Declaring an emergency is one of the easiest actions a pilot can take.
FAR 91.3 spells it out very clearly. “The pilot-in-command of an aircraft is directly responsible for and is the final authority as to the operation of that aircraft. In an emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot-in-command may deviate from any rule in 14 CFR Part 91, to the extent required to meet that emergency.”
Pretty simple, right? The Pilot in Command (PIC) may deviate from any rule in Part 91. However like most things in aviation, it doesn’t end there. The Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) goes on to state: “An emergency can be either a distress or urgency condition. Pilots do not hesitate to declare an emergency when they are faced with distress conditions such as fire, mechanical failure, or structural damage. However, some are reluctant to report an urgency condition when they encounter situations which may not be immediately perilous, but are potentially catastrophic. An aircraft is in at least an urgency condition the moment the pilot becomes doubtful about any condition that could adversely affect flight safety. This is the time to ask for help, not after the situation has developed into a distress condition.”
Recently, a situation occurred involving an Air Carrier aircraft at a large metro airport. The airport was operating in a reduced runway capacity due to construction. Arrivals were assigned a runway that had a strong crosswind – on the order of 35 knots. The exchange that follows is paraphrased for the purpose of this discussion.
On initial contact with the Tower, the Air Carrier said, “If we don’t get a different runway, we’ll declare an emergency”
OK, that got the controller’s attention. The Air Carrier included no other information; nothing about operational limitations, fuel status, equipment status, etc. The controller said he would work on the request. The Air Carrier said “We are circling to the other runway – get everybody out of the way”
Was the PIC exercising his authority under 91.3? Clearly, he was. The PIC, for whatever reason felt that he could not operate safely on the crosswind runway. That is certainly within his right and his obligation to safely conduct the flight. The breakdown however comes in the lack of communication afterwards. Was there a reason for the need to circle immediately? Could the flight have held for a few minutes to coordinate the runway? Were they low on fuel? Or have a mechanical issue that prevented landing on the assigned runway? We cannot tell from listening to the very short clip available on the internet. But, the controller did what he had to do; he got the other runway cleared and the Air Carrier landed without further incident.
What is troubling is what didn’t transpire in between. The Air Carrier started a turn towards the final approach course of the crossing runway. In a very congested area, such as the one in this incident, adjacent airports are running operations in very close proximity. We don’t know if there was another aircraft on final. We don’t know if the runway was occupied by a departure or a tug towing an aircraft across the runway. The entire operation would have been much smoother and safer to all the other aircraft involved if the PIC had communicated the reason for the emergency. It doesn’t have to be a detailed or lengthy explanation. A simple one word answer “Fuel” would have told the controller everything that he needed to know.
Communication is the key to all that we do in Aviation. Good clear concise professional communication. During the course of almost 30 years as a Controller and Front Line Manager, I have worked countless emergencies. Not all emergencies require immediate action. Yes, the engine failure in a single or an onboard fire requires a quick response from all concerned.
But, most emergencies actually play out over a longer period of time. For example, a very common occurrence is a hydraulic failure in a large aircraft. On approach, the crew realizes that they have a hydraulic warning. This is an emergency in every sense of the word. The crew is in doubt as to the safe outcome of the flight. Maybe the flaps or slats will not operate; nose wheel steering or brakes could be affected. But the airplane is not going to fall out of the sky. They elect to abandon the approach and work on the problem. With good communication to and from ATC, both sides know what to expect. The crew needs to get a delaying vector, run some checklists, dump fuel, call company, etc. ATC will continue to run operations while getting the Crash Fire Rescue (CFR) assets in place. When the crew decides to turn inbound, the runway is clear, all previous traffic is out of the way and CFR is in position. There was minimal impact to the other users and the emergency aircraft got everything they needed.
Why? Because everyone communicated! Contrast that to the situation described earlier. It appears (and I stress appears because we don’t have the whole story given the short clip available) that there was only one-way communication involved.
Next week, we’ll look at another Air Carrier emergency that is a textbook example of good communications during a very stressful incident.
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
Reference Candy’s comment on more arms and two heads….this situation had four arms and two heads assuming a standard 2 man cockpit. As an Designated Examiner on the B737 the rating ride I administer has one landing where declaration of an emergency is going to occur and management of the situation, co-ordination of ATC / CFR, and crew management is graded and de-briefed.
Arrogant Captain, they exist no argument but the date with Jim Beam…..
With over 25 years in the industry, I remember very few situations like this where little or no communications occurred.
Bill H. has a point , what did happen to the pilot?
We really don’t know the total story…… so I would certainly give the Captain the benefit of the doubt.
What we do know:
The guy was low on fuel…. NO doubt about it.
The guy was faced with a crosswind runway that exceeded his capabilities.
Perhaps his communication would leave a bit to be desired… but he got the job done. And we dont know if he declared min fuel to the previous controller.
Last time I declared… I wasn’t polished in speech, either, but I got the job done without damaged people or bent metal and THAT is the goal when there’s an emergency. Now, I had plenty of fuel… but the first objective was to control the plane and determine the next step…. so I TOLD the controller what I was going to do and then said standby…. and later went into details.
So…. what would you do?
Not wanting to land on a runway with that strong of a crosswind is very understandable. Demanding to land right now on the other runway without any explanation as to a real emergency is not so understandable. If it was due to fuel as some have speculated, he should have declared minimum fuel long before this happened. And if so, why was he at minimum fuel? Had he diverted? Had he spent time holding? None of this has been explained.
I also agree with Gary that if he had time to make the statment he made, then he had time to engage in more reasonable discourse with the controller.
While I am a big believer in the PIC having the final say, I also believe that there is a right way and a wrong way to let ATC know your intentions and the reasons for them. This pilot failed to communicate.
Then it could be a simple case of an arrogant airline captain late for a date with a bottle of Jim Beam.
come on guys…ive been flying the bush all my life…if we had more arms and 2 heads, then there would be more time to talk…
Yes, if the air carrier crew had said something like “We’ve got a problem and are going to have to put it down on runway 8 NOW!” then I think that would have helped immensely.
As an air traffic controller 30 years ago, I had a DC-10 enroute from DFW to ORD that declared an emergency with Fort Worth Center about 35 miles southwest of Tulsa. Fort Worth Center didn’t know the nature of the emergency but they handed him off to me in Tulsa Approach and said, “Your control.” When I asked the pilot the nature of the emergency and what the souls and fuel on board numbers were, all I got back was “we don’t have time to talk.” But that “we don’t have time to talk” told me volumes about the seriousness of the problem.
The “if you don’t give me such-and-such a clearance then I’m going to have to declare an emergency” transmission first of all tells me that the crew DOES have the time to talk, and second, sounds more like a threat than a request for help.
Excellent point in this article. From what you’ve shared, it sounds like the pilot had a chip on his shoulder. Since he obviously landed safely (or we’d be reading the headlines) he handled that part correctly. But why not a few more words to ATC? Was he completely consumed by handling the plane?
A few more words may have done wonders.
What happens to this pilot after this incident?