with military traffic, which has diffrent fuel regulations. They come back to land with much lower endurance remaining than commercial planes.
Well said. It sounds like European controllers better at knowing and sticking to standard procedures and phraseology, possibly necessitated my the greater amount of international traffic involved.
I also tend to think this is true in the US as well. ATC may be more concerned with time remaining, but ARFF is going to want the fuel in volume or weight (gallons or pounds in the US), so they have an idea of how much flammable liquid is on board as they approach the aircraft.
Also, I think when a plane just took of from your airport and then declares an emergency and wants to return, and the emergency is not "hey we see we forgot to take on fuel and we are almost out of it!!!", it seems very unlikely that endurance is going to be an issue. So why bother asking for it?
That's my understanding as well. After all, by definition, a Mayday is a "land ASAP" situation. So that's what ATC will help to achieve. What ASAP is will be defined solely by the flight crew.
@@123goodoldmusic Basically, when a pilot declares an emergency, they call the shots. They inform ATC of what they are GOING to do, it is NOT a request. After an emergency has been declared ATCs job switches to ensuring that everyone else is out of the way and that required emergency services are at the ready.
Kelsey - regards the "2.2 for 4" non-standard phraseology: even if you are flying strictly domestically there are other aircraft on the frequency that may be international flights. Those pilots might not understand, which eats into their situational awareness.
USA has a really bad habit of butchering phraseology, and there are countless videos of readback errors and confusion because of precisely this. Yes y'all have some very congested airspace and SOME very good controllers, but if the half-second saved by abbreviating something unnecessarily results in you being told to "Say Again" then it was never worth it. Worse if it results in confusion that's detrimental to safety. Stick to standard comms always. Aviation is a profession, act professional.
From VASAviation’s videos I’ve learned that if pilots say fuel in pounds they get asked for time, and if they give it in time they get asked for pounds, and if they give it in both they get asked for it in pints.
Yep, controllers need to know if they got enough time to get to the airport, but rescue crew needs to know how much fire potential to deal with. Both are important.
And in this case, the controller was likely aware that they had just taken off and had enough fuel to get to a destination. Further, in this case, the risk wasn't running out of fuel, but running out of engines to burn the fuel.
Couldn't they get the stewardesses tell passengers whats happening if passengers really want to know from start 3spevially if experienced passengers say theve turned an engine off regular passengers can proberly tell so nervous fliers are proberly on edge anyway
Yes, would have felt better about it if ATC had asked the pilot whether he wanted to hold or have vectors. I really like it when the controller makes it clear to a pilot in an emergency that he can go where he needs to, in his discretion. Obviously this pilot could have asked the controller for vectors and I don't think there would have been any problem with that, both the controller and the pilot handled this very well and stayed very calm. Being able to call the shots in an emergency is basically a concept of safe harbor in Maritime law. Only one of them was up in the air and I guess that underscores the concept of safe harbor when in an emergency. In those circumstances, let the pilot have the discretion regarding when he needs to land and where he needs to land. Glad this one ended well.
@@afriedrich1452 The hold at SCAPO is a perfectly valid delay vector. With modern FMS, as noted by several other pilots, it's usually a big workload reducer for the pilot too.
I am an Emergency Physician who loves the channel. So many of the things you point out about communication, task load reduction, teamwork, safety all have direct correlations to the resuscitation bay in a medical emergency or trauma. Thanks for making your stories accessible to those of us with no aviation background!
Boy, are you right. Trauma bays are definitely not a place for poor application of any of those facets and there are a LOT more people in that bay. It isn’t just two “pilots” trying to communicate with one other person. A simple resuscitation is one thing but a major trauma might involve multiple specialists not leaving out member of several other disciplines present for that effort.
"The universal distress call Mayday was invented in 1923 by Frederick Stanley Mockford, chief radio officer at Croydon airport in London. The authorities had asked him to find a term to signal distress that would be easily understood by all pilots and ground staff in the event of an emergency. Mockford chose a phonetic transcription of the pronunciation of the French expression "m'aider" - ‘help me’ (a shortened version of "venez m'aider") which had been uttered by a French pilot in distress two years earlier and which was understood by the English operator as "Mayday". And Pan Pan is from the French 'Panne' (Breakdown)
Gotta love the French getting dunked on simply as a matter of convenience. Everyone has to learn English to fly international, but they also have to learn a couple French words for when things go sideways.
The hospital in Croydon was named Mayday and I always wondered why! This is probably why! We used to call it May die due to the many mrsa virus outbreaks….
We must appreciate that Kelsey left his nice hotel and brought all of his recording equipment and stood in an abandoned building just to tell us about this!
"You might have to let the engine burn, which isn't part of procedure...but neither is hitting the mountain"....LMAO you always unintentionally crack me up @74 Gear!
I was taught to give the critical numbers in an emergency. If fuel low give duration remaining so controllers know to expedite, if fuel is high give amount on board so fire teams know what they are dealing with.
As a firefighter, I highly appreciate your attitude! "Last time" (read: the only time) that I had to deal with an airplane emergency in that context, the reported "numbers" included a spare fuel tank and 2 air-to-ground missiles. 😱
That makes sense. Tell the time so ATC knows how long and where you can hold if needed while the pilot and ground crews get set up for the landing, then go back and give in weight so fire crews can do their preparations.
As a controller I always assumed holding wasn’t that hard to do for a pilot. Seems like a good idea to have them hold close to the field so they can be ready to come in when they’re ready. I think the majority of controllers that don’t have piloting experience think this way until we see stuff like this explaining it. My initial thought was that giving the hold instructions would’ve been easier because now they’re in one spot near the field and no longer expecting any more radio calls for more control instructions while they troubleshoot and configure. I’ll keep this video in mind if I’m in the scenario in the future but truly I (and a lot of us) didn’t/don’t know how much workload it increases. As you said though the pilot should’ve said unable to his hold instructions if it increases the workload that much. Not all of us know how to fly a plane and how much goes into certain tasks and we just want to help lol Ps. Super embarrassing that a pilot said mayday, mayday, mayday and the controller asked if he was declaring an emergency 🤦🏼♂️
Depends on the aircraft, the crew, and what the holding instructions are. If you gave me “hold present position” that’s like 3 keystrokes on my FMS. If you told me hold as published or some “hold this fix this radial these turns these leg times” I gotta punch in that whole thing manually. If we go missed approach and you say hold as published that’s also easy, because it’s pre-programmed with the approach. But that’s just me, on my aircraft, with my training and experience. For a different pilot/crew on a different aircraft, with different avionics it’s probably way different. Either way you wouldn’t know unless we tell you. Just a quick “unable” or suggestion like “can we just do present position holding?” Would clear it up. I’m glad you’re going out of your way to learn what’s happening on the other side of the mic. I know controllers have to do jumpseat observations every so often. I wish airline pilots had to go hang out in the ARTCC or tower once in a while too. We’re a team! We should know what each other’s jobs look like.
@@byronhenry6518 That's interesting, any published hold in our FMS comes up as an option when you begin to create the hold. I'm surprised it's not like this on all FMSes!
An unexpected hold, especially during an emergency is a PITA and causes us to stop whatever we’re doing in order to make sure we get it right. Bad form to assign a hold during an emergency
On older aircraft especially its a ton of work. Once full screen GPS became common place they became much much easier, but you still have to dial them in: in an emergency, vectors are much appreciated!
I almost feel a personal sense of pride looking at those tightly spaced golden stripes on the shirt. And Kelsey, please don't try to fool us into thinking that you are not very intelligent - you are obviously a very competent person in whatever you choose to do. And that includes a comfortable level of practical, emotional and social intelligence. Had you chosen to be an academic, you'd surely master that too, IMHO.
Speaking from a firefighter’s perspective there’s WAY too much radio traffic wasted on fuel during emergency incidents. If they give fuel remaining in time, ATC or fire wants pounds. If they give it in pounds, they want time. I’ve seen incidents where the plane is almost over the threshold and either fire or ATC wants to know the fuel on board which is not a valid reason to distract the pilots seconds from touchdown IMHO. It simply doesn’t matter at that point. It doesn’t make one iota of difference to the ARFF crews if it’s 10k or 20k of fuel, every commercial passenger jet is landing with enough fuel for “big bada boom.” If a flight *just* departed then that information alone negates any need to ask about time or weight of fuel, because obviously the flight has plenty. In cases of fuel leaks, fuel starvation, other fuel related emergencies then yes people will want to know how much fuel is on board in which case crews should simply provide time and weight so there’s not this back/forth all the damn time. Now I know it’s easier and preferred to have standard emergency procedures so it “makes sense” to ask about fuel anytime an emergency is declared - except we’re currently doing that and can’t even get it right in the US. Something needs to change.
Bonus with nearly-empty tanks: if you happen to have about the right amount of vapor, then you might get actual kaboom instead of whoosh... (you're a firey, obviously I'm assuming you already know this)
I would agree, shouldn't the firefighting team be prepared for a plane running off the runway on takeoff with full tanks. I mean they are not going to sit with empty tanks and only load up for the incident. (Oh my bad I thought we only had to fight 500 pounds of fuel not 1500, hang on BRB while I go and get more AFFF)
Many years ago we lost an outboard engine on takeoff from Lajes field, Azores. We were in a KC130 bagged out with 65 thousand pounds of fuel. Once we’d shut down the engine and started to dump fuel and barely having positive rate of climb, we declared Mayday and came around to land but were directed to extend our down wind for a P-3 that was in the pattern doing touch and goes. Got to love it.
I'm not even a pilot and have nothing to do with aviation, but your storytelling is so good that it's interesting and informative even for someone like me. Thank you!!!🤩
I noticed this about many skilled youtubers. The topic may vary but it doesn't matter, even a "boring" topic can be made interesting by the right presenter.
Most simulator scenarios at my airline have us do a hold after an engine failure on departure followed by a return to the airport. But hey, that's the sim... we understand the game and play along. In reality, I would certainly refuse any hold given, and request vectors. When we changed from "declaring an emergency" to PAN-PAN-PAN I was like "how am I going to remember calling PAN in an emergency after years of training with "declaring an emergency"? Couple years later we had to shut down an engine at 1500ft after departure, and to my surprise I did call PAN-PAN-PAN !! I asked for 15-20 min vectors to get ourselves ready to come back SE, that's what we got no problem, ATC was super helpful. Once on final the controller asked us to "keep the speed up". My answer was "Negative". He immediately apologized and said "Speed at you discretion".
Lol, keep the speed up... "yeah if you send me up a second functional engine, I'll be glad to help with your sequence" :D everyone's got their reflexes.
Keep your speed up isn’t as bad as when controller tells a single engine aircraft that lost its engine to descend and maintain x altitude? That drives me nuts.
@@couespursuit7350 Actually they have us do a hold for at least one of the scenarios, as a hold is required in the test. Once a hold has been correctly demonstrated (FMS programming, correct entry) we get vectored as you say for the rest of the session (or, more simply, they just position freeze the sim).
In the mid 80s my father was flying alone for the DEA in the middle of the night on the way home from a mission when a piston ejected through the hood. He was told to stand by after declaring mayday multiple times until he eventually crash landed in a field. Never was able to communicate with tower. He survived but was knocked unconscious, seat belt caught so hard he had to get stitches in his chest. He was a legend!
@@loganp1354 the DEA allows Coca-Cola to produce 3 billion dollars worth of pure cocaine every year. They "bust" drug runners, cartels, etc., but they are so honorable they never take those drugs they seize amd sell them back to drug running organizations, or release them on the streets through government protected drug dealers. You're naive if you think the CIA is the only drug running agency in government. The ATF wouldn't run guns to Mexico either huh?
When I got my PPL here in the UK back in 1985 there was separate training and exam, and a separate licence, for operating an aviation radio. We were taught that there is a standard sequence for the information in a MAYDAY call: MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY callsign and aircraft type Reason ("engine failure") Intention ("returning to airfield") Position (may not be needed when under radar control) Level Heading Squawking (7700 or whatever) We had to memorise this because when the fan gets splattered - especially if you only have one fan - you don't have time to look it up! I've always been puzzled by hearing "declaring an emergency" on this and other aviation channels - MAYDAY is the international distress signal and gets the ATC's attention (although apparently not in this case!) even if the controller's native language isn't English. As for MAYDAY being the "new version" - it was introduced in 1923 according to Alexa 🙂
a bigger issue with inflight deployment of thrust reversers is that it creates a plume of air infront of the affected engine and wing, wich leads to loss of lift, wich then can lead to an aerodynamic stall. this happend in 1991 to Lauda Air Flight 004
Because of that flight measures were taken to stop it from happening. In this case the reverser unlock error trigggers automatic idle, and then procedure calls for shutdown. Of this is the incident I’m thinking of they actually had the error on the ground, cleared it, and then whammie as soon as they got up in the air and hit some turbulence it jostled the reverser just enough.
If I recall the correct flight - there was no notification given to pilots about an in-flight deployment of the reverser - the plane merely rolled the engine back to idle. The plane rolling thrust back unannounced at takeoff is ... concerning to pilots, especially if you're under speed and the plane is trying to stall.
@@Relkond if true then that means this is the second such incident with an A320 family aircraft in the last 6 weeks or so as mine had a message on the ground.
I have called Mayday only once in 60 years. I was flying a Cessna 402C, lost one engine, opened valves to get fuel to the dead engine, went to start the dead engine only to find that the other engine stopped. I was over the sea at 12,000.
I’m an older controller at a level 12 facility and this is all great info, I’ve learned a lot from your channel. A lot of the weird questions and misunderstandings you may hear from us nowadays is a product of the FAA’s recent hiring of people with NO previous aviation experience. However, also bear in mind that there IS a lot going on behind the scenes for us too. Internal coordination between sectors and/or the tower, calling the domestic event network, moving other aircraft out of your way, rolling the equipment, dealing with stupid supervisors mouth breathing over our shoulder asking dumb questions, etc. So we may or may not have operational bandwidth to be able to give progressive instructions either, depending on workload. When they pull the tapes on these incidents they usually tell the computer to filter out all the other transmissions to declutter, so who knows what else was going on. Love your stuff, keep up the good work!
lol geez the new kids all that bad are they? Retired ATC myself and I concur, there's a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes. The hold made perfect sense for me, easier for the pilot as well....when he's ready he can just get a clearance for a published approach if they don't have the airport in sight. The only thing I might have changed is asked the pilot if he would like hold instructions and "advise ready to copy." Let's not forget, the EFC time also helps with a NORDO situation. Safety first gang!
@@Pendarr7 made perfect sense to me and I appreciate the advisory from the controller. I believe I train all my students enough that it would make sense for them as well. I think the only disagreement is coming from pilots that aren’t trained up
I recently read an article about the FAA's hiring practices. One guy was getting a degree in aviation and was turned down for a job because he didn't meet the DEI hiring guidelines. They hire village idiots that meet their hiring guidelines so they can feel good about themselves. I bet the passengers would prefer someone who actually knows something about aviation.
I have been watching you for a long time now and just noticed that you have a fourth bar on your shoulders Congratulations on becoming a captain, how proud you must feel Best wishes Nick Brumpton
A very good debrief! As a simulator instructor, I know how busy the pilots are when they have an engine issue during take-off and initial climb. The checklists are long, and the approach chart is something they will only think about later when the issue has been taken care of. Flying into an airport you are not 100% familiar with makes it much harder.
Reverser deployed in flight: 🔸Lauda Air flight NG004, Thailand, 26 May 1991, B767, fatalities: 223 (no survivors) 🔸TAM flight JJ402, Brazil, 31 October 1996, F100, fatalities: 103 (no survivors)
All the other: Never heard about them. Engine went auto- idle upon the faulty deployment. This happens before the pilots even have time to process what is happening. With the engine at idle, the plane remains controllable (most of the time, at least at low altitude). After above incidents, aside from auto-idle, the also installed additional safeguards. The later deployments, to my knowledge, where all due to faulty maintenance, if one reverser was deactivated, but not correctly stowed.
@@beyondEV if I remember correctly, at least in the case of the TAM Fokker 100, the plane tried to put the engine at idle but the copilot, thinking it was an auto-throttle malfunction, pushed the throttle forward and fought against the system trying to pull it back, to the point that the steel cable used by the system to pull the throttle back ended up breaking.
I'm not sure why I haven't seen you for awhile, but I see that you have become a Captain in the interim. Congratulations! I have always enjoyed your videos.
Kelsey, if you listen to the recording really closely when the pilot was transmitting the MAYDAY declaration, it sounds like ATC is stepping on the pilot (you’ll need good quality headphones). So it makes sense that ATC asked if he was declaring an emergency because he didn’t hear that part. Thanks to your channel and videos for training my ear to even notice that!
Yep I heard that too, anyone receiving would have either heard ATC, the pilot or a mix of garbage due to both stations transmitting at once, depending on proximity
I was riding in the jump seat on a C-5B Galaxy out of Travis AFB years ago. On take off, at about 120 knots, we had a reverser unlocked indication. The crew immediately rejected the take off, but weren't sure if they should use reverse thrust to stop, the checklist wasn't clear, so they relied on the brakes. Luckily, we were empty, with a light fuel load (going up for air-to-air refueling training), so we stopped with plenty of concrete left in front of us, but the brakes were seriously hot. Taxied off, fire department made sure nothing was on fire or smoking, so we went back to the ramp. Ended up being a mis-rigged sensor (had just been replaced the day before). Maintenance fixed it, tested it, and we were back on our way in about an hour and a half. Luckily the tanker didn't have anything else to do that day, so we completed the mission and everybody got current. Still a bit scary though, thinking about one of those big GE TF-39s suddenly deciding to go the opposite direction.
I was thinking if they were fully loaded would they try to use the reversers or not. Try to fully open the reverser and turn the engine back on? I'm guessing procedure for brakes only while fully loaded would be land on the numbers and use the entire length of the runway and hopefully meet the fire crews at the very end of the runway. Obviously I'm not a pilot but I am curious what the landing procedures for something like this would be.
The engine won't go into "reverse" unless it's selected to do so by the pilot. The problem is just an indication problem, not a control problem. If it's anything like the Tornado thrust reverse, there are stowed microswitches on the operating arms and locked microswitches on the locking pins which lock the mechanism closed. We often used to get reports from pilots that they'd got an "unlocked" indication (iirc) during supersonic runs which was purely down to one of the microswitches being out of adjustment. I have no doubt the engines you mention have a very similar system. Hope this helps.
@@shadowprince4482 I don't know about military aircraft, but all civilian aircraft are tested to do a RTO at max gross weight, at V1, using only the brakes. There's a video out there with a fully loaded A380 doing an emergency stop from V1. They even sat there for several minutes with the tires slowly starting to burn to simulate the fire brigade being slow. I think after 3 (or 5?) minutes, the fire brigates was told, ok, you can start putting out the fire.
When I was in ATC I I added to the end of the phraseology to "How much fuel remaining?" IN TIME?" Sure speeded up the process and gave the information needed first thing.
Yep. You’re going to land at a known airport. ATC may want to know how much fuel in time, but the real need for the fuel state is for the responders on the ground. They want/need gallons.
@@greysheeumExactly what I was going to say. 4 hours may mean nothing to the ground responders. They want pounds or gallons, because 4 hours in one plane might be 500 gallons and another be 1500 gallons.
That’s a spirit and love for his RUclips audience, even when he is kidnapped in this warehouse he still wear his nice clean and press captain shirt and made a RUclips video for us. 👊👍🏻
I love your Broadcasts. You give great explanations so it really keeps we. (unformed) Information we don’t even k ow we need . You’re really very good at this which makes me curious if you’re an Instructor. You certainly sound like a very thorough & knowledgeable Instructor. I enjoy your Broadcasts as I like to learn. Thank you. I can’t imagine how much time & effort you put into these Programs it I do realize it’s much more than I could ever estimate. You are amazing. Again, thank you . 🇺🇸
Great commentary on passengers hearing engine shutdown. I was on a commercial flight which lost an engine (felt like the fan was going to rip through the fuselage when it went out). Seemed like 5 minutes or more before the Captain made an announcement. I already knew they were busy 1)assessing the situation and 2)going through checklists. We landed at an alternate airport after 30 minutes of flying with 1 engine and praying it didn’t burn out from overload. Always professional, courteous, and I believe the crew was relieved to be safely on terra firma as well. Thanks as always for the commentary.
Hours of fuel remaining may be important to you and specific to your aircraft, but pounds of fuel is very standard and useful to the fire crew on the ground.
Transmit a distress or urgency message consisting of as many as necessary of the following elements, preferably in the order listed: If distress, MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAY-DAY; if urgency, PAN-PAN, PAN-PAN, PAN-PAN. Name of station addressed. Aircraft identification and type. Nature of distress or urgency. Weather. Pilots intentions and request. Present position, and heading; or if lost, last known position, time, and heading since that position. Altitude or flight level. ...Fuel remaining in minutes.... Number of people on board. Any other useful information Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) FAA
I wouldn’t care what they say. My instruments give kg so they’ll get kg. I doubt they’ll do calculations on how many fire engines to dispatch. They’ll send them all.
Watched quite a few of these type videos, more than a few ATC have asked for the fuel in pounds...even after flight crew gives them fuel in time remaining.
Right? Im just a couch surfer and seeing these exchanges between professionals in the comments and them giving their opinions and having back and forth discussions is wonderful.
Being an ATC controller since 28 years, I had quite a few emergencies on my frequencies - including engine shutdowns. We also always listen to the voices of the flightcrews to determine their stress level and how we can work with them based on what we hear. This particular pilot did not sound overly stressed out after they had shut down the engine and he even requested delay vectors to set the aircraft up for a proper approach and landing. The controller however let them fly to SCAPO to enter the holding there which I do not find that discerning for several reasons: 1. as mentioned above, the crew sounded calm enough and needed time and miles anyway 2. SCAPO is the initial approach fix - so in case they wanted to start the approach, they wouldn´t have been too far out, which - on the other hand - could happen any time with delay vectors (which they did request) as the controller usually does not know when the aircraft is ready to commence the approach. 5000ft would also be 1000ft above the initial approach altitude what gives them additional safety margin if needed 3. as far as I understand, letting the aircraft enter a holding pattern and let the crew just fly that pattern on autopilot takes away another distraction from them which is receiving new vectors every 20 or so seconds (depending on the size of airspace or 5000ft radar vectoring minimum the controller has available) I´m absolutely on your side regarding sloppy phraseology...
The 2021 TransAir 810 crash in Honolulu comes to mind. ATC gave them the option to come back in right away, but they required more time to run checklists. ATC gave vectors to give them time, but they ended up being too far out after they "lost" their second engine. If they were in a holding pattern at the approach end, it would have added an additional layer of safety, in case the situation became much more urgent.
The pilot is in control here, so if he wasn't comfortable with being directed to SCAPO then he can indicate negative. The pilot has already shown he will do his own thing by staying at 5000. It seems clear it's an option for the pilot, not a direction. In this situation is seems reasonable.
I'm just an aviation fan myself and the entire video I was thinking, "What's wrong here?" This seemed like a very professional interaction between both ATC and the pilots. Obviously, Kelsy pointed out some ways they could have improved it, but overall, no one seemed to get upset. And except for the initial missed understood Mayday call (which still was clarified quickly), they communicated quite well.
I agree with what robk8987 said about SCAPO being the perfect place to park them. PDX has intensive flight training to the southwest, parachute jumping to the southeast, and a volcano to the north. (Though I doubt there was much of either on a cold blustery February day, but this was a very safe place to put them.) I think Kelsey has blown this way out of proportion and as far as we (don't) know, the pilot could live in Scappoose and this could have been his 23'rd flight back and forth from PHX that week. As others have pointed out, thrust reversers deploying in flight at low altitude at high power could be a death sentence, not just a bad thing that makes the airplane fly crooked. Also, the MSA in the video is factually wrong, as the charted MSA is centered around Battleground VOR, not PDX. There was no chance of that plane hitting anything.
Becoming a great pilot sounds extremely difficult, I don't think I could ever do it. The stress and responsibility that you guys have and go through is incredible. Huge respect! BTW, it's nice to finally see you with four stripes, congratulations!🎉
I'm a Rideshare driver that works PDX. That planes was parked in Alaskas Maintenance spot for over a week. They had to pull the entire cowling and reverser off. I don't think American has maintenance facilities at PDX either so that probably complicated things.
Kelsey deserves a fifth stripe. Addresses serious matters with an outrageous tongue in cheek humour. As he says (twice) "I'm just a big cry baby". Who tosses around 747's like they are feathers. 74Gear rules!
Kelsey, ATC wants to know fuel in pounds to relay to ARFF services, so they know what to expect should the plane end up in flames on the ground, and how much fire they could be battling. Though time is helpful too for the reasons you stated.
It really doesn’t make a difference to ARFF if it’s 10k or 30k. Big bada boom either way. The flight just took off so they know it has a bunch of fuel on board. In my experience as a firefighter some people ask questions just for the sake of asking questions; they really shouldn’t be bothering the flight crew unless it’s for something pertinent/ meaningful. As I mentioned in another post I’ve heard fire ask for fuel in weight/pounds right when the aircraft is approaching the threshold which is nonsense.
@@cruisinguy6024Smarter not harder. I hope you are promoted sooner than later. At least I want you as my ARFF incident commander if I’m coming in with an emergency.
Yeah, this fuel question is just box ticking and seems to be ingrained into American ATC. No other country asks that question because it’s kind of obvious by the type of aircraft and operation. Basically for a large airliner you need 100% of your resources. Furthermore “Hazardous Materials” is not a phrase used in aviation in the rest of the world. It’s “Dangerous Goods”. And the rest of the world doesn’t use “Souls on Board”either. The whole thing is unnecessary and time wasting, the information can be gained from the airline more accurately and in better detail.
@@EdOeuna ...But they might decide to alert nearby fire departments if it's more than they feel comfortable handling with the 2 trucks they have available on the airport. It's really not any less helpful than asking for time. Getting an aircraft in distress on the ground ASAP is always priority #1, if low fuel is an issue it shouldn't matter because that plane will be sent straight to the runway unless pilots request otherwise. So frankly fuel in time is rarely helpful at all, but at least the weight helps the airport know what could happen on the ground.
Thanks for clarifying the reason for asking about fuel on board. I always assumed it was so they could notify firefighters how big of a fireball to expect if the plane crashed (or something like that).
i appreciate kelsey negotiating with his kidnappers to let him set up his filming equipment and record the video. editor also did a great job cutting out the screams. im glad they gave him access to wifi. haha love your vids
Retired 777 check pilot here. Thank you for addressing the Mayday vs Pan, Pan issue. We began transitioning to this ICAO training within the last two years and, as usual, U.S. ATC seems to be the last to know. Both are a means of declaring an emergency. “Mayday” is defined as “grave and imminent” danger. “Grave” means, you’re gonna die. “Immanent” means, you’re gonna die right away. 😂. “Pan, pan” simply means, “Urgent.” You’re correct, which you declare is based upon your situation at the moment. Unless I am actively on fire - engine, cargo, or other - or anything els3 I deem to be “grave and imminent” I’m going to err toward, Pan, pan. That’s just me, or was me. Great analysis.
I don’t know where your comment comes from but that information was released long ago and guidance in 7100.G5 AA was updated to reflect both the Mayday and pan calls.
@@Jimmer-Space88 to be honest, there are questions why it took so long when mayday was invented for Aeronautical use at Croydon Airport in the UK and was adopted as the standard grave and imminent emergency call by the ITU for all emergency radio voice calls at the International Radiotelegraph Convention of Washington in 1927. SOS is the Morse code equivalent. Pan-Pan actually comes from the Geneva conventions for specifying a medical transport as pan-pan medical, but also was specified at that same conference for less emergency use with XXX being the Morse code equivalent.
@@EwanMarshall very interesting. Thanks for sharing. What’s also noteworthy, the United States Coast Guard and anyone with a nautical captains license knows that Mayday called three times is the standard phraseology for what is an “emergency” and pan pan pan is the equivalent phraseology for an urgent situation. This has been around for (I don’t know how long) so it’s nice to see aeronautical and nautical join in phraseology similarities!
@@Jimmer-Space88 Yes, I'm a ham operator and a sailor, the whole declaring an emergency was weird to me, but it is even weirder when mayday came from the aeronautical world. Pan-pan may have too, they are both based in French.
Your modesty is fantastic. With a long business career I learned that those with that attitude were the best. Those who thought they knew everything were always dangerous.
I live in Scappoose (ie: SCAPO). Of the areas surrounding PDX, it is the least populated, surrounded by fields, and next to the Columbia river. If an aircraft has to go down, this would be the best place for it, even pulling a Sully and landing in the river. I'll bet it is SOP for PDX to orbit any emergency aircraft in this area to minimize the potential collateral ground damage should a crash be inevitable. It makes complete sense to me that the controller immediately vectored them away from the high density urban areas.
Had nothing to do with it. SCAPO is the IAF for the ILS into runway 10R, that is where you start the landing approach procedure. The hold is there as a method to get airplanes traveling the wrong direction (like this one was) turned around and onto the final approach path.
The ATC could have vectored the plane away from the populated areas. I've never had an actual emergency, only simulated ones. And since I'm trained by more experienced pilots they always give vectors in the sim. It would be a good exercise to give a holding to increase workload. To teach that as a pilot you can be a big crybaby and request delayed vectors instead.
Hey Kelsey. God bless you for raising RT discipline by many US pilots. As an Aussie, it is so frustrating to hear the shortcuts accepted as standards phraseology. As to fuel on board notification with a mayday, my understanding is that the notification is for RFFS situational awareness. So they want to know the weight of the fuel onboard to assist with the planning of the amount of extinguishing agent needed in case that weight of fuel erupts into flame. If it was for ATC SA purposes relating to when you’re going to run out of juice, they’d ask for endurance. That’s just my take… As for holding v vectors. It’s a cultural thing I think. I’m so used to holding to complete procedures during sim sessions, that I find it funny to hear people ask for vectors all the time. In fact, it’s SOP where I work (and places I’ve worked prior) that we program a return in the secondary flight plan that includes a hold if published. When the engine goes bang, we fly the escape procedure, then ask for a DIR TO the hold. Easy peasy, lemon squeezy.
I agree with your points regarding the Mayday X 3 call and rough time estimates for FOB. I offer up an alternative perspective regarding vectors vs. holding. First, I never trust a controller explicitly. During the emergency (same as at all times), it is ultimately my responsibility to “Aviate, Navigate, and effectively Communicate” until we reach a successful conclusion to the flight. If I’m in a situation where I need to reduce our crew’s task loading, burn down fuel, etc.; I prefer to hold. Holding does a few things for me. It adds an additional resource operating our automation at a higher level hooked up to our FMC. It also helps to maintain a higher level of situational awareness as it speeds up our cross check on not only where we are but also where we are relative to our intended approach and airfield, restricted airspace, high terrain/obstacles, etc. Finally, it reduces the risk of missing an important radio call and excessive radio calls to listen for in general. Don’t get me wrong, sometimes vectors alone are fine in many situations. Regarding ATC’s calls, we’re really “splitting hairs” on that. If ATC asks if I am declaring an emergency, “Affirmative, I AM DECLARING AN EMERGENCY AND WE ARE RETURNING TO LAND.” No big deal, whatever I need to do to establish a shared mental model. I agree the controller could have avoided dropping the point on the crew but again, no big deal. I find the best controllers work as a team with the pilots establishing that “shared mental model “ I referred to earlier. Ultimately, I believe everyone involved did an outstanding job communicating and working together to safely recover the aircraft. I really enjoy your videos buddy. Thanks for all you do. BD
I really appreciate how thorough you are in explaining what the pilots are doing and how as passengers we need to give the pilots time to do what they need to do instead of giving updates to the. Passengers when they are extremely busy trying to land the plane. I know if I ever experience an emergency I will try to remember how busy the pilots are as well as the flight attendants trying to get the cabin ready for landing. Love your channel ❤
During a ground school a few years ago it was interesting to see the CC perspective on things. They were shocked when we said we might land without even speaking to them. They had the idea that we would be speaking to them and the cabin from the beginning.
As Blancoliro says: Aviate Navigate Communicate They need to be in control, know where they're going, how to get there... Then, tell pax what's going on..
@@lohikarhu734 - aviate, navigate, communicate is a good system for basic aviation in GA aircraft. Once you get into the multi crew environment then ANC doesn’t really apply, although it is always a good fall back position in an emergency.
Captain, this series is very informative for both pilots and controllers. I was trained in the Air Force as an ATC, before being hired years later as a LaGuardia radar departure controller who had to learn the traffic patterns, airspace, frequencies and restrictions of neighbor airports JFK and Newark. Kinda like a triangle with 15-mile legs. Re AA1625 and the loss of an engine, the controller who asks souls on board and fuel status is not concerned about how many hours of flight are left but to alert airport firefighters of what they are facing in the event of a crash. Secondly, when a pilot declares an emergency on departure, the controller will immediately respond and take action to provide help that involves coordination with other controllers in adjoining airspace and the tower who will also be affected. But like confusion in the cockpit during an emergency, the controller is responsible for all of the aircraft under his/her control and may not have time to provide ongoing vectors in the midst of a push of incoming or outgoing traffic vs. a holding pattern. While an aircrew with an emergency is focused on one aircraft, a busy controller concerned with separating everyone can be distracted by out-of-routine requests like vectors in a crowded traffic pattern that require focused attention. That said, keep up the great work!
Totally agree with the 2.2 issue. As a retired controller/supervisor phraseology has been written in blood. Stick to the pilot-controller glossary and recommended phraseology. What does the controller think "Mayday, mayday, mayday" mean other than an emergency? Controller giving an alt and heading is perfect, then all the pilot to aviate, navigate, then get to you. Also once the pilot gives SOB and fuel remaining in time (if they give lbs take it, let pilot fly) coordinate all the subsequent controllers know and won't ask again. So, as a controller, and 10,000+ corporate pilot you nailed this, not surprised. I feel any engine failure (for 2 engined aircraft), keeping the aircraft sort of close to the airport just in case of the other engine buggering up. Weather issuance was good, totally agree. I'd have asked the pilot if they wanted vectors or holding, and if holding where they'd like to hold. And if holding at the controllers discretion, issue easy holding...give a point and ask the pilot how they'd like to hold. The PILOT is the BOSS. Controllers are not very well versed on aircraft fly, or even emergencies aside from how to handle them, so keep that in mind.
Aren't you proud of him being a captain now? Remember he was a first officer and I watch all his vids and I don't remember him ever him being like "notice my fourth stripe now" comment so good for him. I love that he's so humble and always speaking about how bad he is at math. Um. we know you aren't, you wouldn''t have that job.
I'm glad we got good guys like you up in the cockpit, double thinking EVERYTHING! That's what makes You a great pilot... and yes be a crybaby all you want, You're A#1 in my book!
Retired ATC. I always wanted to know which engine was shut down because you don’t want to issue vectors that make the aircraft turn towards the engine which is shut down or at least set the aircraft up so that the pilot can make wide turns toward the bad engine.
I'm confused. If your starboard engine is out, wouldn't turns towards starboard, i.e. towards the shut down engine, be easier to perform than turns to port where the shut down engine won't help the turn? 🤔
@@Lornoor Good morning. I was an air traffic controller and I am not a pilot so you should contact a certified twin engine flight instructor to get his or her input. As I understand it if you lose an engine the aircraft will have asymmetric thrust. In other words, if the left engine becomes inoperative it won’t provide any thrust while the “good” engine, the right, is still producing thrust. This will cause the aircraft to yaw (turn) towards the left. In addition, the engine nacelle and the propeller on the bad engine is producing drag. Additionally, the propeller on the left side is not spinning and forcing air over the left wing. Which means that the left wing will produce less lift than the right which will cause the aircraft the bank (lean) to the left. Remember that I am NOT a pilot. There are methods that a pilot can use to attempt to counter act the effects of losing an engine. But if you turn towards the bad engine you may lose control of the aircraft because of less lift on the left wing plus the right engine is producing thrust and the left is not. I see your point where it may be easier to turn towards the dead engine but it may increase your risk. That is why I mentioned in my original comment that I would issue wide turns towards the good engine. Set the aircraft up for a wide downwind and extend him a bit farther from the field so that the pilot can execute a more gradual turn to final and have an opportunity to fly a stabilized approach as opposed to keeping the aircraft on a tight downwind and too close to the threshold so that he has to really crank it in on a slam dunk approach.
@@Lornoor Months late. That's a great way to make an accelerated stall. Yes, it'll be easier, but the winfs create lift. You're fighting against the turn of the plane as it wants to tilt to the engine that's off. Letting it happen, it's going to be hard to turn it back to make it level and you might lose altitude. So, yeah, a lot of bad.
Its interesting that Kelsey should talk about reverting to what you're most familiar with in an emergency and why speaking correctly is so important to do all the time so you revert to correct communication when faced with an emergency. Then to have the controller revert to what he's most familiar with, a standard holding instruction, instead of offering holding vectors.
This is why I never drive a car when I go to the U. K. Sure I will be alright when I am focused on being on the "wrong" side of the road, but let my mind wander or have to react instantly in an emergency and I know 100% I will do what I would do if I were back on a U. S. road.
Good morning to you, Captain Kelsey from Chicago. I miss those weekly videos man when we get them, they're good. Have a good day, BROTHER ! KEEP THE BLUE SIDE UP 🛩🫡
I watch this channel from time to time and really like it. Anyway I see things way out of order and not regularly. But I notice here that you have a captain’s stripe now and, even if I am in the wrong decade or something, want to congratulate you for that. It’s been a while since I was flying, and that was military as well so not the same in many respects, but these videos are super informative, instructive, and entertaining, and have some simple life messages as well for that matter. Thanks for all this great programming.
As a powerplants engineer whom has been party to lots of flight testing including TR deployment in flight test, you should be afraid of a reverser unlocked message in flight. What it means is that you have lost one of several inadvertent deployment preventions which means you are one step closer to deployment. In flight deployment of a wing TR on a wing mounted engine is more than likely catastrophic. Teh crew in this case did exactly the right thing, shut down the engine.
Offhand I can't think of a quicker way to take a plane from coordinated flight to uncontrolled freefall, than that kind of ridiculous yaw spinning the aircraft sideways. That's purely reasoning from first principles, but you've actually seen it done - is that roughly what happens? I'm really curious to hear anything you can tell us about that, though I absolutely wouldn't want to be anywhere near it myself.
It's not just the yaw from differential thrust, but that the deployed reverser will spoil the airflow over that wing. Having one wing suddenly stall while the other is still trying to fly is bad.
@@rayvanlandingham7218 true, plus that wing suddenly has less airspeed. I'm struggling to imagine exactly how all this would interact, but I'm damn sure I wouldn't want to be the poor bastard trying to fly the thing.
@patheddles4004 A hard roll to the affected side, combined with a rotation of the aircraft (yaw) into the roll (so, in effect, rolling sideways and then nosing into the new "down" direction). Since you are diving, you are now getting even more lift from the unaffected wing, and since you are "sideways" now, it's just going to spin you harder. This is my "guess" (not an aeronautical engineer) but I think you would basically turn into a lawn dart. Imagine if you were in cruise, then suddenly pushed the stick hard right (aileron roll), shoved the right rudder pedal to the floor.... and then just held it. I don't think it would be the "crabbing" effect of the differential thrust itself that would be really dangerous (it's trying to rotate the entire airframe into the windstream) but that the loss of lift will immediately cause you to dive into it, and that starts a cycle of self-reinforcing effects
Kelsey I really enjoy listening to your explanations of what’s going on. I have no airline experience except actually riding in a plane. Thank you and stay safe
2 quick remarks : -13:50 the airplane would have a tendency to turn the other way (clockwise) #1 engine would push you clockwise (to the right) negative thrust on #2 would do the same. - my understanding of declaring fuel in quantity (weight or volume) is for the firefighters. They need to know if they potentially have to extinguish 100 liters or 1000 liters of fuel. Should we maybe say both?
I once returned to base in a B-52 after having fumes, a burning smell, and several pieces of electronic gear fail, including the autopilot. Our Command Post asked if we could go into holding while they consulted maintenance about our problems. I told them we were proceeding directly back to land, our ETA, and that we’d be listening for any advice they might have. But, barring any startling revelations or information we weren’t aware of, our intention was to land ASAP. The DO met our aircraft and told me I’d done the right thing. It was an onboard electrical fire in a wiring bundle. It had gone out on its own, but there was no guarantee that it might not reignite, or what other systems might fail if it did. Not to mention that there were noxious fumes in the crew compartment.
Back in the early 80's, I was flying in the pattern at Fulton County Airport (FTY and then known as Charlie Brown Airport). It was a super busy day. A Piper Navajo had just taken off and called a Mayday as his left engine went out. I'll never forget it. The controller responded, "Roger, Piper xxx make a LEFT 360 for spatial clearance." The rules about cussing on the radio temporarily went out the window. Fortunately, he made a safe landing. My instructor said that the controller got a little re-educating.
@@bene5431 no. Turning into a dead engine is the last thing you want to do. The plane wants to do it, but it’s a good way to enter an accelerated stall.
Controller here. I’ve been taught early on to prioritize emergency aircraft (obviously) and without task saturating them give the pilot options and/or ask them for what they want/need. In these type of situations a hold is easier for the controller in the sense that we are also coordinating in a lot of ways (with the supervisor for the best option for the airport, with the tower, with fire, etc.) but just throwing out a fix randomly is not the way to go. I would go more with “hey I can give you the initial fix to the airport to hold at IF YOUD LIKE” and if they want it leave them on vectors until the PILOT is ready to proceed direct. And leave them alone until they feel comfortable in their tasking to find the fix and figure out if that works for them. If not then I’ll just work vectors.
Well, NOT hitting the mountain IS a procedure. Which doesn't include leaving an engine burning (unless you've had a bad day and lost >1 engine OR you screwed up your perf calculations).
So this is a typical pilot perspective. I say that as a commercial helicopter pilot. But I'm also an ATC. Pilots think about themselves. They should, it's their job, to fly THEIR aircraft. Controllers on the other hand, think about EVERY aircraft. So whilst as you say, you are very busy in the cockpit, there is a lot going on for the controller too. Firstly, the aircraft with the mayday is the priority but there is still every other aircraft under his control that still needs to be monitored, vectored, or handed off so that the controller has less traffic to think about. He also needs to co-ordinate. This would be with the aisle supervisor, probably a quick note to say "heads up, I've got a mayday, I'll get back to you". He will then contact the tower to let them know to stop departures like you mentioned and to let them have a rough idea as to what is occurring. This process will continue and every time the controller gets new info he'll have to co-ordinate it. Oh and he still has all those other aircraft I talked about to control. One of the fastest ways to have two aircraft get close together or have some sort of incident is to get hyper focused on an emergency to the detriment of all your other traffic. When the controller gave the vector to the hold, in my opinion he was basing that on what the pilot has told him both verbally and by his demeanor. You mentioned the pilot sounded calm and in control. The shut down was procedural, not due to something like a bird strike or fire. Yes it was an emergency but even the pilots said they'd like to hold whilst they problem solve. I have found over my 20 year ATC career I have learnt that you can tell a lot from how the pilots communicate. I've heard everything from guys like this to people who knew they were about to die on the radio. So based on how they talk to me I will tailor my response accordingly. That's not to say that you can load the cool, calm and collected guy/girl up. The situation can change quickly but you definitely make decisions based on both what and how something is said. One other thing to think about. The pilot said he'd need to hold. It's quite possible that the controller thought the pilot may be actually asking to be sent to SCAPO where the published hold is. I'm not saying that's definitely what happened but it's possible. Again it comes back to communication. The pilot could have just as easily come back and asked for vectors as you say. Listening to this guy, I feel , had it been out of his ability to manage he would have said something. He sounded like a pro to me. All of this doesn't mean I'm saying you are wrong. I just feel it's a lot more nuanced than is alluded to here.
So glad to see this perspective. I actually started getting a bit annoyed at this video even early on, seems like a bad take. Even if I lacked any ATC or aeronautic experience he literally goes from "yeah the plane can fly safely with one engine, and everyone seems calm" to "how dare this bad, bad ATC man give him a hold at a fix instead of delay vectors and ask questions". If the delay vectors come in frequently, is it not as annoying or task saturating as having to get the fix and hold? Plus, will they not need the approach plate to, ya know, land at the runway they're going to have to land at? And maybe the ATC was not used to a MAYDAY call for single engine failure, and asked the cause to relay that pertinent information to other agencies that requested it, as well as to gain some better understanding as to why a single engine out was an emergency. I've had an "emergency" called due to a technical requirement, but the pilot asked that vehicles not roll. These things happen, every situation is dynamic that's the nature of the beast. This video seemed like a bottom of the barrel scoop in my opinion, and overinflated and exaggerated certain points. And if he wants to try to nitpick, "A pilot who encounters a Distress condition should declare an emergency by beginning the initial communication with the word “Mayday,” preferably repeated three times." Keyword here is "should" not "shall" so no, MAYDAY calls are not expressly required to be made to declare an emergency, maybe read the terms of reference and actually know what you're talking about before making a RUclips video about it. He also doesn't realize that the CONTROLLER ASKED IF HE WANTED EQUIPMENT AS HE VERIFIED IF HAD THE EMERGENCY, so it's not just some erroneous request to repeat if he's an emergency he just sprinkles the verification in with the ACTUAL QUESTION of if he wanted equipment. Having been ATC and an avionics technician, I genuinely am shocked at how narrow sighted, bigheaded, and just a complete non-critical thinking mindset that SOME pilots can display at times. This video stands as proof of that.
@@JoshuaChalys Well, the first bit where he asked if there was an emergency, when he declared an emergency. Frankly I disagree. They declared an emergency. The part where he has him hold? These airports can be very busy, and I've heard about the problems in some cases of ATC basically being expected to track a rather large amount of planes. Although not ideal that seemed reasonable to me. I do agree I think this is being made a bigger deal than it probably was.
@@JoshuaChalys agreed on most of that mate. I do think pilots don’t really understand controllers needs for the most part. As I mentioned they are only focused on themselves and traffic that may affect them. This video felt like that a bit. It’s like he thought that the controller is sitting back only taking care of the one flight and had nothing else to worry or think about. But, I will say controllers can definitely learn from stuff like this as well. I don’t think this video was wrong per se, I just think it was one sided and lacked some understanding of what goes on on the other side of the radio.
7:15 because they just took off, I figure he told them how much fuel in weight so that emergency crews could know what they're dealing with... they're not worried about running out of fuel, they're worried about running out of engines.
About 40 years ago, I was flying a Cessna C206 when a loud bang woke up my passenger. Although I lost some manifold pressure and airspeed, the engine was still operating, so I asked for clearance to a higher altitude. I managed to slowly gain some more height. I happened to be flying above a highway in the Australian Outback, and in those days, there wasn't so much traffic. Expecting a sudden seizure of the engine, I looked at the very, very long tarmac and also the rough terrain on either side of that highway. I actually asked for permission to land on the highway, and after a long pause, permission was granted! As it is, I managed to get to the next airport with plenty of height ... but I want to say one thing: REGARDLESS of whether or not the flight service officer granted me permission to land on that highway, I can tell you now that that is where I would have landed, if I had to! It wouldn't have been much fun for these pilots to be told to be directed to do an IFR racecourse track when all you really wanna do is just get DOWN! (BTW, that loud bang was the head of a cylinder lifting off, like a soup can lid.)
An amazing video and an exceptionally great explanation you made, yes I'm a nervous flyer, so thank you for all of the information you have passed on to viewers to better understand what goes on in situations like this. Congratulations on being a pilot, that is a job I could never do.
Hearing you talk about the pan-pan vs. Mayday engine scenario where this 747 crew told ATC that they had an engine out, and when ATC asked if they’re declaring an emergency the 747 crew responded “no, we’re fine!”
I think it was Kelsey that one time said something along the lines of "if the threat of loosing another engine is low and there are no big bodies of water on the route they are sometimes told to simply fly to the intended destination with 3 engines"
@@zottelhuehs6375-- If nothing is leaking and there are no tall mountains to climb over, and airports along the way in case things get worse, why not?
A USAF B-52 and an F-16 were on a routine training mission, the pilot of the F-16 was a young arrogant SoB and started showing off to the B-52 crew by barrel rolling around the B-52. The F-16 pilot then challenged the B-52 pilot by saying anything you can do, I can do better. You're on replied the B-52 pilot, and the F-16 driver watched as the B-52 proceeded to fly straight and level. Curious, the F-16 pilot asked what the B-52 pilot did that was so impressive. The BUFF pilot replied I just shut down 2 engines kid, to which the F-16 pilot had no reply!!
Hard work,talking into a camera ,really hard,im so sick of these kiss ass comments to youtubers. They dont care about you,sorry to bring you back to earth.
Just an FYI, we actually want the fuel in lbs like the pilot gave. We pass the info along to ARFF. They want to know how many bodies, how big of fireball. If the pilot give fuel in time, we ask what the weight is.
Fun fact, px have assigned seats because when the ac comes apart on the ground, they may well be strapped into the seats, makes the coroner's life easier. Another CAP training point, on SAR never ever say He's dead Jim. Now everyone gets to wait for a coroner to show up. Load them into the ambulance and DOA saves a ton of paperwork.
Mayday comes from the French M'aider meaning 'help me' . PAN also comes from the French word Panne meaning breakdown. So when you call Mayday, you want help to go somewhere, like right now. When you call PAN, you're saying 'I have a breakdown, and give me some space to sort it out; don't need immediate assistance for now'. The level of urgency is lower with a PAN, because you don't have to proceed somewhere immediately.
Maybe all true, maybe not. The main thing is that "Mayday, Mayday, MAYDAY" means exactly one thing over the radio, be it aviation or marine: Lives are in immediate danger. Drop everything else and help us as best you can."
@@jerelull9629 Yes, needing to go somewhere right away because we're toast if we do not, is why MAYDAY is broadcast. Besides, the only respondent to MAYDAY that can help you is ATC, since they are the ones to assist you into getting yourself on the ground ASAP. What else could ATC do apart from pointing you in the right direction and giving you priority.... there are no airborne rescue vehicles. Origins of words tell you what the context is; in this case, it means 'help me', and ATC can only point you in the right direction.
It's worth remembering that once a pilot has declared an emergency, they do not have to follow ATC instructions, they can ignore ATC and simply do what they need to do to for the best of the aircraft and the persons on board.
I don't think the issue here was that the controller gave a harmful or even unhelpful instruction, it's that they could have potentially been *more* helpful, e.g. by providing vectors to the hold point rather than forcing the pilots to take time to look it up and navigate themselves. Ignoring the controller would not have helped. As an aside, the pilot in command has the final authority over their aircraft always and can deviate from ATC instructions anytime if they are illegal, unsafe or if the pilots are unable to comply. CFR releases pilots from obeying CFR rules (including compliance with ATC) in any in-flight emergency so requiring it, whether they've declared or not. The declaration is irrelevant. CFR does require the pilot to notify ATC of deviations as soon as possible, so it's not quite like they can "ignore" ATC indefinitely, unless it is impossible to contact them indefinitely, which could certainly be the case in a more intense emergency. I don't think that could be justified here.
Have you considered becoming an ATC ? It is high stress !!! Not soothing, but more like, "got to remember that "' there is a lot going on, at the same time. Not for everyone !
@@linanicolia1363 I believe he is talking about the sound of their calm delivery, which doesn't mean they are not under stress, rather it's the way they modulate their voices. Akin to the reactions to certain sounds involved in ASMR.
Also when your manual says LAND ASAP - you kind of want to land as soon as possible, or as soon as ATC finishes up getting a fresh cup of coffee. You know. Priorities.
Initial info for souls and fuel is for the CFR. How many people are we going to take care of/account for and how much fuel for an idea of water and extinguishing agents can we expect to need. The time remaining info for the controller to plan for contingencies.
0:22 yeh I've noticed that habit, particularly among US pilots. Try drop that habit if you can cause it has potential to cause confusion even in native english speaking countries like the UK and here in Ireland, as its not said here, it's not proper EASA phraseology. Just keep it clear and simple, just [callsign] passing[current alt] climbing/descending[target alt] example, ''Shamrock123 passing 3000 climbing 7000'' try to avoid saying ''3000 for 7000'' or ''climbing to 7000'' because ''to'' and ''for'' sound like ''two'' and ''four'' so your altitude could be misheard or misinterpreted by atc.
Thanks for that Kelsey your humorous self deprecating delivery is very entertaining, supported by nearly 1.2 million subscribers. Just one thing though, you do realise we all celebrated your captaincy when it mysteriously appeared so you've got nearly 1.2 million loyal subscribers who would love to hear some First Officer to Captain details.
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
As an ARFF Firefighter (Airport Rescue & Fire Fighting) I can tell you a controllers main reason for asking for fuel load in a none low fuel emergency is for us. Our truck carry between 1500 and 3000 gallons of water. We can convert to foam via a foam concentrate we mix into the water. The more fuel you have the more foam we will need if your fuel tanks rupture. We use foam even in the absence of fire because it floats in the leaking fuel and keeps it from being able to ignite. Us knowing how much fuel is onboard gives us that heads up to calculate if we have enough resources. Hours of fuel does not tell us the actual volume because we don’t know the aircraft consumption rate. We have ti have it in pounds or gallons for our calculations. Food for thought for pilots who give it in hours.
So what you're saying is... both?
See that's what I originally thought and then Kelsey said it was for Time so I was like "yeah I can see that" but I always thought it was for the guys on the ground.
If the controller wanted "time" they could use the term endurance.
Thing is about the fuel the damaged engine may be using more fuel or even leaking
@@pollysims6040or no fuel if it's shut down 🙄
"Mayday mayday mayday."
"Are you declaring an emergency?"
"Is this your first day as an ATC?"
Another example of FAA being different to international standard ICAO phraseology.
i mean ATCs sometimes ask just to confirm, have seen it multiple times on other channels. better to ask twice rather than once and get it wrong
Maybe ATC would have been better phrasing it back. "I heard you call Mayday, can you confirm the nature of your emergency and ...." That way you confirm it and don't look like you weren't listening. Much like how pilots read back instructions. I'd prefer to hear ATC use the same phrase rather than declaring an emergency. If ATC hears an emergency is prefer they confirm it with are you calling a Mayday? That's what I'd do on Ham radio which uses the phrases Mayday and Pan Pan distress and urgency.
I work in healthcare and had a major emergency declared to me last week for the first time in a 15 year career. I did a bit of a double take and asked to confirm. I passed it on down the procedure of all the different people I had to inform who have their own emergency procedures, and some of them did the same. We have emergencies every day, just not "major" emergencies. Those are normally reserved for CBRN attacks.
@@magical_catgirl mayday is as old or even older than ICAO itself existing.
Pilot and instructor at a US legacy airline here. If, in the sim during an emergency, my students ask for vectors-I’ll give them. But I have them consider asking for a hold. If I’m in an actual emergency and was going to do an immediate return, that’s exactly what I’m going to ask for. If I were in the situation in the video in my aircraft, we’d have many minutes of checklists to run (rev unlocked, shutdown, overweight). If I’m on vectors, the checklists are going to be constantly interrupted by ATC instructions (hdg changes, etc). Each one of those changes has to be input by the pilot flying and then verified by the pilot monitoring. The pilot flying also has to devote more attention to flight path management (where are we?)
If I get a hold, it takes 30 seconds (if that) to enter it in the FMS. Once I’m in the hold…I’m done. Now the PF has more available bandwidth to devote to helping the PM go through all these checklists and formulate a plan. When my students use the hold strategy, the whole emergency invariably goes far smoother.
I did catch how the pilots asked for time to go through the checklist, so the hold pattern, and perhaps the way they spoke made the ATC agent think it wasn't as big as a deal as it arguably and debatably was, at least at the time of the mayday call. Obviously they are all in a very stressful situation(s), and remaining calm is and should be something the one in control is doing at the time, and while we all have a varying degree of calmness when it comes to difficult situations, there is something to be said how panic in voices/actions can lend itself to everyone understanding the gravity of the situation as soon as it rears its head. Now that doesn't mean everyone will pick up on it, or that the situation will be handled with urgency, nor would I want the Pilot flying/in command to be panicky, but yea giving how nuanced things can be, sometimes calmness (aka do as little intervention as possible or very calculated changes) is the way to go, and other times panic (button mashing and/or 'screaming' so more level heads can possibly intervene and guide others to safety)/aka the path to the greatest outcome. - Albeit panic more often than not just leads to worse outcomes/pure chaos and having chaos especially when lives are on the line is quite a recipe for disaster.
Also going into a Hold avoids the risk of Terrain or being forgotten by the controller, therefore letting the crew prepare more comfortably. It also lets you stay closer to the runway.
14:44 "That may not be procedure, but neither is hitting the mountain." 😂 My kind of humor.
Came here to say this. I heard this, lol'ed, and thought, ah, there's Kelsey. Happy Sunday.
Seriously, not a traditional landing
Going to make that a normal saying
After landing the desk pilots will censure him for not following procedures.
I think Boeing may be using that as an option now.
From the European ATC perspective I don't agree with what You said about fuel.
If we ask for "fuel on board", we want the kilograms or tonnes. The only purpose of that information is to pass it to the firefighters. Since it is you, who have the emergency, we don't need to know how long CAN You fly. We want to know how long you WANT to fly. If you need immediate return, you will get it. If you need 10 minutes for the checklist, you will get it. If you need 2 hour for fuel burning You will get it.
If we need to know how long you can fly there's an other word in phreseology: "endurance". "Report endurance" - the answer must be in minutes/hours. And we rarely would use that in an emergency. It happens in "weather situations. Or in our unit's case - with military traffic, which has diffrent fuel regulations. They come back to land with much lower endurance remaining than commercial planes.
Well said. It sounds like European controllers better at knowing and sticking to standard procedures and phraseology, possibly necessitated my the greater amount of international traffic involved.
I also tend to think this is true in the US as well. ATC may be more concerned with time remaining, but ARFF is going to want the fuel in volume or weight (gallons or pounds in the US), so they have an idea of how much flammable liquid is on board as they approach the aircraft.
Also, I think when a plane just took of from your airport and then declares an emergency and wants to return, and the emergency is not "hey we see we forgot to take on fuel and we are almost out of it!!!", it seems very unlikely that endurance is going to be an issue. So why bother asking for it?
That's my understanding as well.
After all, by definition, a Mayday is a "land ASAP" situation. So that's what ATC will help to achieve. What ASAP is will be defined solely by the flight crew.
@@123goodoldmusic Basically, when a pilot declares an emergency, they call the shots. They inform ATC of what they are GOING to do, it is NOT a request. After an emergency has been declared ATCs job switches to ensuring that everyone else is out of the way and that required emergency services are at the ready.
Kelsey - regards the "2.2 for 4" non-standard phraseology: even if you are flying strictly domestically there are other aircraft on the frequency that may be international flights. Those pilots might not understand, which eats into their situational awareness.
Very well said!
Communication is Essential. The RIGHT (mutual shared) Communication.👍
USA has a really bad habit of butchering phraseology, and there are countless videos of readback errors and confusion because of precisely this. Yes y'all have some very congested airspace and SOME very good controllers, but if the half-second saved by abbreviating something unnecessarily results in you being told to "Say Again" then it was never worth it. Worse if it results in confusion that's detrimental to safety. Stick to standard comms always. Aviation is a profession, act professional.
From VASAviation’s videos I’ve learned that if pilots say fuel in pounds they get asked for time, and if they give it in time they get asked for pounds, and if they give it in both they get asked for it in pints.
Yep, controllers need to know if they got enough time to get to the airport, but rescue crew needs to know how much fire potential to deal with. Both are important.
...and if they give it in pints, they will ask it in Star Trek standard measuring units. Twice.
And in this case, the controller was likely aware that they had just taken off and had enough fuel to get to a destination. Further, in this case, the risk wasn't running out of fuel, but running out of engines to burn the fuel.
Couldn't they get the stewardesses tell passengers whats happening if passengers really want to know from start 3spevially if experienced passengers say theve turned an engine off regular passengers can proberly tell so nervous fliers are proberly on edge anyway
Pints 😂
Task saturation kills pilots. As a fellow long haul captain, this conversation needs to happen, in earnest much more often. Keep it coming brother.
Yes, would have felt better about it if ATC had asked the pilot whether he wanted to hold or have vectors. I really like it when the controller makes it clear to a pilot in an emergency that he can go where he needs to, in his discretion. Obviously this pilot could have asked the controller for vectors and I don't think there would have been any problem with that, both the controller and the pilot handled this very well and stayed very calm.
Being able to call the shots in an emergency is basically a concept of safe harbor in Maritime law. Only one of them was up in the air and I guess that underscores the concept of safe harbor when in an emergency. In those circumstances, let the pilot have the discretion regarding when he needs to land and where he needs to land. Glad this one ended well.
The pilot asked for delay vectors and he got a SCAPO point instead.
@@afriedrich1452 The hold at SCAPO is a perfectly valid delay vector. With modern FMS, as noted by several other pilots, it's usually a big workload reducer for the pilot too.
I am an Emergency Physician who loves the channel. So many of the things you point out about communication, task load reduction, teamwork, safety all have direct correlations to the resuscitation bay in a medical emergency or trauma. Thanks for making your stories accessible to those of us with no aviation background!
Lol I was about to ask what an Emergency Physicist does when I noticed I misread.🤣
I am a nurse and that is the reason I am watching.
@@carolynlyfordsullivan1377I'm a retired nurse and I'm watching as I am fascinated by aviation!
@@zaphod333 that sounds like one of the most badass scientific positions
Boy, are you right. Trauma bays are definitely not a place for poor application of any of those facets and there are a LOT more people in that bay. It isn’t just two “pilots” trying to communicate with one other person. A simple resuscitation is one thing but a major trauma might involve multiple specialists not leaving out member of several other disciplines present for that effort.
Kelsey recording this video after being kidnapped and held in an abandoned warehouse? Blink three times if you need us to send the A-Team
I think that's his sex dungeon
And snacks.
We should send him some free breakfast
If he defends the tower and blames the pilot, you'll know it's bad!
(this is a joke, btw! I know he calls it like he sees it!)
@@nuuukethewhales In case the A-Team needs more time to free Murdock first.
"The universal distress call Mayday was invented in 1923 by Frederick Stanley Mockford, chief radio officer at Croydon airport in London. The authorities had asked him to find a term to signal distress that would be easily understood by all pilots and ground staff in the event of an emergency. Mockford chose a phonetic transcription of the pronunciation of the French expression "m'aider" - ‘help me’ (a shortened version of "venez m'aider") which had been uttered by a French pilot in distress two years earlier and which was understood by the English operator as "Mayday". And Pan Pan is from the French 'Panne' (Breakdown)
Gotta love the French getting dunked on simply as a matter of convenience. Everyone has to learn English to fly international, but they also have to learn a couple French words for when things go sideways.
@@RadioactiveSherbet The number of French words in English is surprising!
@@james-p The number of English speaking French also.
The local hospital in Croydon was known as Mayday for many years.
The hospital in Croydon was named Mayday and I always wondered why! This is probably why! We used to call it May die due to the many mrsa virus outbreaks….
I've just notice you have your 4th stripe on your Epaulets, congratulations Captain....
Oh yeah, I didn't notice it so well spotted!!
Congratulations Kelsey, well done mate!!!!!
yeah, i noticed that too. both my boys are pilots, new kids on the block. wonder how long it'll take them to get four stripes.
Yes it makes his eyes look even closer together lol
@kennethtalbott2233 just a few years or possibly never. Some guys just can't hack it. Most likely 10-20 years
So proud of you Kelsey! Hard work, knowledge, experience.
We must appreciate that Kelsey left his nice hotel and brought all of his recording equipment and stood in an abandoned building just to tell us about this!
Didn't even waste time covering the broken window!
For the drama 😊
Read my thoughts exactly
Looks to me, like Kelsey has recorded himself then added that backdrop.
You know Captain Kelsey, he was out checking to see if there were any of his favorite snacks to be had amongst the homeless population.
"You might have to let the engine burn, which isn't part of procedure...but neither is hitting the mountain"....LMAO you always unintentionally crack me up @74 Gear!
That part got me as well.
ya..but it's true and preferred
Came here to look for this comment!
I have to give plenty of respect to pilots and Atc. You guys are like invisible warriors .. getting us all safe to our destinations
Except for the guy in this video, who should not be in the tower. But besides that....!
I was taught to give the critical numbers in an emergency. If fuel low give duration remaining so controllers know to expedite, if fuel is high give amount on board so fire teams know what they are dealing with.
The pilot doesn't have to. It's good airmenship but it's up to the ATC to ask for the info
...and hadn't they just left Portland? Love the videos!
As a firefighter, I highly appreciate your attitude!
"Last time" (read: the only time) that I had to deal with an airplane emergency in that context, the reported "numbers" included a spare fuel tank and 2 air-to-ground missiles. 😱
I always thought it was about how many foam trucks needed......
That makes sense. Tell the time so ATC knows how long and where you can hold if needed while the pilot and ground crews get set up for the landing, then go back and give in weight so fire crews can do their preparations.
As a controller I always assumed holding wasn’t that hard to do for a pilot. Seems like a good idea to have them hold close to the field so they can be ready to come in when they’re ready. I think the majority of controllers that don’t have piloting experience think this way until we see stuff like this explaining it. My initial thought was that giving the hold instructions would’ve been easier because now they’re in one spot near the field and no longer expecting any more radio calls for more control instructions while they troubleshoot and configure.
I’ll keep this video in mind if I’m in the scenario in the future but truly I (and a lot of us) didn’t/don’t know how much workload it increases. As you said though the pilot should’ve said unable to his hold instructions if it increases the workload that much. Not all of us know how to fly a plane and how much goes into certain tasks and we just want to help lol
Ps. Super embarrassing that a pilot said mayday, mayday, mayday and the controller asked if he was declaring an emergency 🤦🏼♂️
I have always thought that pilots and controllers should observe each other's job
Depends on the aircraft, the crew, and what the holding instructions are.
If you gave me “hold present position” that’s like 3 keystrokes on my FMS. If you told me hold as published or some “hold this fix this radial these turns these leg times” I gotta punch in that whole thing manually.
If we go missed approach and you say hold as published that’s also easy, because it’s pre-programmed with the approach.
But that’s just me, on my aircraft, with my training and experience.
For a different pilot/crew on a different aircraft, with different avionics it’s probably way different.
Either way you wouldn’t know unless we tell you. Just a quick “unable” or suggestion like “can we just do present position holding?” Would clear it up.
I’m glad you’re going out of your way to learn what’s happening on the other side of the mic. I know controllers have to do jumpseat observations every so often. I wish airline pilots had to go hang out in the ARTCC or tower once in a while too. We’re a team! We should know what each other’s jobs look like.
@@byronhenry6518 That's interesting, any published hold in our FMS comes up as an option when you begin to create the hold. I'm surprised it's not like this on all FMSes!
An unexpected hold, especially during an emergency is a PITA and causes us to stop whatever we’re doing in order to make sure we get it right. Bad form to assign a hold during an emergency
On older aircraft especially its a ton of work. Once full screen GPS became common place they became much much easier, but you still have to dial them in: in an emergency, vectors are much appreciated!
I almost feel a personal sense of pride looking at those tightly spaced golden stripes on the shirt. And Kelsey, please don't try to fool us into thinking that you are not very intelligent - you are obviously a very competent person in whatever you choose to do. And that includes a comfortable level of practical, emotional and social intelligence. Had you chosen to be an academic, you'd surely master that too, IMHO.
Speaking from a firefighter’s perspective there’s WAY too much radio traffic wasted on fuel during emergency incidents. If they give fuel remaining in time, ATC or fire wants pounds. If they give it in pounds, they want time. I’ve seen incidents where the plane is almost over the threshold and either fire or ATC wants to know the fuel on board which is not a valid reason to distract the pilots seconds from touchdown IMHO. It simply doesn’t matter at that point.
It doesn’t make one iota of difference to the ARFF crews if it’s 10k or 20k of fuel, every commercial passenger jet is landing with enough fuel for “big bada boom.” If a flight *just* departed then that information alone negates any need to ask about time or weight of fuel, because obviously the flight has plenty.
In cases of fuel leaks, fuel starvation, other fuel related emergencies then yes people will want to know how much fuel is on board in which case crews should simply provide time and weight so there’s not this back/forth all the damn time.
Now I know it’s easier and preferred to have standard emergency procedures so it “makes sense” to ask about fuel anytime an emergency is declared - except we’re currently doing that and can’t even get it right in the US.
Something needs to change.
Bonus with nearly-empty tanks: if you happen to have about the right amount of vapor, then you might get actual kaboom instead of whoosh...
(you're a firey, obviously I'm assuming you already know this)
I would agree, shouldn't the firefighting team be prepared for a plane running off the runway on takeoff with full tanks. I mean they are not going to sit with empty tanks and only load up for the incident. (Oh my bad I thought we only had to fight 500 pounds of fuel not 1500, hang on BRB while I go and get more AFFF)
I was just thinking, give the measurement that's important - if you're landing with full tanks, give tons. if you're landing with low tanks give time.
@@kenbrown2808 Short tons, or long tons....?
@@wessexdruid7598 or metric ton?
Many years ago we lost an outboard engine on takeoff from Lajes field, Azores. We were in a KC130 bagged out with 65 thousand pounds of fuel. Once we’d shut down the engine and started to dump fuel and barely having positive rate of climb, we declared Mayday and came around to land but were directed to extend our down wind for a P-3 that was in the pattern doing touch and goes. Got to love it.
You had three more engines though... 😂
@@wg100
At that weight you really need all four and being heavy and low and slow it is truly an emergency.
Good grief!!!
Too bad no air-to-air capability :)
If this young man flies a 747 … he’s a Captain?!
I'm not even a pilot and have nothing to do with aviation, but your storytelling is so good that it's interesting and informative even for someone like me. Thank you!!!🤩
I noticed this about many skilled youtubers. The topic may vary but it doesn't matter, even a "boring" topic can be made interesting by the right presenter.
I’m exactly the same. I love learning from these broadcasts. We’re passengers. We might need to know this one day.🧐😊👍
Most simulator scenarios at my airline have us do a hold after an engine failure on departure followed by a return to the airport. But hey, that's the sim... we understand the game and play along. In reality, I would certainly refuse any hold given, and request vectors.
When we changed from "declaring an emergency" to PAN-PAN-PAN I was like "how am I going to remember calling PAN in an emergency after years of training with "declaring an emergency"? Couple years later we had to shut down an engine at 1500ft after departure, and to my surprise I did call PAN-PAN-PAN !! I asked for 15-20 min vectors to get ourselves ready to come back SE, that's what we got no problem, ATC was super helpful. Once on final the controller asked us to "keep the speed up". My answer was "Negative". He immediately apologized and said "Speed at you discretion".
Lol, keep the speed up... "yeah if you send me up a second functional engine, I'll be glad to help with your sequence" :D everyone's got their reflexes.
Well done. 11y years in jets 30 in ATC.
Keep your speed up isn’t as bad as when controller tells a single engine aircraft that lost its engine to descend and maintain x altitude? That drives me nuts.
Our sim instructors would give us delay vectors, no go hold BS.
@@couespursuit7350 Actually they have us do a hold for at least one of the scenarios, as a hold is required in the test. Once a hold has been correctly demonstrated (FMS programming, correct entry) we get vectored as you say for the rest of the session (or, more simply, they just position freeze the sim).
In the mid 80s my father was flying alone for the DEA in the middle of the night on the way home from a mission when a piston ejected through the hood. He was told to stand by after declaring mayday multiple times until he eventually crash landed in a field. Never was able to communicate with tower. He survived but was knocked unconscious, seat belt caught so hard he had to get stitches in his chest. He was a legend!
Yep them DEA drug runners are legends for sure.
@@Watchdog_McCoy_5.7x28 CIA... CIA drugrunners 😂
@@loganp1354 the DEA allows Coca-Cola to produce 3 billion dollars worth of pure cocaine every year. They "bust" drug runners, cartels, etc., but they are so honorable they never take those drugs they seize amd sell them back to drug running organizations, or release them on the streets through government protected drug dealers. You're naive if you think the CIA is the only drug running agency in government. The ATF wouldn't run guns to Mexico either huh?
@@Watchdog_McCoy_5.7x28go soak your head
@@M167A1 should I do that before or after Coca-Cola sells their cocaine they make every year with their "special agreement" they have with the DEA?
When I got my PPL here in the UK back in 1985 there was separate training and exam, and a separate licence, for operating an aviation radio. We were taught that there is a standard sequence for the information in a MAYDAY call:
MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY callsign and aircraft type
Reason ("engine failure")
Intention ("returning to airfield")
Position (may not be needed when under radar control)
Level
Heading
Squawking (7700 or whatever)
We had to memorise this because when the fan gets splattered - especially if you only have one fan - you don't have time to look it up!
I've always been puzzled by hearing "declaring an emergency" on this and other aviation channels - MAYDAY is the international distress signal and gets the ATC's attention (although apparently not in this case!) even if the controller's native language isn't English.
As for MAYDAY being the "new version" - it was introduced in 1923 according to Alexa 🙂
14:41 "That may not be procedure... but neither is hitting the mountain"
Lol!! I love these explanations expressed in such a straightforward way
a bigger issue with inflight deployment of thrust reversers is that it creates a plume of air infront of the affected engine and wing, wich leads to loss of lift, wich then can lead to an aerodynamic stall. this happend in 1991 to Lauda Air Flight 004
Because of that flight measures were taken to stop it from happening.
In this case the reverser unlock error trigggers automatic idle, and then procedure calls for shutdown.
Of this is the incident I’m thinking of they actually had the error on the ground, cleared it, and then whammie as soon as they got up in the air and hit some turbulence it jostled the reverser just enough.
If I recall the correct flight - there was no notification given to pilots about an in-flight deployment of the reverser - the plane merely rolled the engine back to idle. The plane rolling thrust back unannounced at takeoff is ... concerning to pilots, especially if you're under speed and the plane is trying to stall.
@@Relkond if true then that means this is the second such incident with an A320 family aircraft in the last 6 weeks or so as mine had a message on the ground.
@@Relkondno your taking about Tam Linhas aéreas flight 402 which as a Fokker 100
Shut down the engine is the reaction you want , evidently.
His first emergency call was perfect - 3x Mayday, Returning to airport. Lost an engine
Tells the controller everything
Don't assume it was heard. This is why there are readbacks.
"That may not be procedure, but neither is hitting the mountain" 🤣🤣🤣..Kelsey ,I love you!!!
same, made me laugh out loud lol
I always love Kelsey’s brilliant life advice.
I have called Mayday only once in 60 years. I was flying a Cessna 402C, lost one engine, opened valves to get fuel to the dead engine, went to start the dead engine only to find that the other engine stopped. I was over the sea at 12,000.
I’m an older controller at a level 12 facility and this is all great info, I’ve learned a lot from your channel. A lot of the weird questions and misunderstandings you may hear from us nowadays is a product of the FAA’s recent hiring of people with NO previous aviation experience. However, also bear in mind that there IS a lot going on behind the scenes for us too. Internal coordination between sectors and/or the tower, calling the domestic event network, moving other aircraft out of your way, rolling the equipment, dealing with stupid supervisors mouth breathing over our shoulder asking dumb questions, etc. So we may or may not have operational bandwidth to be able to give progressive instructions either, depending on workload. When they pull the tapes on these incidents they usually tell the computer to filter out all the other transmissions to declutter, so who knows what else was going on. Love your stuff, keep up the good work!
Supervisors with dumb questions are the worst lol
lol geez the new kids all that bad are they? Retired ATC myself and I concur, there's a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes. The hold made perfect sense for me, easier for the pilot as well....when he's ready he can just get a clearance for a published approach if they don't have the airport in sight. The only thing I might have changed is asked the pilot if he would like hold instructions and "advise ready to copy." Let's not forget, the EFC time also helps with a NORDO situation. Safety first gang!
@@Pendarr7 made perfect sense to me and I appreciate the advisory from the controller. I believe I train all my students enough that it would make sense for them as well. I think the only disagreement is coming from pilots that aren’t trained up
@@ndub1410 right on :)
I recently read an article about the FAA's hiring practices. One guy was getting a degree in aviation and was turned down for a job because he didn't meet the DEI hiring guidelines. They hire village idiots that meet their hiring guidelines so they can feel good about themselves. I bet the passengers would prefer someone who actually knows something about aviation.
I have been watching you for a long time now and just noticed that you have a fourth bar on your shoulders
Congratulations on becoming a captain, how proud you must feel
Best wishes Nick Brumpton
A very good debrief! As a simulator instructor, I know how busy the pilots are when they have an engine issue during take-off and initial climb. The checklists are long, and the approach chart is something they will only think about later when the issue has been taken care of. Flying into an airport you are not 100% familiar with makes it much harder.
Reverser deployed in flight:
🔸Lauda Air flight NG004, Thailand, 26 May 1991, B767, fatalities: 223 (no survivors)
🔸TAM flight JJ402, Brazil, 31 October 1996, F100, fatalities: 103 (no survivors)
All the other: Never heard about them. Engine went auto- idle upon the faulty deployment. This happens before the pilots even have time to process what is happening. With the engine at idle, the plane remains controllable (most of the time, at least at low altitude). After above incidents, aside from auto-idle, the also installed additional safeguards. The later deployments, to my knowledge, where all due to faulty maintenance, if one reverser was deactivated, but not correctly stowed.
C-5 in Germany shortly after TO. Believe all aboard were KIA
@@beyondEV if I remember correctly, at least in the case of the TAM Fokker 100, the plane tried to put the engine at idle but the copilot, thinking it was an auto-throttle malfunction, pushed the throttle forward and fought against the system trying to pull it back, to the point that the steel cable used by the system to pull the throttle back ended up breaking.
Tap Air flight 754 had 3 of the 4 thrust reverser doors deploy while landing in 2022, and miraculously didn't spin into the ground.
@@lodmstr KIA?
I'm not sure why I haven't seen you for awhile, but I see that you have become a Captain in the interim. Congratulations! I have always enjoyed your videos.
Kelsey, if you listen to the recording really closely when the pilot was transmitting the MAYDAY declaration, it sounds like ATC is stepping on the pilot (you’ll need good quality headphones). So it makes sense that ATC asked if he was declaring an emergency because he didn’t hear that part.
Thanks to your channel and videos for training my ear to even notice that!
Ah, the joys of half-duplex!
Yep I heard that too, anyone receiving would have either heard ATC, the pilot or a mix of garbage due to both stations transmitting at once, depending on proximity
I was riding in the jump seat on a C-5B Galaxy out of Travis AFB years ago. On take off, at about 120 knots, we had a reverser unlocked indication. The crew immediately rejected the take off, but weren't sure if they should use reverse thrust to stop, the checklist wasn't clear, so they relied on the brakes. Luckily, we were empty, with a light fuel load (going up for air-to-air refueling training), so we stopped with plenty of concrete left in front of us, but the brakes were seriously hot. Taxied off, fire department made sure nothing was on fire or smoking, so we went back to the ramp. Ended up being a mis-rigged sensor (had just been replaced the day before). Maintenance fixed it, tested it, and we were back on our way in about an hour and a half. Luckily the tanker didn't have anything else to do that day, so we completed the mission and everybody got current. Still a bit scary though, thinking about one of those big GE TF-39s suddenly deciding to go the opposite direction.
I was thinking if they were fully loaded would they try to use the reversers or not. Try to fully open the reverser and turn the engine back on? I'm guessing procedure for brakes only while fully loaded would be land on the numbers and use the entire length of the runway and hopefully meet the fire crews at the very end of the runway. Obviously I'm not a pilot but I am curious what the landing procedures for something like this would be.
The USAF would have supplied new drawers for the crew I would hope!
Wonder if they updated the checklist...
The engine won't go into "reverse" unless it's selected to do so by the pilot. The problem is just an indication problem, not a control problem.
If it's anything like the Tornado thrust reverse, there are stowed microswitches on the operating arms and locked microswitches on the locking pins which lock the mechanism closed. We often used to get reports from pilots that they'd got an "unlocked" indication (iirc) during supersonic runs which was purely down to one of the microswitches being out of adjustment. I have no doubt the engines you mention have a very similar system. Hope this helps.
@@shadowprince4482 I don't know about military aircraft, but all civilian aircraft are tested to do a RTO at max gross weight, at V1, using only the brakes. There's a video out there with a fully loaded A380 doing an emergency stop from V1. They even sat there for several minutes with the tires slowly starting to burn to simulate the fire brigade being slow.
I think after 3 (or 5?) minutes, the fire brigates was told, ok, you can start putting out the fire.
@@realulli Oh cool! Thanks for the reply!
Thanks!
When I was in ATC I I added to the end of the phraseology to "How much fuel remaining?" IN TIME?" Sure speeded up the process and gave the information needed first thing.
That’s a good option, but then half the time ARFF keys up and wants fuel time weight. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t
Yep. You’re going to land at a known airport. ATC may want to know how much fuel in time, but the real need for the fuel state is for the responders on the ground. They want/need gallons.
@@greysheeumExactly what I was going to say. 4 hours may mean nothing to the ground responders. They want pounds or gallons, because 4 hours in one plane might be 500 gallons and another be 1500 gallons.
Keep the info coming
I say “fuel remaining in minutes”
That’s a spirit and love for his RUclips audience, even when he is kidnapped in this warehouse he still wear his nice clean and press captain shirt and made a RUclips video for us. 👊👍🏻
I love your Broadcasts. You give great explanations so it really keeps we. (unformed) Information we don’t even k ow we need . You’re really very good at this which makes me curious if you’re an Instructor. You certainly sound like a very thorough & knowledgeable Instructor. I enjoy your Broadcasts as I like to learn. Thank you. I can’t imagine how much time & effort you put into these Programs it I do realize it’s much more than I could ever estimate. You are amazing. Again, thank you . 🇺🇸
Great commentary on passengers hearing engine shutdown. I was on a commercial flight which lost an engine (felt like the fan was going to rip through the fuselage when it went out). Seemed like 5 minutes or more before the Captain made an announcement. I already knew they were busy 1)assessing the situation and 2)going through checklists. We landed at an alternate airport after 30 minutes of flying with 1 engine and praying it didn’t burn out from overload. Always professional, courteous, and I believe the crew was relieved to be safely on terra firma as well. Thanks as always for the commentary.
Hours of fuel remaining may be important to you and specific to your aircraft, but pounds of fuel is very standard and useful to the fire crew on the ground.
Transmit a distress or urgency message consisting of as many as necessary of the following elements, preferably in the order listed:
If distress, MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAY-DAY; if urgency, PAN-PAN, PAN-PAN, PAN-PAN.
Name of station addressed.
Aircraft identification and type.
Nature of distress or urgency.
Weather.
Pilots intentions and request.
Present position, and heading; or if lost, last known position, time, and heading since that position.
Altitude or flight level.
...Fuel remaining in minutes....
Number of people on board.
Any other useful information
Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) FAA
I wouldn’t care what they say. My instruments give kg so they’ll get kg. I doubt they’ll do calculations on how many fire engines to dispatch. They’ll send them all.
Watched quite a few of these type videos, more than a few ATC have asked for the fuel in pounds...even after flight crew gives them fuel in time remaining.
I was thinking the same thing. I need pounds to figure out the hazmat game plan.
Only in America
Your comments and some of the additional comments from your viewers makes it very enjoyable to watch your 74 Gear videos. Thank you for posting.
Right? Im just a couch surfer and seeing these exchanges between professionals in the comments and them giving their opinions and having back and forth discussions is wonderful.
Being an ATC controller since 28 years, I had quite a few emergencies on my frequencies - including engine shutdowns. We also always listen to the voices of the flightcrews to determine their stress level and how we can work with them based on what we hear.
This particular pilot did not sound overly stressed out after they had shut down the engine and he even requested delay vectors to set the aircraft up for a proper approach and landing. The controller however let them fly to SCAPO to enter the holding there which I do not find that discerning for several reasons:
1. as mentioned above, the crew sounded calm enough and needed time and miles anyway
2. SCAPO is the initial approach fix - so in case they wanted to start the approach, they wouldn´t have been too far out, which - on the other hand - could happen any time with delay vectors (which they did request) as the controller usually does not know when the aircraft is ready to commence the approach. 5000ft would also be 1000ft above the initial approach altitude what gives them additional safety margin if needed
3. as far as I understand, letting the aircraft enter a holding pattern and let the crew just fly that pattern on autopilot takes away another distraction from them which is receiving new vectors every 20 or so seconds (depending on the size of airspace or 5000ft radar vectoring minimum the controller has available)
I´m absolutely on your side regarding sloppy phraseology...
As an armchair aviation guy I like it when ATC gives options for either a hold or vectors.
The 2021 TransAir 810 crash in Honolulu comes to mind. ATC gave them the option to come back in right away, but they required more time to run checklists. ATC gave vectors to give them time, but they ended up being too far out after they "lost" their second engine. If they were in a holding pattern at the approach end, it would have added an additional layer of safety, in case the situation became much more urgent.
The pilot is in control here, so if he wasn't comfortable with being directed to SCAPO then he can indicate negative. The pilot has already shown he will do his own thing by staying at 5000. It seems clear it's an option for the pilot, not a direction. In this situation is seems reasonable.
I'm just an aviation fan myself and the entire video I was thinking, "What's wrong here?" This seemed like a very professional interaction between both ATC and the pilots. Obviously, Kelsy pointed out some ways they could have improved it, but overall, no one seemed to get upset. And except for the initial missed understood Mayday call (which still was clarified quickly), they communicated quite well.
I agree with what robk8987 said about SCAPO being the perfect place to park them. PDX has intensive flight training to the southwest, parachute jumping to the southeast, and a volcano to the north. (Though I doubt there was much of either on a cold blustery February day, but this was a very safe place to put them.) I think Kelsey has blown this way out of proportion and as far as we (don't) know, the pilot could live in Scappoose and this could have been his 23'rd flight back and forth from PHX that week. As others have pointed out, thrust reversers deploying in flight at low altitude at high power could be a death sentence, not just a bad thing that makes the airplane fly crooked. Also, the MSA in the video is factually wrong, as the charted MSA is centered around Battleground VOR, not PDX. There was no chance of that plane hitting anything.
Kelsey: "I'm a big fat crybaby" - best laugh I've had in a while! 😅
Captain Kelsey always keeping it real 😂
how about "pucker factor" LOL
Kelsey: "Waaah, gimme my vectors! I want my vectors!" LOLOL
Damn right Kelsey....give me vectors.
Becoming a great pilot sounds extremely difficult, I don't think I could ever do it. The stress and responsibility that you guys have and go through is incredible. Huge respect! BTW, it's nice to finally see you with four stripes, congratulations!🎉
I'm a Rideshare driver that works PDX. That planes was parked in Alaskas Maintenance spot for over a week. They had to pull the entire cowling and reverser off. I don't think American has maintenance facilities at PDX either so that probably complicated things.
PDX has been a mess for the past two or so years. Not sure what's going on there.
@@TwistedQuestionMark It all started when the damn carpets got changed
American doesn't, but they're a One World airline like Alaska, so that would be the natural choice.
@@definitelynotaweeb6879 😂😂😂 Indeed
@@definitelynotaweeb6879 Man, I miss that carpet.
Kelsey deserves a fifth stripe. Addresses serious matters with an outrageous tongue in cheek humour. As he says (twice) "I'm just a big cry baby". Who tosses around 747's like they are feathers. 74Gear rules!
Actually above 4 stripes would be 1 really thick stripe
You can clearly see he already has 5 black stripes on his golden lapels.
That's why I bought a zebra
I think this guy sleeps in his captain uniform
@@TagiukGoldcount again
“That’s not procedure, but neither is hitting a mountain.” I laughed out loud. :)
Now, c'mon, you know he hasn't read _EVERY_ procedure manual for each and every airline out there. It could be in one of them!! hahaha
Kelsey, ATC wants to know fuel in pounds to relay to ARFF services, so they know what to expect should the plane end up in flames on the ground, and how much fire they could be battling. Though time is helpful too for the reasons you stated.
It really doesn’t make a difference to ARFF if it’s 10k or 30k. Big bada boom either way. The flight just took off so they know it has a bunch of fuel on board.
In my experience as a firefighter some people ask questions just for the sake of asking questions; they really shouldn’t be bothering the flight crew unless it’s for something pertinent/ meaningful. As I mentioned in another post I’ve heard fire ask for fuel in weight/pounds right when the aircraft is approaching the threshold which is nonsense.
@@cruisinguy6024Smarter not harder. I hope you are promoted sooner than later. At least I want you as my ARFF incident commander if I’m coming in with an emergency.
Yeah, this fuel question is just box ticking and seems to be ingrained into American ATC. No other country asks that question because it’s kind of obvious by the type of aircraft and operation. Basically for a large airliner you need 100% of your resources.
Furthermore “Hazardous Materials” is not a phrase used in aviation in the rest of the world. It’s “Dangerous Goods”.
And the rest of the world doesn’t use “Souls on Board”either.
The whole thing is unnecessary and time wasting, the information can be gained from the airline more accurately and in better detail.
They’re not going to do a calculation and send 2.5 fire engines to the crash.
@@EdOeuna ...But they might decide to alert nearby fire departments if it's more than they feel comfortable handling with the 2 trucks they have available on the airport. It's really not any less helpful than asking for time. Getting an aircraft in distress on the ground ASAP is always priority #1, if low fuel is an issue it shouldn't matter because that plane will be sent straight to the runway unless pilots request otherwise. So frankly fuel in time is rarely helpful at all, but at least the weight helps the airport know what could happen on the ground.
Kelsey has been kidnapped by the crew schedulers lmao. That abandoned warehouse background makes me laugh.
Or the Eyelid Guy.
@@Anna_Xor Or captain Hernandez
The boiled owl person has kidnapped him
@@limbercubas or the hotel receptionist.
It was only a matter of time. He knows too much.
Thanks for clarifying the reason for asking about fuel on board. I always assumed it was so they could notify firefighters how big of a fireball to expect if the plane crashed (or something like that).
i appreciate kelsey negotiating with his kidnappers to let him set up his filming equipment and record the video. editor also did a great job cutting out the screams. im glad they gave him access to wifi. haha love your vids
Retired 777 check pilot here. Thank you for addressing the Mayday vs Pan, Pan issue. We began transitioning to this ICAO training within the last two years and, as usual, U.S. ATC seems to be the last to know. Both are a means of declaring an emergency. “Mayday” is defined as “grave and imminent” danger. “Grave” means, you’re gonna die. “Immanent” means, you’re gonna die right away. 😂. “Pan, pan” simply means, “Urgent.” You’re correct, which you declare is based upon your situation at the moment. Unless I am actively on fire - engine, cargo, or other - or anything els3 I deem to be “grave and imminent” I’m going to err toward, Pan, pan. That’s just me, or was me. Great analysis.
I don’t know where your comment comes from but that information was released long ago and guidance in 7100.G5 AA was updated to reflect both the Mayday and pan calls.
@@Jimmer-Space88 to be honest, there are questions why it took so long when mayday was invented for Aeronautical use at Croydon Airport in the UK and was adopted as the standard grave and imminent emergency call by the ITU for all emergency radio voice calls at the International Radiotelegraph Convention of Washington in 1927. SOS is the Morse code equivalent. Pan-Pan actually comes from the Geneva conventions for specifying a medical transport as pan-pan medical, but also was specified at that same conference for less emergency use with XXX being the Morse code equivalent.
@@EwanMarshall very interesting. Thanks for sharing. What’s also noteworthy, the United States Coast Guard and anyone with a nautical captains license knows that Mayday called three times is the standard phraseology for what is an “emergency” and pan pan pan is the equivalent phraseology for an urgent situation. This has been around for (I don’t know how long) so it’s nice to see aeronautical and nautical join in phraseology similarities!
@@Jimmer-Space88 Yes, I'm a ham operator and a sailor, the whole declaring an emergency was weird to me, but it is even weirder when mayday came from the aeronautical world. Pan-pan may have too, they are both based in French.
Please note, 1927 and ITU pre-date both ICAO and the FAA
Your modesty is fantastic. With a long business career I learned that those with that attitude were the best. Those who thought they knew everything were always dangerous.
I live in Scappoose (ie: SCAPO). Of the areas surrounding PDX, it is the least populated, surrounded by fields, and next to the Columbia river. If an aircraft has to go down, this would be the best place for it, even pulling a Sully and landing in the river. I'll bet it is SOP for PDX to orbit any emergency aircraft in this area to minimize the potential collateral ground damage should a crash be inevitable. It makes complete sense to me that the controller immediately vectored them away from the high density urban areas.
Had nothing to do with it. SCAPO is the IAF for the ILS into runway 10R, that is where you start the landing approach procedure. The hold is there as a method to get airplanes traveling the wrong direction (like this one was) turned around and onto the final approach path.
The ATC could have vectored the plane away from the populated areas. I've never had an actual emergency, only simulated ones. And since I'm trained by more experienced pilots they always give vectors in the sim.
It would be a good exercise to give a holding to increase workload. To teach that as a pilot you can be a big crybaby and request delayed vectors instead.
Hey Kelsey.
God bless you for raising RT discipline by many US pilots. As an Aussie, it is so frustrating to hear the shortcuts accepted as standards phraseology.
As to fuel on board notification with a mayday, my understanding is that the notification is for RFFS situational awareness. So they want to know the weight of the fuel onboard to assist with the planning of the amount of extinguishing agent needed in case that weight of fuel erupts into flame.
If it was for ATC SA purposes relating to when you’re going to run out of juice, they’d ask for endurance.
That’s just my take…
As for holding v vectors. It’s a cultural thing I think. I’m so used to holding to complete procedures during sim sessions, that I find it funny to hear people ask for vectors all the time. In fact, it’s SOP where I work (and places I’ve worked prior) that we program a return in the secondary flight plan that includes a hold if published. When the engine goes bang, we fly the escape procedure, then ask for a DIR TO the hold. Easy peasy, lemon squeezy.
I often listen to the local regional airport close to my house. Your videos give me insight to what it is I’m listening to.
I agree with your points regarding the Mayday X 3 call and rough time estimates for FOB. I offer up an alternative perspective regarding vectors vs. holding. First, I never trust a controller explicitly. During the emergency (same as at all times), it is ultimately my responsibility to “Aviate, Navigate, and effectively Communicate” until we reach a successful conclusion to the flight. If I’m in a situation where I need to reduce our crew’s task loading, burn down fuel, etc.; I prefer to hold. Holding does a few things for me. It adds an additional resource operating our automation at a higher level hooked up to our FMC. It also helps to maintain a higher level of situational awareness as it speeds up our cross check on not only where we are but also where we are relative to our intended approach and airfield, restricted airspace, high terrain/obstacles, etc. Finally, it reduces the risk of missing an important radio call and excessive radio calls to listen for in general. Don’t get me wrong, sometimes vectors alone are fine in many situations. Regarding ATC’s calls, we’re really “splitting hairs” on that. If ATC asks if I am declaring an emergency, “Affirmative, I AM DECLARING AN EMERGENCY AND WE ARE RETURNING TO LAND.” No big deal, whatever I need to do to establish a shared mental model. I agree the controller could have avoided dropping the point on the crew but again, no big deal. I find the best controllers work as a team with the pilots establishing that “shared mental model “ I referred to earlier. Ultimately, I believe everyone involved did an outstanding job communicating and working together to safely recover the aircraft. I really enjoy your videos buddy. Thanks for all you do. BD
I really appreciate how thorough you are in explaining what the pilots are doing and how as passengers we need to give the pilots time to do what they need to do instead of giving updates to the. Passengers when they are extremely busy trying to land the plane. I know if I ever experience an emergency I will try to remember how busy the pilots are as well as the flight attendants trying to get the cabin ready for landing. Love your channel ❤
During a ground school a few years ago it was interesting to see the CC perspective on things. They were shocked when we said we might land without even speaking to them. They had the idea that we would be speaking to them and the cabin from the beginning.
As Blancoliro says:
Aviate
Navigate
Communicate
They need to be in control, know where they're going, how to get there... Then, tell pax what's going on..
@@lohikarhu734 - aviate, navigate, communicate is a good system for basic aviation in GA aircraft. Once you get into the multi crew environment then ANC doesn’t really apply, although it is always a good fall back position in an emergency.
Captain, this series is very informative for both pilots and controllers. I was trained in the Air Force as an ATC, before being hired years later as a LaGuardia radar departure controller who had to learn the traffic patterns, airspace, frequencies and restrictions of neighbor airports JFK and Newark. Kinda like a triangle with 15-mile legs.
Re AA1625 and the loss of an engine, the controller who asks souls on board and fuel status is not concerned about how many hours of flight are left but to alert airport firefighters of what they are facing in the event of a crash. Secondly, when a pilot declares an emergency on departure, the controller will immediately respond and take action to provide help that involves coordination with other controllers in adjoining airspace and the tower who will also be affected.
But like confusion in the cockpit during an emergency, the controller is responsible for all of the aircraft under his/her control and may not have time to provide ongoing vectors in the midst of a push of incoming or outgoing traffic vs. a holding pattern. While an aircrew with an emergency is focused on one aircraft, a busy controller concerned with separating everyone can be distracted by out-of-routine requests like vectors in a crowded traffic pattern that require focused attention.
That said, keep up the great work!
Totally agree with the 2.2 issue. As a retired controller/supervisor phraseology has been written in blood. Stick to the pilot-controller glossary and recommended phraseology.
What does the controller think "Mayday, mayday, mayday" mean other than an emergency? Controller giving an alt and heading is perfect, then all the pilot to aviate, navigate, then get to you. Also once the pilot gives SOB and fuel remaining in time (if they give lbs take it, let pilot fly) coordinate all the subsequent controllers know and won't ask again. So, as a controller, and 10,000+ corporate pilot you nailed this, not surprised. I feel any engine failure (for 2 engined aircraft), keeping the aircraft sort of close to the airport just in case of the other engine buggering up. Weather issuance was good, totally agree. I'd have asked the pilot if they wanted vectors or holding, and if holding where they'd like to hold. And if holding at the controllers discretion, issue easy holding...give a point and ask the pilot how they'd like to hold. The PILOT is the BOSS. Controllers are not very well versed on aircraft fly, or even emergencies aside from how to handle them, so keep that in mind.
I love Kelsey’s channel, he is so humble and charming.I would fly with him as Captain anywhere.
Aren't you proud of him being a captain now? Remember he was a first officer and I watch all his vids and I don't remember him ever him being like "notice my fourth stripe now" comment so good for him. I love that he's so humble and always speaking about how bad he is at math. Um. we know you aren't, you wouldn''t have that job.
He is an envoy for passenger confidence. Nice to know, you can feel safe ! Always a good feeling.
I'm glad we got good guys like you up in the cockpit, double thinking EVERYTHING! That's what makes You a great pilot... and yes be a crybaby all you want, You're A#1 in my book!
Retired ATC. I always wanted to know which engine was shut down because you don’t want to issue vectors that make the aircraft turn towards the engine which is shut down or at least set the aircraft up so that the pilot can make wide turns toward the bad engine.
Great commentary.....thank you
I'm confused. If your starboard engine is out, wouldn't turns towards starboard, i.e. towards the shut down engine, be easier to perform than turns to port where the shut down engine won't help the turn? 🤔
@@Lornoor Good morning. I was an air traffic controller and I am not a pilot so you should contact a certified twin engine flight instructor to get his or her input. As I understand it if you lose an engine the aircraft will have asymmetric thrust. In other words, if the left engine becomes inoperative it won’t provide any thrust while the “good” engine, the right, is still producing thrust. This will cause the aircraft to yaw (turn) towards the left. In addition, the engine nacelle and the propeller on the bad engine is producing drag. Additionally, the propeller on the left side is not spinning and forcing air over the left wing. Which means that the left wing will produce less lift than the right which will cause the aircraft the bank (lean) to the left. Remember that I am NOT a pilot. There are methods that a pilot can use to attempt to counter act the effects of losing an engine. But if you turn towards the bad engine you may lose control of the aircraft because of less lift on the left wing plus the right engine is producing thrust and the left is not. I see your point where it may be easier to turn towards the dead engine but it may increase your risk. That is why I mentioned in my original comment that I would issue wide turns towards the good engine. Set the aircraft up for a wide downwind and extend him a bit farther from the field so that the pilot can execute a more gradual turn to final and have an opportunity to fly a stabilized approach as opposed to keeping the aircraft on a tight downwind and too close to the threshold so that he has to really crank it in on a slam dunk approach.
@@Lornoor Months late. That's a great way to make an accelerated stall. Yes, it'll be easier, but the winfs create lift. You're fighting against the turn of the plane as it wants to tilt to the engine that's off. Letting it happen, it's going to be hard to turn it back to make it level and you might lose altitude. So, yeah, a lot of bad.
Its interesting that Kelsey should talk about reverting to what you're most familiar with in an emergency and why speaking correctly is so important to do all the time so you revert to correct communication when faced with an emergency. Then to have the controller revert to what he's most familiar with, a standard holding instruction, instead of offering holding vectors.
This is why I never drive a car when I go to the U. K.
Sure I will be alright when I am focused on being on the "wrong" side of the road, but let my mind wander or have to react instantly in an emergency and I know 100% I will do what I would do if I were back on a U. S. road.
Exactly…
Scapo is Scappoose Ore. And that holding pattern puts them squarely over the coast range. It's not too high, tallest is about 2500, but still.
Good morning to you, Captain Kelsey from Chicago. I miss those weekly videos man when we get them, they're good. Have a good day, BROTHER !
KEEP THE BLUE SIDE UP 🛩🫡
"That might not be procedure, but neither is hitting a mountain" - true wisdom right there
I watch this channel from time to time and really like it. Anyway I see things way out of order and not regularly. But I notice here that you have a captain’s stripe now and, even if I am in the wrong decade or something, want to congratulate you for that. It’s been a while since I was flying, and that was military as well so not the same in many respects, but these videos are super informative, instructive, and entertaining, and have some simple life messages as well for that matter. Thanks for all this great programming.
As a powerplants engineer whom has been party to lots of flight testing including TR deployment in flight test, you should be afraid of a reverser unlocked message in flight. What it means is that you have lost one of several inadvertent deployment preventions which means you are one step closer to deployment. In flight deployment of a wing TR on a wing mounted engine is more than likely catastrophic. Teh crew in this case did exactly the right thing, shut down the engine.
Offhand I can't think of a quicker way to take a plane from coordinated flight to uncontrolled freefall, than that kind of ridiculous yaw spinning the aircraft sideways.
That's purely reasoning from first principles, but you've actually seen it done - is that roughly what happens? I'm really curious to hear anything you can tell us about that, though I absolutely wouldn't want to be anywhere near it myself.
I immediately visualized yaw into uncontrolled spin. (I am curious, too)
It's not just the yaw from differential thrust, but that the deployed reverser will spoil the airflow over that wing. Having one wing suddenly stall while the other is still trying to fly is bad.
@@rayvanlandingham7218 true, plus that wing suddenly has less airspeed. I'm struggling to imagine exactly how all this would interact, but I'm damn sure I wouldn't want to be the poor bastard trying to fly the thing.
@patheddles4004 A hard roll to the affected side, combined with a rotation of the aircraft (yaw) into the roll (so, in effect, rolling sideways and then nosing into the new "down" direction). Since you are diving, you are now getting even more lift from the unaffected wing, and since you are "sideways" now, it's just going to spin you harder.
This is my "guess" (not an aeronautical engineer) but I think you would basically turn into a lawn dart. Imagine if you were in cruise, then suddenly pushed the stick hard right (aileron roll), shoved the right rudder pedal to the floor.... and then just held it.
I don't think it would be the "crabbing" effect of the differential thrust itself that would be really dangerous (it's trying to rotate the entire airframe into the windstream) but that the loss of lift will immediately cause you to dive into it, and that starts a cycle of self-reinforcing effects
Hey! You have four bars! Congratulations!
It's been months now, but he hasn't talked about it. At least not on RUclips.
@@AFloridaSonKelsey is just a humble guy. That's why we love him
yeah..I just noticed that on this video too
The 4 strips that must not be named. Never ever, no matter what.
I came here to say this!! Congrats Captain Kelsey!!
Kelsey I really enjoy listening to your explanations of what’s going on. I have no airline experience except actually riding in a plane. Thank you and stay safe
2 quick remarks :
-13:50 the airplane would have a tendency to turn the other way (clockwise) #1 engine would push you clockwise (to the right) negative thrust on #2 would do the same.
- my understanding of declaring fuel in quantity (weight or volume) is for the firefighters. They need to know if they potentially have to extinguish 100 liters or 1000 liters of fuel. Should we maybe say both?
14:42 "It is not procedure to hit a mountain." Good to know this is standard airline policy!
Only if goats are on the mountain
I once returned to base in a B-52 after having fumes, a burning smell, and several pieces of electronic gear fail, including the autopilot. Our Command Post asked if we could go into holding while they consulted maintenance about our problems. I told them we were proceeding directly back to land, our ETA, and that we’d be listening for any advice they might have. But, barring any startling revelations or information we weren’t aware of, our intention was to land ASAP. The DO met our aircraft and told me I’d done the right thing. It was an onboard electrical fire in a wiring bundle. It had gone out on its own, but there was no guarantee that it might not reignite, or what other systems might fail if it did. Not to mention that there were noxious fumes in the crew compartment.
Back in the early 80's, I was flying in the pattern at Fulton County Airport (FTY and then known as Charlie Brown Airport). It was a super busy day. A Piper Navajo had just taken off and called a Mayday as his left engine went out. I'll never forget it. The controller responded, "Roger, Piper xxx make a LEFT 360 for spatial clearance." The rules about cussing on the radio temporarily went out the window. Fortunately, he made a safe landing. My instructor said that the controller got a little re-educating.
Isn't that what the plane wants to do anyway? Would be worse if they has to do a right turn after the left engine failed
@@bene5431 no. Turning into a dead engine is the last thing you want to do. The plane wants to do it, but it’s a good way to enter an accelerated stall.
Negative, cannot comply.
I demand a T-Shirt with "That may not be procedure, but neither is hitting the mountain" LOL.
You want me to make one? Or is that just a phrase
I know how to make one
I’d buy it😊
@viffviffer9804 Alright! You want plain text on it? Which font? Do you want a photo in the background?
that literally would be an awesome shirt
Controller here. I’ve been taught early on to prioritize emergency aircraft (obviously) and without task saturating them give the pilot options and/or ask them for what they want/need. In these type of situations a hold is easier for the controller in the sense that we are also coordinating in a lot of ways (with the supervisor for the best option for the airport, with the tower, with fire, etc.) but just throwing out a fix randomly is not the way to go. I would go more with “hey I can give you the initial fix to the airport to hold at IF YOUD LIKE” and if they want it leave them on vectors until the PILOT is ready to proceed direct. And leave them alone until they feel comfortable in their tasking to find the fix and figure out if that works for them. If not then I’ll just work vectors.
I'm glad Kelsey confirmed, "hitting the mountain is not procedure."
Well, NOT hitting the mountain IS a procedure. Which doesn't include leaving an engine burning (unless you've had a bad day and lost >1 engine OR you screwed up your perf calculations).
Hitting the mountain is optional but not best practice
Not only is it not procedure, but 'the aircraft will not be re-usable'.
So this is a typical pilot perspective. I say that as a commercial helicopter pilot. But I'm also an ATC. Pilots think about themselves. They should, it's their job, to fly THEIR aircraft. Controllers on the other hand, think about EVERY aircraft. So whilst as you say, you are very busy in the cockpit, there is a lot going on for the controller too. Firstly, the aircraft with the mayday is the priority but there is still every other aircraft under his control that still needs to be monitored, vectored, or handed off so that the controller has less traffic to think about.
He also needs to co-ordinate. This would be with the aisle supervisor, probably a quick note to say "heads up, I've got a mayday, I'll get back to you". He will then contact the tower to let them know to stop departures like you mentioned and to let them have a rough idea as to what is occurring. This process will continue and every time the controller gets new info he'll have to co-ordinate it. Oh and he still has all those other aircraft I talked about to control. One of the fastest ways to have two aircraft get close together or have some sort of incident is to get hyper focused on an emergency to the detriment of all your other traffic.
When the controller gave the vector to the hold, in my opinion he was basing that on what the pilot has told him both verbally and by his demeanor. You mentioned the pilot sounded calm and in control. The shut down was procedural, not due to something like a bird strike or fire. Yes it was an emergency but even the pilots said they'd like to hold whilst they problem solve. I have found over my 20 year ATC career I have learnt that you can tell a lot from how the pilots communicate. I've heard everything from guys like this to people who knew they were about to die on the radio. So based on how they talk to me I will tailor my response accordingly.
That's not to say that you can load the cool, calm and collected guy/girl up. The situation can change quickly but you definitely make decisions based on both what and how something is said.
One other thing to think about. The pilot said he'd need to hold. It's quite possible that the controller thought the pilot may be actually asking to be sent to SCAPO where the published hold is. I'm not saying that's definitely what happened but it's possible. Again it comes back to communication. The pilot could have just as easily come back and asked for vectors as you say. Listening to this guy, I feel , had it been out of his ability to manage he would have said something. He sounded like a pro to me.
All of this doesn't mean I'm saying you are wrong. I just feel it's a lot more nuanced than is alluded to here.
Shack. This here. I’ve also been number 3 of three emergencies in progress, that now ATC has to figure out who is which priority.
@@gunhog11yeah been there on both sides of the radio too. Slept well those nights for sure.
So glad to see this perspective. I actually started getting a bit annoyed at this video even early on, seems like a bad take. Even if I lacked any ATC or aeronautic experience he literally goes from "yeah the plane can fly safely with one engine, and everyone seems calm" to "how dare this bad, bad ATC man give him a hold at a fix instead of delay vectors and ask questions". If the delay vectors come in frequently, is it not as annoying or task saturating as having to get the fix and hold? Plus, will they not need the approach plate to, ya know, land at the runway they're going to have to land at?
And maybe the ATC was not used to a MAYDAY call for single engine failure, and asked the cause to relay that pertinent information to other agencies that requested it, as well as to gain some better understanding as to why a single engine out was an emergency. I've had an "emergency" called due to a technical requirement, but the pilot asked that vehicles not roll. These things happen, every situation is dynamic that's the nature of the beast. This video seemed like a bottom of the barrel scoop in my opinion, and overinflated and exaggerated certain points.
And if he wants to try to nitpick, "A pilot who encounters a Distress condition should declare an emergency by beginning the initial communication with the word “Mayday,” preferably repeated three times." Keyword here is "should" not "shall" so no, MAYDAY calls are not expressly required to be made to declare an emergency, maybe read the terms of reference and actually know what you're talking about before making a RUclips video about it. He also doesn't realize that the CONTROLLER ASKED IF HE WANTED EQUIPMENT AS HE VERIFIED IF HAD THE EMERGENCY, so it's not just some erroneous request to repeat if he's an emergency he just sprinkles the verification in with the ACTUAL QUESTION of if he wanted equipment.
Having been ATC and an avionics technician, I genuinely am shocked at how narrow sighted, bigheaded, and just a complete non-critical thinking mindset that SOME pilots can display at times. This video stands as proof of that.
@@JoshuaChalys Well, the first bit where he asked if there was an emergency, when he declared an emergency. Frankly I disagree. They declared an emergency.
The part where he has him hold? These airports can be very busy, and I've heard about the problems in some cases of ATC basically being expected to track a rather large amount of planes. Although not ideal that seemed reasonable to me. I do agree I think this is being made a bigger deal than it probably was.
@@JoshuaChalys agreed on most of that mate. I do think pilots don’t really understand controllers needs for the most part. As I mentioned they are only focused on themselves and traffic that may affect them. This video felt like that a bit. It’s like he thought that the controller is sitting back only taking care of the one flight and had nothing else to worry or think about.
But, I will say controllers can definitely learn from stuff like this as well. I don’t think this video was wrong per se, I just think it was one sided and lacked some understanding of what goes on on the other side of the radio.
7:15 because they just took off, I figure he told them how much fuel in weight so that emergency crews could know what they're dealing with... they're not worried about running out of fuel, they're worried about running out of engines.
Wow! I just noticed the captain's bars. Congrats!! 🎉
My favorite Ginger Captain! ❤
About 40 years ago, I was flying a Cessna C206 when a loud bang woke up my passenger. Although I lost some manifold pressure and airspeed, the engine was still operating, so I asked for clearance to a higher altitude. I managed to slowly gain some more height. I happened to be flying above a highway in the Australian Outback, and in those days, there wasn't so much traffic. Expecting a sudden seizure of the engine, I looked at the very, very long tarmac and also the rough terrain on either side of that highway. I actually asked for permission to land on the highway, and after a long pause, permission was granted! As it is, I managed to get to the next airport with plenty of height ... but I want to say one thing: REGARDLESS of whether or not the flight service officer granted me permission to land on that highway, I can tell you now that that is where I would have landed, if I had to! It wouldn't have been much fun for these pilots to be told to be directed to do an IFR racecourse track when all you really wanna do is just get DOWN! (BTW, that loud bang was the head of a cylinder lifting off, like a soup can lid.)
An amazing video and an exceptionally great explanation you made, yes I'm a nervous flyer, so thank you for all of the information you have passed on to viewers to better understand what goes on in situations like this. Congratulations on being a pilot, that is a job I could never do.
Hearing you talk about the pan-pan vs. Mayday engine scenario where this 747 crew told ATC that they had an engine out, and when ATC asked if they’re declaring an emergency the 747 crew responded “no, we’re fine!”
I think it was Kelsey that one time said something along the lines of "if the threat of loosing another engine is low and there are no big bodies of water on the route they are sometimes told to simply fly to the intended destination with 3 engines"
@@zottelhuehs6375-- If nothing is leaking and there are no tall mountains to climb over, and airports along the way in case things get worse, why not?
@@TheRealScooterGuy exactly
A USAF B-52 and an F-16 were on a routine training mission, the pilot of the F-16 was a young arrogant SoB and started showing off to the B-52 crew by barrel rolling around the B-52. The F-16 pilot then challenged the B-52 pilot by saying anything you can do, I can do better. You're on replied the B-52 pilot, and the F-16 driver watched as the B-52 proceeded to fly straight and level. Curious, the F-16 pilot asked what the B-52 pilot did that was so impressive. The BUFF pilot replied I just shut down 2 engines kid, to which the F-16 pilot had no reply!!
This is why I look forward to every other Sunday. Thank you so much for all your hard work in making videos for us Kelsey!
Hard work,talking into a camera ,really hard,im so sick of these kiss ass comments to youtubers. They dont care about you,sorry to bring you back to earth.
I love that you give great advice (2.2 bad habit if you fly internationally) while showing the craziness in the videos.
Just an FYI, we actually want the fuel in lbs like the pilot gave. We pass the info along to ARFF. They want to know how many bodies, how big of fireball. If the pilot give fuel in time, we ask what the weight is.
If asking for fuel, they’re asking for weight. If they wanted flying time, they’ll ask for endurance.
Fun fact, px have assigned seats because when the ac comes apart on the ground, they may well be strapped into the seats, makes the coroner's life easier. Another CAP training point, on SAR never ever say He's dead Jim. Now everyone gets to wait for a coroner to show up. Load them into the ambulance and DOA saves a ton of paperwork.
74 Gear will always be #1
Mayday comes from the French M'aider meaning 'help me' . PAN also comes from the French word Panne meaning breakdown. So when you call Mayday, you want help to go somewhere, like right now. When you call PAN, you're saying 'I have a breakdown, and give me some space to sort it out; don't need immediate assistance for now'. The level of urgency is lower with a PAN, because you don't have to proceed somewhere immediately.
Maybe all true, maybe not. The main thing is that "Mayday, Mayday, MAYDAY" means exactly one thing over the radio, be it aviation or marine: Lives are in immediate danger. Drop everything else and help us as best you can."
@@jerelull9629 Yes, needing to go somewhere right away because we're toast if we do not, is why MAYDAY is broadcast. Besides, the only respondent to MAYDAY that can help you is ATC, since they are the ones to assist you into getting yourself on the ground ASAP. What else could ATC do apart from pointing you in the right direction and giving you priority.... there are no airborne rescue vehicles. Origins of words tell you what the context is; in this case, it means 'help me', and ATC can only point you in the right direction.
It's worth remembering that once a pilot has declared an emergency, they do not have to follow ATC instructions, they can ignore ATC and simply do what they need to do to for the best of the aircraft and the persons on board.
I don't think the issue here was that the controller gave a harmful or even unhelpful instruction, it's that they could have potentially been *more* helpful, e.g. by providing vectors to the hold point rather than forcing the pilots to take time to look it up and navigate themselves. Ignoring the controller would not have helped.
As an aside, the pilot in command has the final authority over their aircraft always and can deviate from ATC instructions anytime if they are illegal, unsafe or if the pilots are unable to comply. CFR releases pilots from obeying CFR rules (including compliance with ATC) in any in-flight emergency so requiring it, whether they've declared or not. The declaration is irrelevant. CFR does require the pilot to notify ATC of deviations as soon as possible, so it's not quite like they can "ignore" ATC indefinitely, unless it is impossible to contact them indefinitely, which could certainly be the case in a more intense emergency. I don't think that could be justified here.
Is it weird that I listen to random ATC radios for a few hours before bed because I find it soothing?
Have you considered becoming an ATC ? It is high stress !!! Not soothing, but more like, "got to remember that "' there is a lot going on, at the same time. Not for everyone !
@@linanicolia1363 I believe he is talking about the sound of their calm delivery, which doesn't mean they are not under stress, rather it's the way they modulate their voices. Akin to the reactions to certain sounds involved in ASMR.
5:09 possible controller deviation, have a number for you to call, please say when ready to copy
*Pilot **_"Mayday, Mayday Mayday Mayday, Mayday Mayday Mayday, Mayday Mayday Mayday, Mayday Mayday "_*
*ATC **_"Is this an emergency?"_*
Pilot: "No, we're just having a rave party here, wanna join?"
😂😂😂😂
"Mayday? Why that's the Russian new year! We'll have a parade and..." Johnny from Airplane
@@jjc4577 make sure the triple A missiles aren't hot
Also when your manual says LAND ASAP - you kind of want to land as soon as possible, or as soon as ATC finishes up getting a fresh cup of coffee. You know. Priorities.
When one engine is pushing you forward and the other engine is pushing you backward, not what you want, lol, I hear ya buddy.
yeah. There goes the lift.
Initial info for souls and fuel is for the CFR. How many people are we going to take care of/account for and how much fuel for an idea of water and extinguishing agents can we expect to need. The time remaining info for the controller to plan for contingencies.
0:22 yeh I've noticed that habit, particularly among US pilots. Try drop that habit if you can cause it has potential to cause confusion even in native english speaking countries like the UK and here in Ireland, as its not said here, it's not proper EASA phraseology. Just keep it clear and simple, just [callsign] passing[current alt] climbing/descending[target alt] example, ''Shamrock123 passing 3000 climbing 7000'' try to avoid saying ''3000 for 7000'' or ''climbing to 7000'' because ''to'' and ''for'' sound like ''two'' and ''four'' so your altitude could be misheard or misinterpreted by atc.
“That may not be procedure,but neither is hitting the mountain” 😂
As a former little Susie I am thrilled to hear that the pilot wants to keep me calm.
Thanks for that Kelsey your humorous self deprecating delivery is very entertaining, supported by nearly 1.2 million subscribers. Just one thing though, you do realise we all celebrated your captaincy when it mysteriously appeared so you've got nearly 1.2 million loyal subscribers who would love to hear some First Officer to Captain details.
About four months ago.
Most people learn that quick, it wouldn't be a good vid