Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

Is Pan or PanPan used in aviation often. I always thought it was an nautical call sign which we used at sea

No, it's a aviation term as well. Just means you have an emergency, but not as extreme as a mayday.

 

[eric2011]

No, it's a aviation term as well. Just means you have an emergency, but not as extreme as a mayday.

Ok thanks, same as we used at sea

 

[RooFlyer]

If you have a look on the dedicated thread, I loaded a reference to the sound clip. Anyway, he did say Mayday...which certainly seems like the right call. The Americans understand that perfectly. The one they don't get is PAN.

Is that because its not part of their official lexicon? The ATCs aren't trained on the word and its meaning?

Even if so, one would hope that sometime in their training, some-one might say to them: "Oh, if you hear a pilot say "PAN' (it'll be with a funny accent), then it means ...."

Anywhere else in the world that doesn't 'get' 'PAN"?

 

[jb747]

When you look through the Jeppesen book that covers the various rules of the air, there are two main sections. ICAO, and the FAA. Both are about the same size (i.e. hundreds of pages). Most countries are simply a few pages of changes from the ICAO standard...but the USA basically has their own rules for everything. Too much history and inertia for either side to give up and align totally.

I'm sure that most, probably all, US controllers would understand you...

 

[basso]

I'm sure that most, probably all, US controllers would understand you...

It was a while ago, so my brain cells may have faded a bit, but I am pretty sure QF74 went with the PAN, PAN, PAN declaration and the San Francisco controllers understood that.

 

[docjames]

Without dredging up the hand luggage / evacuation debate, i was wondering specifically about the procedure followed when the flight crew are evacuating the coughpit in a situation similar to the BA777 incident at LAS.

Obviously there is the initial handling of the situation (assess issue, cut fuel flows, communicate if time, etc and "park" the aircraft (? set brakes) etc - perhaps you can detail?) but thinking more - are the any "key items" from the coughpit that have to come with you as you evacuate or is it strictly "nothing" other than get all pax out and then yourselves?

 

[jb747]

Obviously there is the initial handling of the situation (assess issue, cut fuel flows, communicate if time, etc and "park" the aircraft (? set brakes) etc - perhaps you can detail?) but thinking more - are the any "key items" from the coughpit that have to come with you as you evacuate or is it strictly "nothing" other than get all pax out and then yourselves?

The first, and most difficult part, is that you are going to come to a halt, and then, seemingly, enter a time warp. You (passengers) have nothing to do (other than panic), but we need you to stay seated initially. Up the front, we'll park the brakes, tell ATC something (but probably not evacuating yet), and a PA will be given "Attention, all passengers remain seated and await further instructions". That tells you to stay put, but it also tells the cabin crew to stand up, look out the windows, and otherwise mentally prepare to evacuate.

In the coughpit, we'll carry out the actions (at least the initial ones) for whatever caused the abort. If it needs to jump to an evacuation, then we go to a paper checklist (which the FOs keep by their side). It basically has us park brakes, tell ATC, shutdown all engines and APU, push ALL of the engine (and APU) fire switches, and to fire the extinguishers as required. Then we can evacuate.

If you go too soon, well, firstly it might have been unnecessary, but secondly the other engines are still running, and they are dangerous, whether you're in front or behind.

 

[Boca68]

The first, and most difficult part, is that you are going to come to a halt, and then, seemingly, enter a time warp. You (passengers) have nothing to do (other than panic), but we need you to stay seated initially. Up the front, we'll park the brakes, tell ATC something (but probably not evacuating yet), and a PA will be given "Attention, all passengers remain seated and await further instructions". That tells you to stay put, but it also tells the cabin crew to stand up, look out the windows, and otherwise mentally prepare to evacuate.

In the coughpit, we'll carry out the actions (at least the initial ones) for whatever caused the abort. If it needs to jump to an evacuation, then we go to a paper checklist (which the FOs keep by their side). It basically has us park brakes, tell ATC, shutdown all engines and APU, push ALL of the engine (and APU) fire switches, and to fire the extinguishers as required. Then we can evacuate.

If you go too soon, well, firstly it might have been unnecessary, but secondly the other engines are still running, and they are dangerous, whether you're in front or behind.

I think what astonishes me the most, is listening to the ATC audio. The BA pilot, who I just read was on his 2nd last flight before retirement (now his last), almost in a matter of fact way, states "mayday". If you weren't listening for it, you could miss it in the jumble of messages! It's quite surreal.

Also the female ATC, was very military in repsonse. Very clinical from both parties. Kept waiting to hear a scream in the background. Kudos !

Don't think I could be so level headed.

 

[waimate01]

Does aviation make use of securite?

 

[jb747]

Does aviation make use of securite?

No. The sort of stuff that it's used with the term is actually covered by the NOTAMS, METARs, and aviation briefing system. I guess flights are all short term compared to shipping.

 

[747sp]

I was wondering with an incident like the BA engine fire in Las Vegas how long does it take to shut down the engine on the other side of the plane so the captain is comfortable with passengers leaving the plane and walking near the engine.

 

[jb747]

I was wondering with an incident like the BA engine fire in Las Vegas how long does it take to shut down the engine on the other side of the plane so the captain is comfortable with passengers leaving the plane and walking near the engine.

The engine shutdown won't take long. It will have wound down as much as it's going to in the time it takes for the cabin crew to do their procedures at the door. But, the pilots won't necessarily jump straight to an evacuation, which means that the other engine won't necessarily be immediately shut down. They may not have had a fire light at all... Their first knowledge of it may have come from the cabin, or from the extra pilot going back and looking out. That camera up in the tail (of the 380) that gives such a nice view to all of the passengers is also fed to the coughpit, and it's part of my briefing now for that to be quickly displayed on the centre console (which gives us a wider view than on the PFD) to help assess the situation.

 

[Himeno]

The QF twitter account just posted this image. http://t.co/eBYru8xYT5

How could an A380 (or any large modern jet for that matter) fly slow enough to keep formation with a squad of prop planes without stalling?

 

[clazman]

Possibly a photo bomb, by QF ?

 

[juddles]

I think the fact it is a still photo rather than a video answers this

 

[jb747]

The QF twitter account just posted this image. http://t.co/eBYru8xYT5

How could an A380 (or any large modern jet for that matter) fly slow enough to keep formation with a squad of prop planes without stalling?

I looks to me like the 380 has just accidentally appeared in the background. I expect that it's QF9 arriving in London.

But, if you wanted to set up a formation photo with Spitfires, there would be plenty of speed range available. The Spitfires would probably like a speed in the order of 200 knots...and the 380 can easily fly there. It could even do so clean (i.e. no flaps or slats) at lighter weights.

 

[mjt57]

But, if you wanted to set up a formation photo with Spitfires, there would be plenty of speed range available. The Spitfires would probably like a speed in the order of 200 knots...and the 380 can easily fly there. It could even do so clean (i.e. no flaps or slats) at lighter weights.

When they did that shoot at the AGP with the Roulletes, what sort of speeds would they have been doing? Certainly the A380 looked "clean" from the shots and I suspect that the PC9s can do a fair speed.

 

[jb747]

When they did that shoot at the AGP with the Roulletes, what sort of speeds would they have been doing? Certainly the A380 looked "clean" from the shots and I suspect that the PC9s can do a fair speed.

I'd expect it to have been somewhere around 220 knots. Easy for both types. I know who was flying it, so I'll drop him a line and see if we can get the exact number.

 

[jb747]

Very quick reply....The A380 was flown at 'green dot' (which is min drag) clean. On the day, that was approximately 200 knots.

 

[Flying Fox]

I know that pilots do lots of sim work before flying the actual aircraft for real but were you ever nervous when taking control of a new aircraft for the first time?