Strong x-wind? declare an emergency.

[FOX69]

Declaring an emergency when none exists is an abuse of command. Deviating from ATC clearance mere seconds after declaring an emergency is dangerous and should only de done in dire situations. The correct procedure is to go around, then request a hold while ATC coordinates the runway, the wind changes, or you reach bingo fuel.

This ain't some kid in in a King air, and it ain't Thompson or Timmins. This is AA at JFK. The big leagues. The pitches come pretty fast and you are expected to be able to hit them.

Here's a tip to remember if you ever make it to "the show". If conditions are WITHIN LIMITS, your are expected to carry out a normal landing. If you cannot, then that is a training issue. If you just don't want to, then you better call the union for some back up.

This guy lost his cool, and made a fool out of himself. I hope the FO slapped him after they made it to the gate.

[SuperchargedRS]

And yes, your lack of experience is showing

No point in debating, with someone that doesn't have "two clues!" Just like doing spinning a Cessna....got it.

Sometimes I think I need help connect the dots for some folks, so let try this one last time:

From reading the first part of this thread it sounded like the x-winds were about 12% under the max demo, so land! and if it aint working out go around.

If the winds were ABOVE the max-demo then go around and advise ATC

The Capt declared that emergency falsely, as it is defined in the AIM!

a. An emergency can be either a distress or urgency condition as defined
in the Pilot/Controller Glossary. Pilots do not hesitate to declare an
emergency when they are faced with distress conditions such as fire,
mechanical failure, or structural damage.

Don't think cross wind holds up all that well as a emergency against things like fire!

How do I not have "two clues" and "why" "must" "it" "be" "in" "quotations" also what do you mean by (and this is a good example of how to use quotes properly so take notes here bud) "Just like doing spinning a Cessna?"

so nope I dont have it, run that one by me one more time champ!

[. ._]

edited due to lack of knowledge

[AuxBatOn]

]

Sometimes I think I need help connect the dots for some folks, so let try this one last time:

From reading the first part of this thread it sounded like the x-winds were about 12% under the max demo, so land! and if it aint working out go around.

If the winds were ABOVE the max-demo then go around and advise ATC

Were the winds REALLY below the max? I think YOU need to have the dot connected. Someone mentioned that at AA, the SOP max x-wind is 29 kts. Do the math, the x-wind they had was more than that.

The x-wind demonstrations are made on a long runway. Runway 22L is 8500' long, roughly. Have you ever landed a 767 close to x-wind limit with a 5 kts tailwind component on a short runway? My guess is no. Can't really criticize the AC's decision if you haven't.

]

The Capt declared that emergency falsely, as it is defined in the AIM!

Really? Rumors say that he was short on fuel. An emergency doesn't have to be what is defined in the AIM. AIM is NOT regulatory. Whatever you judge put the flight in a dangerous situation can be considered an emergency.

Just curious, have you ever flown something bigger than a Cessna 150?

[TG]

From reading the first part of this thread it sounded like the x-winds were about 12% under the max demo, so land! and if it aint working out go around.

Yeah, right! Exactly like those guys, aint working, go around!
......ooops, Wing strike in the process....


The funny part, they were offered another runway more into the wind!



Again, nobody should be pushed to declare an emergency to get a proper runway assignment!

[DHC3Rwannafly]

Christ you guys are worse than a group of 16 year old girls sitting in the cafeteria. Everyone's going to bitch until the cows come home, because everyone on here was sitting in the jump seat at the time, and you're always right. You are all pilots, no? What's done is done....he's an idiot....he's a hero. Who gives a f&ck, perimeter had another engine failure.

[cyeg66]

Who can argue with that?

[Doc]

Personally, I'm happy that this happened.
It's a wake up call.
We're not going to take 30 knots on the wing if there's a more suitable runway available.
Declaring an emergency? Well, circumstances alter cases. I wasn't there. I do, however have a very hard time faulting the crew for not bending the equipment, and making a point.
Kind of like doing an approach on a runway with an RVR or 600, when there is one available with an RVR of 1200....just makes no sense.
BTW, I can land in the max demonstrated cross wind component for my airplane. But, I won't if there's a choice. And neither should you..

[SuperchargedRS]

Were the winds REALLY below the max? I think YOU need to have the dot connected. Someone mentioned that at AA, the SOP max x-wind is 29 kts. Do the math, the x-wind they had was more than that. ....

Yes, that what the first post said, if they were above max and were a tail wind and low on fuel and and and...then disregard what I said, like I said before (please dont make me quote my own posts here!) based of the original post they were under max by a little over 12%.

Really? Rumors say that he was short on fuel. An emergency doesn't have to be what is defined in the AIM. AIM is NOT regulatory. Whatever you judge put the flight in a dangerous situation can be considered an emergency.

Just curious, have you ever flown something bigger than a Cessna 150?

No the AIM is not a substitute for common sense, however declaring a emergency for a cross wind doesn't make a hell of a alot of sense ether.

I've never flown a 150 btw and I dont really buy into the whole your a god if you fly something huge mindset! why dont you go give a BJ to the guy that made the world largest ball of yarn lol

Credit where credit is due, I'm not saying I'm the best (not for probably a few more years), I'm just saying based on the info in the first post it appears the capt shot a mouse with a cannon here!

[Doc]

Just one more wee point, then I'm off the subject, unless provoked.

I'd way rather see a "questionable" emergency call, than see something like the DC8 a few years back, being vectored all over the area with low fuel. These guys were critical on fuel, and knew it, yet they allowed themselves to be taken on a scenic tour, which ultimately resulted in fuel starvation, and everybody on board dieing. Had this crew declared an emergency, they'd be alive today.
Historically, pilots have been hesitant, to say the least, about declaring emergencies. Even when "real" ones existed.

I'm out of here.

[yycflyguy]

Weird. I find myself agreeing with Doc. Except that it wasn't a DC-8. Avianca flight 52 that crashed trying to land in JFK due to fuel starvation was a 707. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avianca_Flight_52

[BTD]

I think you need to go back a bit further to find the one Doc was talking about. Or he mixed the two together.

But here is the DC-8 that ran out of fuel. And they new it. Or at least the F/O and F/E did. Capt was in a bit of denial.

http://libraryonline.erau.edu/online-fu ... R79-07.pdf

The National Transportation Safety Board determined that the probable cause
of the accident was the failure of the captain to monitor properly the aircraft’s
fuel state and to properly respond to the low fuel state and the crewmember’s
advisories regarding fuel state. This resulted in fuel exhaustion to all engines.’ tiis
inattention resulted from preo&upation with a landing gear malfunction end
preparations for a possible landing emergency.
Contributing to the accident was the failure of the other two flight
crewmembers either to fully comprehend the criticality of the fuel state or to
successfully communicate their concern to the captain.

[FOX69]

When did this become a low fuel event? I don't recall that being part of the situation. If that was indeed the case, then big points lost for not saying anything til on final. Either way, if you need to prove a point to ATC, don't do it by flying unpredictably and unprofessionally in the airspace we all share.

PS, on the subject of low fuel situation, declaring a state of "MIN FUEL" is a great tool to advise ATC that delays can not be accepted. It is not yet a fuel emergency, but they will take care of you.

[IFRATC]

SIGH!!!
I don't know where I stand on this issue. Indeed it is a great thread though. Some great posts and then some NOT so great posts!!!
I have NO issue with a pilot requesting/wanting/demanding another runway if he/she deems it unsafe. It may take a while, with alot of coordinating etc. but it can be accomodated. But expect a delay if it is not configuring with the operation at such given time. UNLESS AN EMEREGENCY HAS BEEN DECLARED.
What I do take issue with is this word that has surfaced in many posts "bullying". Where did this aircrew ever get "bullied" to this runway? Was all the traffic landing on another runway and they were the only ones to get the crosswind? NO. Often times at major airports it is not ATC who dictates the active runways!! (Crazy as far as I am concerned) but rather it is the airport authority OR as in some places the dominant carrier of that facility!!!
If the runway in question is unacceptable, then alternate clearances can be worked out further back, but not while on approach to the runway for which you have accepted (NOT BULLIED) a clearance to land. From my side of the mic I can only assume that the controller had to scramble like a retard immediately following their declaration of an emergency. Quite frankly he might even have been taken off guard with the call and hence his indecision to deal with it appropriately. Not making an excuse, an emergency is an emergency I just think he maybe thought the crew was bluffing.
From our perspective, our hands are tied when it comes to runway operations at major aerodromes. In fact, alot of times it will take a few "missed approaches" to get the operation configured into wind.
But here comes the catch 22!!!! Once ops are degraded and runway acceptance rates go down FLOW times and HOLDS go way up. So, here is my dilema. As soon as this happens alot of you guys will get on here and type away your complaints about delays and holds!!! How ineffecient we all are, whats with YYZ today???, etc, etc. For those here that blame ATC for the actions that transpired I sure hope your not the same ones who complain about delays and holds by ATC when we are operating at reduced rates.
I am really on the fence with this topic. There is alot of good points out there. IMO, the one factor that is missing is; early comm between both the crew and the controller. I am almost certain something could have been done to accomodate the situation without the crew having to go as far as declaring an emergency and put themselves in a secondary, potentially dangerous position by deviating from there originally accepted clearance. I scratch my head on this one guys!!!
The controller was probably working on the assumption that since all crews were taking the crosswind runway that this particular crew was not going to be any different. SURPRISE!!!
Correct me if I am wrong but does the CFS not state to expect operations at YYZ to be conducted on crosswind runways for efficiency and capacity up to a certain speed depending on runway contamination??? This was not written by controllers. We operate by what is dictated to us. This scenario is definitely not going to be the last.
I can't blame the controller in this case knowing how his hands are tied. YET, I definitely can't fault the crew for there actions either. I only hope this occurance helps bring to light how we all sometimes get trapped by efficiency taking precedence over safety.

IFRATC

[cyeg66]

^ Sorta how I feel about the whole incident, IFRATC. Both crews, starting with the one at the controls of the heavy, followed by the tower guy, were caught unawares in the sudden change of plan, it seemed. AA2 got the 'cleared to land call' on final with the current wind and that changed the(ir) game, which in turn threw a big wrench in the twr's plan. My concern is that many of you talk about fuel issues with the 767. Has this ever been confirmed by a source much closer than any of us? If yes, then it's THE big issue. It seems his whole decision to land like the plane was on fire was based entirely on the premise that he didn't have enough to fly another 30-40 miles on vectors. This begs the questions: Why in the hell would a 767 with the legs to do double the LAX-JFK distance be running out of gas when 1) flying into one of the most congested airspaces in the world and 2) when major construction coupled with weather could possibly degrade capacity further from an already-overscheduled airport? If gas was the clincher, then the problem really began when they decided how much fuel to upload 2000+ miles away....

Wrt the 'bullying' issue. True, NY controllers seem to have that image but I'm sure they have to put up with a lot of shit daily to warrant being a little more forceful. Safety should not be compromised, though.

[Shadowfax]

A - Never hesitate to declare an emergency and get all the ground based assistance you can - they get paid to help you! Filling out paperwork afterwards is easy when you are alive - not so much so for next of kin.

B1 - Declaring an emergency is not a trump card to do whatever you like - necessarily. Having an engine failure could be dire - a subsequent midair a little more so.

B2 - As the saying goes "Poor planning on your part does not constitue an emergency on my part". Waiting until final to declare an emergency because of crosswinds you knew about 20 odd minutes ago? Really..... What we have here is a failure to communicate. Call that 40nm out so the system can respond and avoid the cowboy antics close in. It's not hard - "Approach, unable to accept runway XX due crosswind limits. We are min fuel and declaring an EMERGENCY AT THIS TIME - request immediate vectors runway XX"

C - This is a pissing contest and we all know it. AA cpt had likely done this leg numerous times and almost had enough. It was festering in him for a long time. On short final (6-7nm talking to TWR) he said enough is enough I'm not going to do this again (which in and of itself is fine - its the timing and subsequent action that stinks). He pulled out what he felt was his trump card and forced what he thought was right. Capts perogative to an extent - see B2!

D - El capitano is in deep ca-ca because of point B2 - even if he was Bingo that is still piss poor planning. Even if he "asked" for a different runway, HE accepted what he was given until close in. He then threw the whole system into disarray by the cowboy "get everyone out of my way" antics. Ya think an ambulance stopped in rush hour traffic just hits the lights and siren and floors it???

E - There is a pilot support group for those who feel ATC bullys them. Those big meanies! See B2 again - this is a big system not the wild west folks.

Pretty disappointing to see a pilot flying for the majors act this way.

[Hedley]

Pretty disappointing to see a pilot flying for the majors act this way

Personally, I like it when they don't bend the airplane, which is what happened this time.

Should I repost the link to the Luftansa crosswind landing again?

[TG]

B2 - As the saying goes "Poor planning on your part does not constitue an emergency on my part". Waiting until final to declare an emergency because of crosswinds you knew about 20 odd minutes ago? Really.....

I'm getting fed up cut & pasting stuff from PPrune so what's written here make any sens.

Clearly (but not from the AvWeb clip) four minutes earlier the pilot was expecting 31R as it was being approached by another heavy when wind was reported at 33026. Subsequently wind was given as 33025 and a minute before the AVWeb clip begins, wind is given at 32022 and American 2 then finds himself first to be cleared to land upon switching approaches to the other runway 22L, which is acknowledged and all is quiet for about 50 secs.

He then, as we know from AVWeb, reports visual for 22L but then two additional external items increased his workload unacceptably:

First, it appears that he had found the localizer on 22L was not working and there was actually a 12 second delay while ATC checked that out (not instantaneous as might be inferred from the clip) and reset. Was it now working? ... Do we care? ... Pure distraction ...

Then quiet for another approx 50 seconds while the information is assimilated and checked....................

.................................................. .............................................

.................................................. .............................................

Then wham! ATC kindly broadcasts wind 32023G35 - just what the doc ordered!

I suggest that was the point at which the pilot quite rightly firmly communicates his dismay at being somewhat led down the garden path with the winds (no mention of any gusts up to that point) and thus made his emergency intentions known.


What then follows descends into an unholy mess but ATC were not without sin - wasting time and bandwidth after the emergency was already both declared and understood - somewhat uselessly attempting to justify why the emergency might not have been initially understood ...


Then some 90 seconds after the emergency is initially declared, on hearing Cactus 12 still cleared on approach, American 2 has to remind ATC that it most definitely is HIS sky as of yesterday.

Overall, of course, and very easy to say, being still up there with some other pressing reason for being down ten minutes ago was the first hole in the cheese.

[cdnpilot77]

I don't know much about anything but I believe that the Captain did what he needed to do to get the airplane on the ground safely.

Has anyone commented on the possibility of Mechanical Turbulence? Maybe thats why he didn't say anthing 40nm out. It is possible that the 30kt+ cross wind in itself was ok for him but with some gusts and subsequent mechanical turbulence he decided to call it off and at the point decided to take the action he did. In not getting the support from the tower in this decision, he took the action. I am guessing 40nm out he would be at an altitude where Mechanical Turbulence would not be much of an issue and the severity really not felt until short final.

What is still most troubling about this entire thing to me is that even after the emergency is declared, the controller wastes time by arguing with the captain and instead of using that time to clear the path he makes the captain repeat himself a few times. It was suggested earlier that controllers need the time to clear the way, well he had it, he just chose to use that time to argue with the captain.