SW 1380 one passenger dead: Uncontained engine failure and emergency landing at PHL
Apr 18, 2018, 4:02 pm
#196
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Orange County, CA, USA
Programs: AA (Life Plat), Marriott (Life Titanium) and every other US program
Posts: 6,411
I never heard the pilot declare an emergency, which seems unusual. I guess what it might say is that under a VERY stressful situation even a professional can make less than optimal communications.
Apr 18, 2018, 4:31 pm
#197
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,872
Apr 18, 2018, 5:28 pm
#199
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 2,281
Plane: "SW 1380 declaring an emergency",
Dispatch "SW1380 state your emergency"
Plane: "SW1380 engine fire, descending, need nearest vector for landing"
Granted the first transmission was lost in static so they could have very well used the word emergency during that transmission.
Apr 18, 2018, 5:47 pm
#200
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,598
A tiny bit of google indicates that it's not at all required to state "I'm declaring an emergency" (link here) - the Captain made her situation and expectations clear in a single statement "engine fire, descending, give me a vector to the nearest airport", followed by "give me a vector to philadelphia". I don't remember if she mentioned loss of pressure in the initial transmission and am too lazy to go back and listen again. ATC gave her what she needed and treated it as an emergency, clearing airspace, preparing to close the airport, giving her a single channel, following up about fire or no fire ("btw, part of the aircraft is missing and someone went out"). The FO took over the radio at some point while the Captain was presumably preparing for the landing. The whole exchange was really about as clear of communication as you could ask for, with the Captain making clear "this is my situation, this is what I need, this is what I'm doing that you need to know" and ATC saying "this is what I'm giving you now, this is what I'm preparing, if you want this much more (longer approach) I can do it but it will take a bit more time", etc. The "I'm declaring an emergency" (or Mayday or Pan Pan) is for if either party thinks there's ambiguity in understanding the situation at the other end.
Apr 18, 2018, 7:14 pm
#203
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,286
A few more details in this article: (Google headline if behind paywall.)
Inside Southwest Flight 1380, 20 Minutes of Chaos and Terror
Inside Southwest Flight 1380, 20 Minutes of Chaos and Terror
Apr 18, 2018, 7:58 pm
#204
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Orange County, CA, USA
Programs: AA (Life Plat), Marriott (Life Titanium) and every other US program
Posts: 6,411
Sorry, I don't get your comment. I think the problem might be that you are not familiar with the "formality" of ATC communication. I have spent thousands of hours listening to ATC communications, and I have listened to over 100 air traffic emergency broadcasts and this is the first time in my memory that the PIC didn't say "We are declaring an emergency", particularly where they had already deviated from the ATC assigned altitude.
Apr 18, 2018, 8:16 pm
#205
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Blue Ridge, GA
Posts: 5,513
It was a proposed directive, never finalized.
A year after the accident, in August 2017, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposed an Airworthiness Directive that would make those inspections mandatory. The FAA noted that though the fan-blade failure was contained by the engine case, “there was subsequent uncontained forward release of inlet cowl and other debris.
”The proposed directive stated that on engines that have flown more than 15,000 cycles, the fan blades would have to be inspected within six months of the rule being finalized, while on those with fewer cycles the blades would be inspected within 18 months.
Eight months later, the FAA still has not finalized that directive.
An FAA safety engineer, who asked for anonymity because he spoke without authorization from the agency, said that seems an unreasonable delay. “In the notice, the FAA proposed inspections within six months,” he said. “How can you wait so long to finalize the rule?” The engineer added that if maintenance is not mandatory, some airlines will put it off until the next major overhaul. Engines are routinely overhauled every 30,000 flights.
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), the counterpart to the FAA in Europe, did finalize an Airworthiness Directive requiring airlines operating in Europe to perform the inspections recommended by CFM.
It’s not known whether the recommended blade inspections were done on the engine involved in Tuesday’s accident.
”The proposed directive stated that on engines that have flown more than 15,000 cycles, the fan blades would have to be inspected within six months of the rule being finalized, while on those with fewer cycles the blades would be inspected within 18 months.
Eight months later, the FAA still has not finalized that directive.
An FAA safety engineer, who asked for anonymity because he spoke without authorization from the agency, said that seems an unreasonable delay. “In the notice, the FAA proposed inspections within six months,” he said. “How can you wait so long to finalize the rule?” The engineer added that if maintenance is not mandatory, some airlines will put it off until the next major overhaul. Engines are routinely overhauled every 30,000 flights.
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), the counterpart to the FAA in Europe, did finalize an Airworthiness Directive requiring airlines operating in Europe to perform the inspections recommended by CFM.
It’s not known whether the recommended blade inspections were done on the engine involved in Tuesday’s accident.
Apr 18, 2018, 8:34 pm
#206
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Blue Ridge, GA
Posts: 5,513
Apr 18, 2018, 8:57 pm
#207
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Orange County, CA, USA
Programs: AA (Life Plat), Marriott (Life Titanium) and every other US program
Posts: 6,411
A tiny bit of google indicates that it's not at all required to state "I'm declaring an emergency" (link here) - the Captain made her situation and expectations clear in a single statement "engine fire, descending, give me a vector to the nearest airport", followed by "give me a vector to philadelphia". I don't remember if she mentioned loss of pressure in the initial transmission and am too lazy to go back and listen again. ATC gave her what she needed and treated it as an emergency, clearing airspace, preparing to close the airport, giving her a single channel, following up about fire or no fire ("btw, part of the aircraft is missing and someone went out"). The FO took over the radio at some point while the Captain was presumably preparing for the landing. The whole exchange was really about as clear of communication as you could ask for, with the Captain making clear "this is my situation, this is what I need, this is what I'm doing that you need to know" and ATC saying "this is what I'm giving you now, this is what I'm preparing, if you want this much more (longer approach) I can do it but it will take a bit more time", etc. The "I'm declaring an emergency" (or Mayday or Pan Pan) is for if either party thinks there's ambiguity in understanding the situation at the other end.
Apr 18, 2018, 9:25 pm
#208
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,872
Apr 18, 2018, 9:46 pm
#209
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Orange County, CA, USA
Programs: AA (Life Plat), Marriott (Life Titanium) and every other US program
Posts: 6,411
Can you point me to an example of a recording of a commercial plane which intentionally deviated from assigned altitude because of an emergency and, while having radio communications intact, did not state that they were declaring an emergency? Or are you just saying that because the pilot handled a very difficult situation very well the fact that it was 1 flight in 100 for not making that declaration didn't matter in YOUR opinion, which doesn't change my opinion that being 1 in 100 shows some level of stress induced unusual communication (i.e. - a 1 in 100 exception). But I would certainly be interested in hearing your views if you would actually provide some information, like I did.
Apr 18, 2018, 10:20 pm
#210
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,417
A tiny bit of google indicates that it's not at all required to state "I'm declaring an emergency" (link here) - the Captain made her situation and expectations clear in a single statement "engine fire, descending, give me a vector to the nearest airport", followed by "give me a vector to philadelphia". I don't remember if she mentioned loss of pressure in the initial transmission and am too lazy to go back and listen again. ATC gave her what she needed and treated it as an emergency, clearing airspace, preparing to close the airport, giving her a single channel, following up about fire or no fire ("btw, part of the aircraft is missing and someone went out"). The FO took over the radio at some point while the Captain was presumably preparing for the landing. The whole exchange was really about as clear of communication as you could ask for, with the Captain making clear "this is my situation, this is what I need, this is what I'm doing that you need to know" and ATC saying "this is what I'm giving you now, this is what I'm preparing, if you want this much more (longer approach) I can do it but it will take a bit more time", etc. The "I'm declaring an emergency" (or Mayday or Pan Pan) is for if either party thinks there's ambiguity in understanding the situation at the other end.
It reminds me of the priorities aviate, navigate, communicate.