Why? Someone dying or dead in the seat next to you is not enough to call it an emergency? How would you define an emergency?
Would you declare an emergency?
- Thread starter SkyHog
- Start date
Why? Someone dying or dead in the seat next to you is not enough to call it an emergency? How would you define an emergency?
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
Since I want everyone else on the frequency to shut up while this is resolved, and I want the undivided attention of the controller, I see nothing "dramatic" about this call. It fits perfectly with its definition in the P/CG:
And this is my initial call-up for the emergency situation, so per the quoted AIM section, it is appropriate.
flyingcheesehead
Taxi to Parking
Dramatic? What's it there for, then? This reminded me of an excellent point Don Brown made:
Sigh.... Mayday is the appropriate call to make. There is a time and place to use the call, a passenger having a heart attack is most definitely one of them. It leaves nothing unclear. The term is in the pilots lexicon for a reason. Not using it because you're "too cool" for that is idiocy.
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
Something that prevents me from safely continuing flight and will result in imminent danger to all on board.
Incomplete definition. ANY life at risk qualifies for a Mayday call.
sba55
En-Route
Would you care if they denied your request? I wouldn't even ask.
I'd declare the emergency and land wherever is closest. If that's military and they don't want me there, I'll sort that out _after_ they've provided medical assistance to my passenger.
kkoran
Pattern Altitude
Why? By saying you need priority, you are essentially saying you are an emergency because that is what gets you priority handling. By not clearly declaring an emergency, you simply introduce ambiguity into the situation.
kkoran
Pattern Altitude
What do you mean by "implicitly refused"? Do you know of any specific instances where pilots who had declared an emergency were denied a clearanc to land at a military airfield?
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
I know my definition of an emergency:
Oh, yeah -- that's the official definition, too! And to save y'all asking...P/CG said:
So, the danger may be less than "imminent" and still create and "emergency" situation. However, if the danger is not imminent, "MAYDAY" (see post #84, above) is not appropriate. Now, is the danger "imminent" if someone's having a heart attack? I think so, but I'm willing to listed to counter arguments.P/CG said:
Last edited:
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
I know what the PCG says, and it's still a judgment call. Some people consider losing their autopilot in IMC an emergency - I don't. I've already relayed all information to ATC. I don't consider it an emergency unless I'm not at the front of the queue. I've already stated repeatedly, that me not being at the front of the queue will get an emergency declaration.
jmaynard
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 1,487
- Location
- Fairmont, Minnesota
- Display Name
Display name:
Jay Maynard
<paramedic>If you think you, or someone else, is having a heart attack, they are until a doctor says otherwise. Get thee to treatment, NOW. That doesn't mean "the closest hospital"; it means "the closest appropriately trained and equipped medical professional". That includes an ambulance. Now, if you know the combined time for you to get on the ground and the ambulance to get there is less if you land at a more distant airport that's closer to help, that's fine, but you can generally assume that any town of a few thousand people or more is going to have enough capability to deal with the situation.</paramedic>
<pilot>If I'm the least bit uncertain whether declaring am emergency is appropriate, I'll declare. We can sort it out later. Yes, that includes "mayday, mayday, mayday" unless I'm in active communication with ATC already. If any time has passed since my last transmission, or any other aircraft has transmitted, I'll use it. It's better to get their undivided attention when you may already have it anyway than not do so and need it.</pilot>
<pilot>If I'm the least bit uncertain whether declaring am emergency is appropriate, I'll declare. We can sort it out later. Yes, that includes "mayday, mayday, mayday" unless I'm in active communication with ATC already. If any time has passed since my last transmission, or any other aircraft has transmitted, I'll use it. It's better to get their undivided attention when you may already have it anyway than not do so and need it.</pilot>
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
Perhaps that's your own personal standard, but there's nothing in the official lexicon which suggests it's not an "emergency" if you're #1 for the runway. And I can think of situations where if you are #1 for the runway, ATC would shuffle you aside if they didn't know you had an emergency, and it's not a good idea to hide that fact until you feel you need the priority.
RotorAndWing
Final Approach
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 8,496
- Location
- Other side of the world
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotor&Wing
"sigh"..........Nothing about being "too cool", there is a place for everything. In international operations it's appropriate. While on center or departure where you are already established in radar and radio contact, not necessary.
In my professional career I've had about 6 times I've declared an emergency. One was while being oceanic, the rest were in ATC contact. Just made the call, told the controller I was declaring an emergency and why, then proceeded to take care of the problem. Nothing was unclear, no one was interrupting and everything went smooth.
I can't remember the last time I've actually heard anyone using it on frequency in the states.
"sigh".............. (LOL!)
"sigh"..........Nothing about being "too cool", there is a place for everything. In international operations it's appropriate. While on center or departure where you are already established in radar and radio contact, not necessary.
In my professional career I've had about 6 times I've declared an emergency. One was while being oceanic, the rest were in ATC contact. Just made the call, told the controller I was declaring an emergency and why, then proceeded to take care of the problem. Nothing was unclear, no one was interrupting and everything went smooth.
I can't remember the last time I've actually heard anyone using it on frequency in the states.
"sigh".............. (LOL!)
Please show me in the FARs, the AIM or H.O. 101 (Code of Signals) where the use of Mayday is in any way restricted or discouraged when the underlying situation is congruent with its use (considering the mortality rate of first heart attacks they most certainly qualify). Just because you haven't heard it, doesn't make it inappropriate. It is the most direct and clear way to break in and get your point across with absolutely no confusion or ambiguity. It also immediately perks up everyone else on frequencies ears who may not have been paying attention and gives them a heads up that things are underfoot and their plans may need to change and they're about to copy an amended clearance.
RotorAndWing
Final Approach
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 8,496
- Location
- Other side of the world
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotor&Wing
"and if considered necessary," My point is it isn't usually necessary under radar & ATC contact. Just state the problem.
Like I stated earlier, in 30 years of professional flying I can't remember anytime I've heard it being used in the states. Perhaps you have.
Last edited:
RotorAndWing
Final Approach
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 8,496
- Location
- Other side of the world
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotor&Wing
Take a chill there Henning, I'm just stating my opinion of being someone who operates in the system on a daily basis. The AIM does state and if considered necessary.
And poking some fun at your condescending tone. Relax.
TMetzinger
Final Approach
I've heard it five times in only thirteen years of flying - in three cases by professional operators in contact with ATC, the other two from GA pilots in contact with ATC.
And in all cases, everybody shut up until ATC responded and they got their initial handling done.
And in all cases, everybody shut up until ATC responded and they got their initial handling done.
John Baker
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2008
- Messages
- 7,471
- Location
- San Diego, California
- Display Name
Display name:
John Baker
I had a fellow drop dead right out front of my store about ten years ago. He had been out for his health walk, but it did him in anyway. Next to my shop was one of those family inexpensive walk in health clinics. The doc came out and looked him (The dead guy) over, then went back to work. The fellow was obviously dead.
A few minutes later, the EMT pulled up and they started lighting the corps up. He would bounce a few inches off the pavement with every jolt. One of the bystanders pointed out to the EMT guy that the fellow was dead, and wanted to know why they were electrocuting the dead guy. The EMT guy said nobody is dead until they get them to the hospital and he is declared dead, they were not allowed to make that call. The doctor next door that looked at him never said a word, he just went back to his office.
My flight instructor is much like myself, we are getting on in years, and this thread is one that has, I am sure, crossed both our minds from time to time.
John
A few minutes later, the EMT pulled up and they started lighting the corps up. He would bounce a few inches off the pavement with every jolt. One of the bystanders pointed out to the EMT guy that the fellow was dead, and wanted to know why they were electrocuting the dead guy. The EMT guy said nobody is dead until they get them to the hospital and he is declared dead, they were not allowed to make that call. The doctor next door that looked at him never said a word, he just went back to his office.
My flight instructor is much like myself, we are getting on in years, and this thread is one that has, I am sure, crossed both our minds from time to time.
John
jmaynard
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 1,487
- Location
- Fairmont, Minnesota
- Display Name
Display name:
Jay Maynard
That doctor committed malpractice: he assumed care of the patient, then abandoned him. The EMTs had no choice, since the doctor did not bother to tell them he'd already declared the patient dead.
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
I'm not sure that those two statements aren't contradictory. If the doctor had correctly declared the patient dead, then it's hard to say he committed malpractice by "abandon[ing]" the patient. The only sin I see is wasting the EMT's time by not telling them that.
Flyfishingpilot
Pre-takeoff checklist
Should read explicitily (thanks for pointing it out) ... but yes
... I remember reading the article. It involved some 10 -12 planes that were out and about, got caught in a storm, were all low on fuel and declared emergency. The military base denied their request to land.
Last edited:
John Baker
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2008
- Messages
- 7,471
- Location
- San Diego, California
- Display Name
Display name:
John Baker
I walked out there and the doc. was not saying a word, nada, nothing. I do not believe he declared the guy as dead. Myself, I don't think he wanted any official involvement, but that is just a guess.
John
John
RotorAndWing
Final Approach
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 8,496
- Location
- Other side of the world
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotor&Wing
A Boeing 747 is approaching New York when the Captain suddenly slumps over and stops breathing. After landing and the body is removed from the plane, the FAA and NTSB remove the CVR for examination.
On the recording is heard the First Officer telling the Flight Engineer "Help me get that dead SOB out of my seat and I'll let you fly the next leg!"
On the recording is heard the First Officer telling the Flight Engineer "Help me get that dead SOB out of my seat and I'll let you fly the next leg!"
Unbeliever
Pre-takeoff checklist
The doc was probably protecting himself by remaining within the limits of the Good Samaritan law protections. Yes, he's a doc, but if he's not trained in emergent care and/or cardiac events and attempts those procedures, he has no protection. So in that case it's better to shut up and be a bystander.
Good Samaritan laws protect responders up to the limits of their training. An ALS team doing their best using standard EMT techniques is protected. The same ALS team doing a thorachotomy in the field, not so much. So the Doc not trained in emergent care, in order to protect himself, will shut up.
--Carlos V.
Last edited:
That's incorrect, he has protection for anything he does in good faith under the Good Samaritan Act. It covers everyone. As long as what he did he felt was proper and in best interest, he's covered. My dad, a pshrink, rolled up on a multi vehicle accident scene, triaged and administered care. Some victims did not make it. A few weeks later a large envelope comes in the mail from State's Attorneys office. He was concerned he was going to be prosecuted or sued. When he opened the envelope it was an award for services rendered.
Unbeliever
Pre-takeoff checklist
That doesn't match with my Urban Search & Rescue training (California). It was hammered into us a couple of times not to go beyond my training or risk losing Good Samaritan Protection. Of course my trainer could be wrong, but I'm parroting what I was taught.
I was also told that each state has different GS laws.
Edit to add:
Oh, hey. I see why they told me about going beyond my training. The statute covers no person who in good faith, and not for compensation
Edit 2:
Perusing my rescue manuals, and a bit of Googling, they pretty much all say that good faith is part of it, don't take rewards, and for the strongest defense, don't go beyond your training.
--Carlos V.
Last edited:
Unbeliever
Pre-takeoff checklist
Poking around on this, I wonder what happened to this case:
http://firstaid.about.com/od/medicallegal/a/07_no_good_sam.htm
Someone knocked a hole in the GS law.
--Carlos V.
http://firstaid.about.com/od/medicallegal/a/07_no_good_sam.htm
Someone knocked a hole in the GS law.
--Carlos V.
Pi1otguy
Pattern Altitude
Assume I witness a nearby plane crash and see or smell leaking fuel. How I supposed to determine the fire risk to get covered by GS? Am I qualified to make that determination?
Another example of why I'll never live in California again. If the guy has any kind of liability insurance, or an organization takes the case to the CA Supreme Court, hopefully they will overturn the appellate.
As for me, If I thought the car might catch fire, I would leave her in place after checking the ABCs and try to eliminate the potentialities of the fire. If the fire was already happening, I'd go ahead and remove her. I'll just avoid California where stupidity always prevails.
roncachamp
Final Approach
You want priority handling but you don't want to declare an emergency. Why not? Do you see some downside in declaring an emergency? You state that if you don't receive priority handling you will declare an emergency, like it's a threat. Do you think ATC sees some downside if you declare an emergency?
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
Look at it from the controller's point of view -- if you don't declare, how does s/he explain pushing others out of your way?
roncachamp
Final Approach
By declaring it to be an emergency him/herself.
kkoran
Pattern Altitude
Exactly. Priority = Emergency
If a pilot doesn't possess the reproducted organs to declare an emergency when warranted (and accept any potential consequences for having caused the situation), he/she shouldn't be in command of an aircraft.
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
The Air Force did a study (accident data, not a survey or anything like that) a long time ago and found out that pilots were more likely to eject sooner (and thus more likely to survive) when the problem was mechanical rather than one of their own making.
K
KennyFlys
Guest
That makes me wonder if they believed they caused the problem, they could fix it and save the plane whereas the mechanical problem tends to be too many unknowns in the cause.
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
More like they didn't want to come back and face the Commander without the jet that they had singlehandedly destroyed. That could motivate you to stay longer (maybe too long) and try harder to salvage an unsalvageable situation.
TMetzinger
Final Approach
When I was in the Military (80's) and we cross trained with USAF, the command culture seemed to have addressed this. The public message was that "I can buy more planes, I can't replace YOU with a check". Now there was still the "save the airplane" mentality among the aircrew, but the command did seem to try and counter it.
I think we often forget just how young the majority of aircrew are. If we can ever find a way to directly transfer the wisdom (and guile) of your typical older guy into the body of a 24 year old, we'd have an unbelievable soldier/sailor/airman.
I think we often forget just how young the majority of aircrew are. If we can ever find a way to directly transfer the wisdom (and guile) of your typical older guy into the body of a 24 year old, we'd have an unbelievable soldier/sailor/airman.
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
Unfortunately, that message was a lie then and a bigger lie now. Military aircraft are, these days, irreplaceable assets, and cost far more than the crew that flies them.