Declared First Emergency

LauraE51

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Nov 24, 2013
Messages
272
Location
Modesto,CA
Display Name

Display name:
Laura
Sunday, on a flight from Modesto <KMOD> to Watsonville <KWVI>, i had to declare an emergency and land in San Martin <E16>.

The flight is one i've taken many times before, and, as with all flights over 30 minutes, i was on flight following. Now, the flight involves passing over two mountain ranges: one between the great San Joaquin Valley, which takes about 15 minutes to cross, and a smaller one between the highway 101 corridor and the pacific coast. That relatively narrow valley runs from San Jose south to Paso Robles in the south and is home to a variety of airports. The northern section of the valley, the part i pass over, is quite busy traffic wise, with departing and landing planes from San Jose International and GA flights from the local airports, one which i pass over on my way to the coast.

The initial parts of the flight were normal, with me cruising at 5,500 with the mixture leaned. As i came into the Gilroy valley, i began descending to 3000 feet before passing over the other side of the valley into watsonville. Just before i got midway through the valley, ATC asked me to level off at 4000 because of traffic. Shortly after, the engine RPMs began gyrating down and up. It wasn't the roughness you get from carb ice; it sounded more like the feeling when you lean the mixture too far, causing the RPMs to drop. In this instance, the RPMs decreased by several hundred before recovering to near normal, followed by decrease and increase again. It felt like the engine was going to quit at some point.

Now, midway through, i know i did put the Lean Mixture knob all the way to rich, but to be honest, i can't say what the effect was. After about 15 seconds of this, i let ATC know i was declaring an emergency, and i turned towards San Martin, which was just two miles away and landed. On the descent down to the airport, with RPMs at the 1700 level, i experienced no fluctuations.

After landing, i performed several high RPM run-ups to see if i could repeat the problem. I couldn't. After opening the engine door to see if anything was loose and performing another run up, i took off and returned to Modesto. I experienced no problems on the way home.

So, this could have been a mixture problem that would have worked itself out once i returned to full mixture, or it could have been something else. I don't know.

I'd say i was quite happy that i was on flight following, since ATC could warn me about traffic and i could reach out to them if i had trouble. They quickly gave me their attention, asked for my intentions, and pointed out San Martin, which i'd already eyeballed. Clicking on San Martin in Foreflight gave me their CTAF frequency and i told ATC i was switching over to advise traffic of my approach. To my pleasure, anther pilot had announced my emergency to San Martin's traffic, as did i a few moments later.....When i landed, that, or another pilot, told me they'd told ATC of my successful landing.

An event like this reminds me that i'm proud to be a pilot.

oh, and i'll be talking to our mechanic today, too.
 
Sunday, on a flight from Modesto <KMOD> to Watsonville <KWVI>, i had to declare an emergency and land in San Martin <E16>.

The flight is one i've taken many times before, and, as with all flights over 30 minutes, i was on flight following. Now, the flight involves passing over two mountain ranges: one between the great San Joaquin Valley, which takes about 15 minutes to cross, and a smaller one between the highway 101 corridor and the pacific coast. That relatively narrow valley runs from San Jose south to Paso Robles in the south and is home to a variety of airports. The northern section of the valley, the part i pass over, is quite busy traffic wise, with departing and landing planes from San Jose International and GA flights from the local airports, one which i pass over on my way to the coast.

The initial parts of the flight were normal, with me cruising at 5,500 with the mixture leaned. As i came into the Gilroy valley, i began descending to 3000 feet before passing over the other side of the valley into watsonville. Just before i got midway through the valley, ATC asked me to level off at 4000 because of traffic. Shortly after, the engine RPMs began gyrating down and up. It wasn't the roughness you get from carb ice; it sounded more like the feeling when you lean the mixture too far, causing the RPMs to drop. In this instance, the RPMs decreased by several hundred before recovering to near normal, followed by decrease and increase again. It felt like the engine was going to quit at some point.

Now, midway through, i know i did put the Lean Mixture knob all the way to rich, but to be honest, i can't say what the effect was. After about 15 seconds of this, i let ATC know i was declaring an emergency, and i turned towards San Martin, which was just two miles away and landed. On the descent down to the airport, with RPMs at the 1700 level, i experienced no fluctuations.

After landing, i performed several high RPM run-ups to see if i could repeat the problem. I couldn't. After opening the engine door to see if anything was loose and performing another run up, i took off and returned to Modesto. I experienced no problems on the way home.

So, this could have been a mixture problem that would have worked itself out once i returned to full mixture, or it could have been something else. I don't know.

I'd say i was quite happy that i was on flight following, since ATC could warn me about traffic and i could reach out to them if i had trouble. They quickly gave me their attention, asked for my intentions, and pointed out San Martin, which i'd already eyeballed. Clicking on San Martin in Foreflight gave me their CTAF frequency and i told ATC i was switching over to advise traffic of my approach. To my pleasure, anther pilot had announced my emergency to San Martin's traffic, as did i a few moments later.....When i landed, that, or another pilot, told me they'd told ATC of my successful landing.

An event like this reminds me that i'm proud to be a pilot.

oh, and i'll be talking to our mechanic today, too.
you did the right thing, thanks for sharing your experience

Sounds like a weird mixture issue or some kind of carb ice.. throwing that carb heat on and going full rich really can't ever hurt

-----

Gratuitous "our 1950's engines suck" comment (and gratuitous "but these are the engineering epitome of what can be done with internal combustion engines, there's literally not a single improvement we could have made in the last 70 years")
 
you did the right thing, thanks for sharing your experience

Sounds like a weird mixture issue or some kind of carb ice.. throwing that carb heat on and going full rich really can't ever hurt

-----

Gratuitous "our 1950's engines suck" comment (and gratuitous "but these are the engineering epitome of what can be done with internal combustion engines, there's literally not a single improvement we could have made in the last 70 years")
You're nothing if not predictable. ;)
 
Good decision making to declare and land. Better to be on the ground wishing you were flying than the other way around. Post incident, this would be a good time to review your emergency procedures checklist and commit the most important items to memory and/or a cockpit flow response.

Any number of things could cause fluctuating rpm: carb icing, fuel pump issues, contaminated (water in) fuel, impending fuel starvation, failing magneto(s), or impending engine failure. Your emergency checklist/flow should include at least these items in a typical carbureted light aircraft, not necessarily in this order:

1. magneto check (does it run better on one or the other?) - may identify a failing mag
2. engage electric fuel pump (for low wing planes) - may identify a failing or air-blocked mechanical fuel pump
3. switch tanks - may identify a fuel tank with contaminated fuel or feed blockage, or by observation of fuel gauges, impending fuel starvation.
4. engage carb heat - may identify carb icing
5. Mixture full rich - may identify over lean mixture. If enrichening causes engine stoppage, return to a more lean condition to enable engine operation.

These actions may rule out, or potentially identify various causes of engine operation anomaly. Unless you get a clean resolution of the problem (e.g. engine operation becomes normal after engaging carb heat, bad magneto is identified, etc.) getting on the ground is a priority. Indeed, depending on the problem identified, getting on the ground may still be a priority (e.g. failed magneto).

I've experienced about 5 engine operation anomalies over 35 years. Two of these were developing carb icing issues that were rapidly resolved in flight. Two were magneto failures shortly after takeoff that resulting in a return and precautionary landing to secure repair of the failed magneto. One was a complete engine stoppage that was likely due to severe carb icing or ice in the mechanical fuel pump or fuel line. That last incident did not leave time for declaring an emergency with ATC due to low altitude. A quick application of the emergency checklist and choosing an off-airport landing site was the first priority, and before making an off-airport landing the engine spontaneously restarted, allowing a gingerly return to my home field after climbing to a safe altitude. No cause was found for the engine stoppage, hence suspecting some sort of carb or fuel icing.
 
you did the right thing, thanks for sharing your experience

Sounds like a weird mixture issue or some kind of carb ice.. throwing that carb heat on and going full rich really can't ever hurt

-----

Gratuitous "our 1950's engines suck" comment (and gratuitous "straw man luddite argument")

FTFY.
 
You should check your fuel tank vent. I had the exact same problem and it was a clogged fuel vent. My mechanic even picked up the plane and flew it back home without finding the clogged vent, so very similar to your experience.

Your flight home after the emergency was with tanks that were less full, so more airspace. After being on the ground, the tanks came back up to normal pressure (no vacuum). You only had a short flight back and so did not draw down the tank enough to generate a vacuum strong enough to cause fuel starvation like the first time.

I would bet $20 on a clogged fuel vent and fuel caps that are not venting properly. Sure, my cessna 150 had two vented fuel caps, but they are known to not work properly (as demonstrated by my emergency landing with a clogged fuel vent). They may open up enough to get you on the ground, or operate at lower power level, but not enough to completely cure a blocked main fuel vent.

I now blow into my grimy fuel tank vent as part of my preflight. I would rather risk blowing a bug up inside and know about it than take off with a blocked vent. As soon as I take off, there is going to be high pressure air going in the tube anyway.
 
Welcome to the club. After my emergency, a fellow pilot asked if I had trained for an engine out emergency landing and I told him I had. He then asked why I declared an emergency if it was something I had trained for. I don't ask him for flying advise anymore.
 
I had the same thing happen to me in the 172. I had full fuel, air was perfectly calm, engine "wanted" to die. It cleared up after I made some slight turns. I'm convinced it was a vent/fuel flow problem after talking to my IA neighbor.
 
Welcome to the club. After my emergency, a fellow pilot asked if I had trained for an engine out emergency landing and I told him I had. He then asked why I declared an emergency if it was something I had trained for. I don't ask him for flying advise anymore.

I don't think I would have declared, unless I needed something from ATC like clearing the airspace for me or rolling the trucks or alerting search and rescue. But the emergency landings I've had happened when I wasn't talking to anybody anyway.
 
You should check your fuel tank vent. I had the exact same problem and it was a clogged fuel vent. My mechanic even picked up the plane and flew it back home without finding the clogged vent, so very similar to your experience.

Your flight home after the emergency was with tanks that were less full, so more airspace. After being on the ground, the tanks came back up to normal pressure (no vacuum). You only had a short flight back and so did not draw down the tank enough to generate a vacuum strong enough to cause fuel starvation like the first time.

I would bet $20 on a clogged fuel vent and fuel caps that are not venting properly. Sure, my cessna 150 had two vented fuel caps, but they are known to not work properly (as demonstrated by my emergency landing with a clogged fuel vent). They may open up enough to get you on the ground, or operate at lower power level, but not enough to completely cure a blocked main fuel vent.

I now blow into my grimy fuel tank vent as part of my preflight. I would rather risk blowing a bug up inside and know about it than take off with a blocked vent. As soon as I take off, there is going to be high pressure air going in the tube anyway.

Sounds like good advice. I love my little C150 with its crappy payload and slow speed. It's wonderful for day trips though. I'd taken off with tanks topped off, but when i talk to our AP, i'll mention this possible solution.

Thanks,

Brian
 
I don't think I would have declared, unless I needed something from ATC like clearing the airspace for me or rolling the trucks or alerting search and rescue. But the emergency landings I've had happened when I wasn't talking to anybody anyway.
Nooooooo. Why does this still persist? How many people do we see in the Mishaps section that did not declare and it made the situation worse? Sure, it worked out for the OP, but next time it could end up with a crater in the ground and a helpful "no known cause" from the NTSB investigation. Or the partial-power emergency turns quickly into an engine out close to the airport and he now HAS to land on an occupied runway.

For god sakes, declaring a Mayday is such a non-issue and will not end up with paper work or more than an hour of your time, unless the problem is very bad, in which case, you will be happy to have all the help the Mayday provides.
 
Sunday, on a flight from Modesto <KMOD> to Watsonville <KWVI>, i had to declare an emergency and land in San Martin <E16>.

The flight is one i've taken many times before, and, as with all flights over 30 minutes, i was on flight following. Now, the flight involves passing over two mountain ranges: one between the great San Joaquin Valley, which takes about 15 minutes to cross, and a smaller one between the highway 101 corridor and the pacific coast. That relatively narrow valley runs from San Jose south to Paso Robles in the south and is home to a variety of airports. The northern section of the valley, the part i pass over, is quite busy traffic wise, with departing and landing planes from San Jose International and GA flights from the local airports, one which i pass over on my way to the coast.

The initial parts of the flight were normal, with me cruising at 5,500 with the mixture leaned. As i came into the Gilroy valley, i began descending to 3000 feet before passing over the other side of the valley into watsonville. Just before i got midway through the valley, ATC asked me to level off at 4000 because of traffic. Shortly after, the engine RPMs began gyrating down and up. It wasn't the roughness you get from carb ice; it sounded more like the feeling when you lean the mixture too far, causing the RPMs to drop. In this instance, the RPMs decreased by several hundred before recovering to near normal, followed by decrease and increase again. It felt like the engine was going to quit at some point.

Now, midway through, i know i did put the Lean Mixture knob all the way to rich, but to be honest, i can't say what the effect was. After about 15 seconds of this, i let ATC know i was declaring an emergency, and i turned towards San Martin, which was just two miles away and landed. On the descent down to the airport, with RPMs at the 1700 level, i experienced no fluctuations.

After landing, i performed several high RPM run-ups to see if i could repeat the problem. I couldn't. After opening the engine door to see if anything was loose and performing another run up, i took off and returned to Modesto. I experienced no problems on the way home.

So, this could have been a mixture problem that would have worked itself out once i returned to full mixture, or it could have been something else. I don't know.

I'd say i was quite happy that i was on flight following, since ATC could warn me about traffic and i could reach out to them if i had trouble. They quickly gave me their attention, asked for my intentions, and pointed out San Martin, which i'd already eyeballed. Clicking on San Martin in Foreflight gave me their CTAF frequency and i told ATC i was switching over to advise traffic of my approach. To my pleasure, anther pilot had announced my emergency to San Martin's traffic, as did i a few moments later.....When i landed, that, or another pilot, told me they'd told ATC of my successful landing.

An event like this reminds me that i'm proud to be a pilot.

oh, and i'll be talking to our mechanic today, too.
Congratulations. Now you know you're the kind of pilot who's not afraid to declare an emergency and ask for help when you need to, so you're more likely to have a long, happy, and healthy flying career ahead of you. That's something you can never be 100% sure of until you've been through it. Stubborn, independent "tough guys" (who are really just scared to ask for help and look weak) are the ones most likely to make scorched holes in the ground.
 
Sounds like good advice. I love my little C150 with its crappy payload and slow speed. It's wonderful for day trips though. I'd taken off with tanks topped off, but when i talk to our AP, i'll mention this possible solution.

Thanks,

Brian
My 150 had a bug screen over the fuel vent for the longest time and everyone assumed that the vent must be clear because of that. Nobody actually put their mouth on the dirty tube to try blowing through it, or stuck a brush up there to clean it out.
You should be able blow air into the fuel tank and pressurize the fuel tank. The fuel vent line has a one-way valve that lets air inside but only has a small hole on the side of the valve that lets the air pressure back out to equalize the pressure on the ground. The air that you blow into the tank will come back out more slowly, so you can blow into the line and then place your finger over the vent and be able to feel or hear the air coming back out. If you do this with a piece of tubing slipped over the fuel vent it works better because you can put the tubing into a glass of water and watch the bubbles come back out of the tubing.
 
Maybe you already posted, but what kind of plane / engine?
 
Maybe you already posted, but what kind of plane / engine?
He alluded to it being a Cessna 150. All have the continental O-200 engine. And only one fuel vent on the left wing (crossover tube to right tank) and a single fuel selector that is either off or both.

I had the exact same emergency experience with my C-150F and had a completely blocked fuel vent. Mechanic did not find it because it ran fine on the ground and flew the plane back home the next day. I did not agree that there was no apparent cause and blew into the fuel vent line myself and not a drop of air could pass.

It takes quite a while to suck enough vacuum in the tanks to cause fuel starvation and depends on the amount of air leaking into the tank through old fuel cap gaskets and the blockage in the fuel vent line. In my case, I flew 1.5 hours on my first leg and had the emergency event 45 minutes into the second leg. But the blockage was certainly there on the first leg. I just maybe did not crank down on the fuel caps as tight the first trip. Or I had less fuel to start with (more airspace in the tank means harder to generate sufficient vacuum).
 
Nice work all around, good on you for getting on the ground. Question, did you pull the carb heat?
 
Good job! NEVER fail to dmeclare an emergency Doing so removes the regulatory handccuffs from both pilot and controller. Declared twice, paperwork zero.
I had one declared for me. I couldn't declare it myself, because I was suddenly lost comms in IMC. The only paperwork was a kind tweet from Nav Canada the next day after I thanked them for their support.
 
Nooooooo. Why does this still persist? How many people do we see in the Mishaps section that did not declare and it made the situation worse?

A few years ago I was riding with a friend when we had a failure of the gear to come down as we entered the downwind. Flew away from the pattern and performed the emergency dump but had a tough time getting the third green for the nose wheel. It finally came on but when entering the pattern to land he declared an emergency as he wasn't confident that the gear was locked.

Performed a soft field landing and the gear held but it sure was reassuring to see the fire equipment waiting to assist us if needed. We thanked them on the way by.

Minimal paperwork was required and to me the call was the right thing to do.
 
Good job! NEVER fail to dmeclare an emergency Doing so removes the regulatory handccuffs from both pilot and controller. Declared twice, paperwork zero.
And the pilot doesn't have to devote anymore mental bandwidth to deciding whether to declare or not.
 
Good job of declaring right away.

I flew almost your exact route two weeks ago - although I started up the hill from you at Pine Mountain Lake. Wifey and I played golf in Modesto today (technically Ceres).
 
For those pilots who are, maybe, a little more anti-government in outlook (not that I'm stereotyping us guys of a certain age who own airplanes :) ), here's a different argument that might help convince you to declare: you're forced to pay all those tax $$$ for emergency services either way, so they damned well should all get off their behinds and be waiting on standby if there's the slightest chance you might actually need them for once.
 
25,000 plus hours flying with many high performance aircraft hours on post maintenance check flights.
 
Nooooooo. Why does this still persist? How many people do we see in the Mishaps section that did not declare and it made the situation worse? Sure, it worked out for the OP, but next time it could end up with a crater in the ground and a helpful "no known cause" from the NTSB investigation. Or the partial-power emergency turns quickly into an engine out close to the airport and he now HAS to land on an occupied runway.

For god sakes, declaring a Mayday is such a non-issue and will not end up with paper work or more than an hour of your time, unless the problem is very bad, in which case, you will be happy to have all the help the Mayday provides.

Yes, don't hesitate to declare an emergency and proceed to do whatever you need to do. But also realize what ATC can and cannot do. They can clear the area for you, but they can't fly the airplane or trouble shoot for you. There have also been cases of inexperienced controllers demanding to know souls and fuel on board during critical times causing distraction. There are accidents that could have been prevented if the pilot had declared an emergency, but the majority of them couldn't have been helped.
 
Yes, don't hesitate to declare an emergency and proceed to do whatever you need to do. But also realize what ATC can and cannot do. They can clear the area for you, but they can't fly the airplane or trouble shoot for you. There have also been cases of inexperienced controllers demanding to know souls and fuel on board during critical times causing distraction. There are accidents that could have been prevented if the pilot had declared an emergency, but the majority of them couldn't have been helped.
I've read a good number of reports where not declaring an emergency prevented the controller from understanding the severity of the problem. For example, "I've lost my vacuum pump" might mean nothing to a controller without GA flying or maintenance experience, so they can (and will) blithely vector you all over the place for an approach. Once you declare an emergency, you automatically have priority handling, whether or not the controller understands any of the technical details. No, they can't fly the plane, but if they know there's a serious problem, they can at least not make things any harder for you than they already are.
 
During my emergency I also had radio problems (it was just a hint of my failing Narco Mk12d that I finally replaced last month with a Garmin GTR-200). Once they heard the first Mayday and knew where I was heading, it did not matter if they could hear anything else. I heard back “xxxx I can’t hear your transmissions but you are cleared for any runway, the airport is cleared”. Basically, allowed me to say “everybody get the F out of the way, I’m coming in hot!”.
 
On this topic, it's true that the second the adrenaline hits you lose a bucket of IQ points, because your body's redirecting the oxygen from your brain to your muscles, but if you can remember, it's good to assume that ATC knows nothing about your situation and tell them exactly what you need, e.g.

My vacuum pump has failed.
I need to land immediately.
I need to minimize maneuvering.
Landing with a tailwind is OK.

etc.
 
You did a fine job!

Now, later in the week don't forget to tell us about the infamous "mountain of paperwork" you faced as a result :D
I agree but I'm not sure I'd take off again until the issue was diagnosed. Actually I'm pretty sure I wouldn't.
What are your thoughts on that Mark?
I once had an issue as a right seater flying with a friend in his Pa28-140 with Gary Shelby on this board. We had engine roughness after take off exacerbated when we increased the throttle turned around and landed at the home field and could not replicate the problem no matter how we tried. Engine ran strong but we opted to travel to the designation in the back of a friends centurion since we did not know what the issue was. Turned out it was an issue with the powerflow exhaust where rain water ran down and was able to pool in the air intake. Apparently it was a known issue for powerflow exhausts in this model. I think the installation of a deflector shield solved the issue. But we opted not to continue the breakfast run in that plane until we figured it out. To the OP did you pull the carb heat? You didn't mention that.
 
I agree but I'm not sure I'd take off again until the issue was diagnosed. Actually I'm pretty sure I wouldn't.
Didn’t we have a POA member who once declared an emergency and after landing took off again and was given a run around by the FSDO?
 
I have declared more emergencies than I can remember. Not once was I asked by the FAA to justify it or provide any paperwork.

It varies.

I’ve only declared once.

On a Friday afternoon (similar situation to the OP). I landed safely, but unlike the OP, I left the airplane and took a commercial flight home.

Monday morning I had the FSDO calling me to get a statement and wanting to talk to the shop working on the airplane to find out what happened.

It’s not a reason to avoid declaring, but make sure you aren’t doing anything shady.
 
Didn’t we have a POA member who once declared an emergency and after landing took off again and was given a run around by the FSDO?
It's possible, but it's not something I'd worry about while I was in the air in an emergency situation. I did get my avionics master switch replaced before I flew again after my own incident, but Transport Canada definitely doesn't have the budget to run through the list of CADORS reports and travel out to each maintenance shop to confirm that the problems were actually identified and rectified. I'm sure the FAA doesn't have that kind of a budget, either — heck, they couldn't even afford to oversee the development of Boeing's 737-MAX properly, much less chase after us penny-ante Piper and Cessna owners.

Now, if you got into a further incident because you hadn't rectified the problem that caused first one, then someone might notice the previous report (if the U.S. has anything like CADORS) and connect the two, but that's a different discussion. Someone might also notice you taxiing out to the runway with oil pouring out the bottom of your plane, for that matter, whether or not you'd ever declared an emergency in the past.
 
It varies.

I’ve only declared once.

On a Friday afternoon (similar situation to the OP). I landed safely, but unlike the OP, I left the airplane and took a commercial flight home.

Monday morning I had the FSDO calling me to get a statement and wanting to talk to the shop working on the airplane to find out what happened.

It’s not a reason to avoid declaring, but make sure you aren’t doing anything shady.
Could the FSDO have been interested because it was an area the FAA was monitoring for possible ADs, etc? For example, when there was the concern about Piper yokes, I can imagine the FAA or Transport Canada calling around after any incident involving a PA-28 that seemed in any way possibly yoke-related to see if they should add it to their list.
 
It's possible, but it's not something I'd worry about while I was in the air in an emergency situation.
No disagreement there at all. I’m fully in the camp of not avoiding declaring.

My only concern with the OP’s situation is the decision to take off again without having an A&P look at it.

Most of the time, you’ll probably never hear from the FSDO. But, you never know when they’ll take interest. Its a tough place to be in trying to justify taking off again if the FAA is asking.
 
I've read a good number of reports where not declaring an emergency prevented the controller from understanding the severity of the problem. For example, "I've lost my vacuum pump" might mean nothing to a controller without GA flying or maintenance experience, so they can (and will) blithely vector you all over the place for an approach. Once you declare an emergency, you automatically have priority handling, whether or not the controller understands any of the technical details. No, they can't fly the plane, but if they know there's a serious problem, they can at least not make things any harder for you than they already are.

I have seen that video of the pilot saying "vacuum failure" and the controller thought it was a vacuum cleaner. However, "Mayday I have a vacuum failure" still would not mean much to that controller, except that it conveys some sense of urgency. The pilot needs to request no-gyro vectors. My point was that declaring an emergency without a specific request is not always that useful.
 
Back
Top