Westjet engine problem YYZ July 24,2014

[Liquid Charlie]

Too funny -- what can I say -- I rest my case --- #37 #mayday #sms #airdisasters --

[Cat Driver]

Maybe Liquid Charlie is not..

a well rounded Canadian pilot

[JayVee]

Maybe I'll look in the "Well Rounded Canadian Pilot" section of the SOPs for engine failures.
Or maybe the "Giver" section.
But certainly not in the, oh I don't know, EMERGENCY PROCEDURES section.
Thank goodness for heros.

[#37]

Maybe I'll look in the "Well Rounded Canadian Pilot" section of the SOPs for engine failures.
Or maybe the "Giver" section.
But certainly not in the, oh I don't know, EMERGENCY PROCEDURES section.
Thank goodness for heros.

Have a look in your SOP, or QRH or COM. Is an Inflight shutdown considered an emergency? If so, give us the quote like TC did, state type and any qualifications to your mandatory Mayday. Right now we are batting 50%, altho Liquid has "rested his case", and is definitely wrong in the context of this thread.

[BTD]

I can't believe this is actually a topic of discussion. In reality the difference between a Pan and Mayday is semantics. Until someone else on the freq shows up with a bigger problem.

[GRK]

Actually not really semantics at all. The difference is clear. A PAN call intimates that there is no IMMEDIATE danger to anyone's life or airframe. A MAYDAY is simple…IMMEDIATE assistance is needed, as in "we need to get this aircraft back on the ground now." ATC are supposed to drop everything for a MAYDAY. The PAN call alerts ATC etc to the potential of a MAYDAY but not right yet.

[Liquid Charlie]

Well rounded I am -- I can lose a few -- but while I rest my case -- I will throttle back on "compulsory" -- nothing is compulsory as long as you as you are ready to pay the price -- the captain certainly can make that choice and go against what is company policy/rules or even CARS but as I stated before you will be sitting in front of your superior who is going to rip you a new asshole (or TC paying a fine) -- and then it goes back to the "new age" aviation catch phrase -- CYA and you will thinking -- why the fuk didn't I do that -- I have witnessed people coming close to busting a ride/ppc because they either forgot or didn't think it was necessary to declare the emergency --

now I'm done unless someone wants to come and sit on my deck by the lake drink a cpl beers -- bbq something and discuss my well rounded disposition

[BTD]

Actually not really semantics at all. The difference is clear.

Yes by definition. In real life the effect of both is the same until someone shows up with a bigger problem. So saying one should only use pan in the case of engine failure and not a mayday, doesn't make sense. Unless you plan on having a more urgent problem later in the flight.

[#37]

Well rounded I am -- I can lose a few -- but while I rest my case -- I will throttle back on "compulsory" -- nothing is compulsory as long as you as you are ready to pay the price -- the captain certainly can make that choice and go against what is company policy/rules or even CARS but as I stated before you will be sitting in front of your superior who is going to rip you a new asshole (or TC paying a fine) -- and then it goes back to the "new age" aviation catch phrase -- CYA and you will thinking -- why the fuk didn't I do that -- I have witnessed people coming close to busting a ride/ppc because they either forgot or didn't think it was necessary to declare the emergency --

now I'm done unless someone wants to come and sit on my deck by the lake drink a cpl beers -- bbq something and discuss my well rounded disposition

This is the problem, at AC and WJ, you will not be sitting in front of your superior if you don't call Mayday, in particular for an Inflight single engine episode. In fact both airlines would prefer you didn't (barring other accompanying issues). The end of the line is the Captains emergency authority, nobody should give a seconds pause about whether Mayday was used or not, the Captain has the authority to do what he/she needs to. Ya he/she may have to explain how they got into the corner they were in, which is fair enough, but mayday should be saved for when you are really not convinced you will survive the next 10 mins. At AC and WJ level an Inflight shutdown is not something there should be any concern over the ultimate outcome. The aircraft, crew, procedures should be such that there should be no need for immediate help to survive.

[fish4life]

How do you know you won't have your single engine shut down into a possible double failure like this crew

http://www.aeroinside.com/item/4010/per ... eaking-oil

I'd rather make sure I was on the ground safe having said mayday then be in some confusion over whether or not I declared an emergency and get held up somewhere having to dead stick it in. Confusion like this

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-sQuHnrJu1I

[Pop n Fresh]

twin engine aircraft with an engine shut down = mandatory MAYDAY -- and still people think it's not necessary -- i'm going to put that down to inexperience --

But MAYDAY was not one of the options... MADAY, I took to mean Mad, eh? ... as in a Canadianism for "are you mad", or "Are YOU MAD?!" Since I couldn't decipher between those two, I abstained from voting. [Go Abstinence! ... said no sane person ever!!]

Oopsie. I'm not even mad bro?

I was basically just curious about the general consensus. I guess I'll fix that.

I wish I would have thought to add, "Giver" and "Run the checklists, get sorted, go in and land, have a nice juicy steak." to the poll.

[airspeed250]

mayday should be saved for when you are really not convinced you will survive the next 10 mins. At AC and WJ level an Inflight shutdown is not something there should be any concern over the ultimate outcome. The aircraft, crew, procedures should be such that there should be no need for immediate help to survive.

Is this fact, that at the major airlines, an engine shutdown on a twin engine aircraft is not considered an emergency (ie mayday call)?

I would prefer if the crew considered this an emergency, for handling priority. You are using a huge assumption that the second engine will not fail, and you have time on your side to land where/when you decide to, rather than asap with priority. To me, minutes might count when you are down to one engine on a twin with a lot of pax on board, but again, that's my risk-adverse take on it. I understand your confidence that the second engine is not going to fail, but that doesn't seem like something the airlines, or pilots, should bet on.

[ahramin]

I suggest that anyone who thinks that a Mayday call is not the most appropriate call in this situation spend a lot less time watching Arctic Air and a lot more time studying their profession.

[bcflyer]

This is the problem, at AC and WJ, you will not be sitting in front of your superior if you don't call Mayday, in particular for an Inflight single engine episode. In fact both airlines would prefer you didn't (barring other accompanying issues). The end of the line is the Captains emergency authority, nobody should give a seconds pause about whether Mayday was used or not, the Captain has the authority to do what he/she needs to. Ya he/she may have to explain how they got into the corner they were in, which is fair enough, but mayday should be saved for when you are really not convinced you will survive the next 10 mins. At AC and WJ level an Inflight shutdown is not something there should be any concern over the ultimate outcome. The aircraft, crew, procedures should be such that there should be no need for immediate help to survive.

That's a very bold statement to make. You seem to be pretty sure of yourself. Do you happen to work for either AC or WJ? If you work for AC I'd be very interested to know what type you are on.

[Eric Janson]

In a quad, declare a PAN and land at the nearest SUITABLE airport.

This is not correct - no requirement to land at the nearest suitable airport in a quad. There are no time limitations on 3 - engine flight. Losing 1 out of 4 is a different situation than losing 1 out of 2. There is a great deal more systems redundancy built into a quad.

On my aircraft a loss of one engine has the following effects.

Electrical - all busses remain fully powered. No load shedding.
Hydraulics - loss of blue or yellow system in case of an inboard engine failure. Slight increase in landing distance and aircraft is limited to Cat 3A minimums. Loss of an outboard engine - no effect. Aircraft can fly to Cat 3B minimums.
Pressurization - no effect.
Fuel - will need to balance periodically.

You will not get a land ASAP indication in amber or red in this situation.

Airbus has made it easy:-

Land ASAP amber - PAN call
Land ASAP red - MAYDAY call

Engine failure is a PAN call at my Airline - unless there is a fire warning then it is a MAYDAY call.

What people fail to understand is that you can upgrade from PAN to MAYDAY or downgrade from MAYDAY to PAN - it all depends on the situation.

Not all aircraft are equal. Example:-

Just did a line check on the A340-500. With an engine failure we could have maintained FL370 and kept our M0.83 cruise speed. Overall fuel flow would have been less than with 4 Engines running so we could have flown further on 3.

[13820]

This is not correct - no requirement to land at the nearest suitable airport in a quad.

We usually argued the nearest "suitable" airport was the one where our cars were parked.

[Gannet167]

It seems the controversy here is over whether it's worth declaring a Mayday or if the crew is being a bunch of Nancys and crying wolf. I have to wonder, what's the harm in saying the magic words? Are we afraid that people will think less of us for over-reacting to an engine failure and requesting too much assistance from ATC? I didn't think it was a popularity contest. Maybe the nay sayers could spell out when is it appropriate to call Mayday?

I'd call Mayday for a single engine scenario on a twin jet, no question. you may have no idea why the engine failed or if the second one will. You will have degraded systems and may require special handling to get the aircraft on the ground. In any case, in many aircraft an engine failure is an emergency procedure, not a mere malfunction or abnormal. Dealing with what the manufacturer has classified as an emergency, requiring emergency checklists, in some cases required fromy memory in the interests of time, but not declaring an emergency for the "emergency" situation doesn't make sense. Why not as for assistance and priority handling?

Land as soon as possible has been removed from many checklists by the lawyers. The term land at nearest suitable airfield leaves the decision with the pilot to decide what is "suitable" under the circumstances. It removes some liability from the checklist authors by leaving "suitable" up to the pilot rather than dictating that the plane land wherever it's possible to put it down. It still implies that if there's an airport under you that you can land at, you should. It might be hard to explain why you overflew a useable airfield in a situation where the checklist says land at nearest suitable.

[GRK]

With all due respect to Captain Jensen:

Eric,

It's actually a bit like picking the fly shit out of the pepper, but if you dig a little deeper than a simple QRH (or in your case, an ECAM action) you will see that although the term is not used in the QRH (in my quad it's not in that particular item as well) the rest of the NNC write-up as well as the BFCTM make it very clear that a landing at the nearest suitable airport is part of the written and important processes that come next.

"The regulations regarding an engine failure on a four engine airplane are slightly more flexible than for two engine airplanes. If not more than one engine has failed or is shutdown, most regulatory agencies specify that the pilot-in common may proceed to another airport if, after considering weather, airplane condition, fuel remaining, air traffic and other pertinent factors, the chosen course of action is as safe as landing at the nearest suitable airport."

I agree with your company policy, mine is similar, but I might guess that yours has significantly more resources for you to use than mine does. Would I be right in thinking that you might have over simplified for brevity here? It's not a simple as it sounds. Position, weather, Critical point, Depress point, terrain ahead, politics of the country you might be flying over.. at some point in time the nearest suitable airport might change as the flight progresses as well. In my opinion saying my statement is simply wrong is not giving the full treatment of the question.

Fly safe…
GRK

[Eric Janson]

It's actually a bit like picking the fly shit out of the pepper, but if you dig a little deeper than a simple QRH (or in your case, an ECAM action) you will see that although the term is not used in the QRH (in my quad it's not in that particular item as well) the rest of the NNC write-up as well as the BFCTM make it very clear that a landing at the nearest suitable airport is part of the written and important processes that come next.

The airbus philosophy is different - the expanded abnormal/emergency checklists do not mention this.

From the FCTM.

If an emergency causes LAND ASAP to appear in red on the ECAM, the flight crew must land as soon as possible at the nearest suitable airport at which a safe approach and landing can be made.

If an abnormal procedure causes LAND ASAP to appear in amber on the ECAM, the flight crew should consider landing at the nearest suitable airport.

I agree with your company policy, mine is similar, but I might guess that yours has significantly more resources for you to use than mine does.

Not so sure about that - typing this from Lagos, Nigeria. Interesting operation here....

Would I be right in thinking that you might have over simplified for brevity here? It's not a simple as it sounds. Position, weather, Critical point, Depress point, terrain ahead, politics of the country you might be flying over.. at some point in time the nearest suitable airport might change as the flight progresses as well. In my opinion saying my statement is simply wrong is not giving the full treatment of the question.

That's correct - I just wanted to clarify that there is a difference between an engine failure in a twin and an engine failure in a quad. A lot of people are unaware as very few people fly anything with more than 2 engines anymore.

Agree 100% that that there are many factors that could influence your actions after an engine failure in a quad and your subsequent choice of landing airport.

Safe flights to you as well GRK.

[B208]

Reference?

any SOP/COM -- if you don't expect the speaker phone call from the DFO or VP ops -- and bring the KY --

Not in mine dude. Where I work MAYDAY means the aircraft is being forced to the ground by circumstances beyond the crew's control. PAN PAN indicates that the crew has a problem that needs to be dealt with, but the crew is still able to keep it in the air.

Summary:
Uncontrolled fire, complete power loss, major flight control malfunction = MAYDAY

Partial power loss (1 engine on a Multi engine AC) = PAN PAN