|
Number
341
|
May
2008
|
||||
P.O. Box 189, Moffett Field, CA 94035-0189 |
||||||
|
||||||
"Did you know?"
- ATC and Emergencies
“We declared an emergency with ATC.” Thousands of incident reports in the ASRS Database Online (DBOL) contain this, or similar, phrasing. Many of these reports also describe two standard questions that ATC asked pilots following an emergency declaration:
Why does ATC request this information? For one ASRS reporter, these questions created confusion and distraction during a smoke-in-the-cockpit emergency.
While repositioning aircraft...and descending from 17,000 feet MSL in IMC and moderate rime icing conditions, with all anti-icing equipment selected on, I experienced smoke in the cockpit while passing through approximately 10,000 feet. When I changed frequencies to Approach, as requested by Center, but before checking in, I first smelled and then observed smoke coming from behind the instrument panel directly in front of me. I believe that I was cleared to descend to 9,000 feet...but in all the ensuing confusion, trying to communicate my emergency to ATC, responding to their requests, hand fly the aircraft, while trying to determine and isolate the source of the problem, I may have descended through the altitude that I was previously cleared to....
At around 7,800 feet, I managed to stop the smoke by turning off the environmental control switch and the windshield heat. After collecting my wits, I queried ATC and asked them what altitude they wanted me at. They responded by authorizing me to descend to 4,000 feet. They did not indicate that I had busted my altitude or violated my clearance in any way, but I believe in all the confusion I may have...I continued to my destination and landed without further incident, somewhat shaken but nevertheless relieved to be safely on the ground....
Thinking back, I seriously doubt that being asked for ‘number of souls on board and fuel remaining’ did anything to help me deal with the emergency, but rather only served to distract me from the task at hand and increased my concern about my predicament...It certainly had no bearing on my situation and did nothing to help me resolve the problem. At best, it only served to contribute to the confusion and provided an unnecessary distraction....
ATC requests fuel/passenger information primarily so that it can be forwarded to Crash Fire Rescue (CFR) personnel at the airport where an emergency landing might take place. CFR is very anxious to have this information, as it allows them to act on an informed basis regarding:
CFR also has detailed information on equipment types and passenger loads that can predict where passengers will be exiting an aircraft. This allows them to concentrate their fire suppression efforts where they will do the most good.
So if you are involved in an emergency, remember that ATC is asking these questions for a good reason—to be able to provide optimal Crash Fire Rescue assistance following an emergency landing.
Why ATC Declares an Emergency
For another ASRS reporter, erratic oil pressure readings led to an ATC declaration of an emergency.
Air traffic controllers operate under the instructions provided in Order 7110.65S (Air Traffic Control Manual). Section 10-1-1-d of this manual states, “...When you believe an emergency exists or is imminent, select and pursue a course of action which appears to be most appropriate under the circumstances and which most nearly conforms to the instructions in this manual.”
Controllers are further instructed to “provide maximum assistance” to aircraft in distress, and to enlist emergency services and facilities “when the pilot requests or when you deem necessary.”
Controllers, in other words, must rely on their best judgement of when to declare an emergency for a pilot. Situations that merit an ATC emergency declaration include, but are not limited to, the following [Section 10-2-5 of the Air Traffic Control Manual]:
To return to our report example, erratic oil pressure readings may be symptomatic of a situation that could lead to a forced landing, whether or not the pilot thinks that is likely. ATC’s declaration of an emergency was understandable in this situation.
Hypoxia and Carbon Monoxide
Effects on Pilot Performance
Chapter 8 of the Aeronautical Information Manual, “Medical Facts for Pilots,” contains a wealth of information on conditions that can adversely affect pilot performance and fitness for flight. Among these are two conditions that are amply illustrated by ASRS incident reports—hypoxia and carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning. This month we look more closely at these conditions through the eyes of ASRS reporters who have “been there.”
Hypoxia
Hypoxia is a state of oxygen deficiency sufficient to impair functioning of the brain and other organs. Hypoxia from exposure to altitude is due to the reduced barometric pressure encountered at altitude. For optimum protection against hypoxia, Part 91 pilots are encouraged to use supplemental oxygen above 10,000 feet during the day, and above 5,000 feet at night (to prevent deterioration of night vision). Part 121 pilots must comply with more stringent regulations.
This BE35 pilot received a “real education” about hypoxia after flying for hours at 12,500 feet MSL
FAR 91.211 requires the use of supplemental oxygen at cabin pressure altitudes above 12,500 feet MSL up to and including 14,000 feet MSL for flight durations of more than 30 minutes.
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Poisoning
Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless, and tasteless gas contained in exhaust fumes. Most heaters in light aircraft work by air flowing over the exhaust manifold. Exhaust gases can escape through manifold cracks and seals, and enter the cockpit. A pilot who experiences symptoms of headache, drowsiness, or dizziness while using the heater should suspect carbon monoxide poisoning and immediately turn off the heater and open air vents.
Heads-up action by a flight instructor prevented a carbon monoxide poisoning incident from becoming worse.
Air carrier flight crews can also be exposed to exhaust fumes—and carbon monoxide poisoning—as this Captain’s report describes.
The reporter later learned that the right engine of this aircraft was replaced because the precise source of the carbon monoxide could not be determined.
ASRS Alerts Issued in March 2008 | |
---|---|
Subject
of Alert |
No. of Alerts |
Aircraft or aircraft equipment |
21 |
Airport facility or procedure |
13 |
ATC procedure or equipment |
8 |
Company policy |
1 |
TOTAL |
43 |
March 2008 Report Intake |
|
---|---|
Air Carrier/Air Taxi Pilots | 2,931 |
General Aviation Pilots | 853 |
Controllers | 145 |
Cabin/Mechanics/Military/Other | 303 |
TOTAL | 4,232 |