I don't know who you are, I don't know what you want. If you are looking for ransom, I can tell you I don't have money, but what I do have are a very particular set of skills, skills I have acquired over a very long career, skills that make me a nightmare for people like you..
My uncle was the Captain of this flight, I'm currently training to become a pilot so it was scary seeing some of the video footage but very proud of him and the crew and happy everyone got home safely!🙂
Pilots and ATC doing a good job at such a busy airport. Keeping passengers safe in an otherwise hectic business. Especially appreciate JetBlue waiting for sweep.
It would have been a bold call to crack on though wouldn't it?! "Nah we'll just go for it" - cue engine debris puncturing a couple of tires and a fuel tank...
Amazing work by everyone involved. Efficient. Kept asking for updates but respected the pilots needed time to process and do their checks etc. fills me with confidence that these people are this good 👍🏻
Couple of things are interesting. 1. Runway might be covered in bits of engine but you're cleared to take off if you want (?) 2. Is it a good idea to be squeezing off departures in front of a priority landing aircraft? What if one of them has a problem and they have to stop on the runway?
1: Good point, but its basically allowing the aircraft to assume responsibility rather than the airport. 2: Separate runway is the usual rule here, larger airports with 2+ runways generally use one for arrivals and one for departures. A good sign is 31 left means there is also a 31 right, there can also be a 31 center.
@@brianlacroix822 that's not really a fair call. China has several airports that are much larger than any in the US (they built them that way on purpose), and they actually have a very good track record on aircraft safety (better than the US). If you actually looked at the distribution of global flights, you'd see that south east asia and China has more air traffic than the rest of the world combined, so their ATC systems & training are definatly not lacking. The reason for shutting other runways isn't debris or anything else. Its safety related, airports don't have 2 seperate fire crews, if your emergency crew is engaged with an ongoing emergency, you can't afford the risk of having a 2nd, so you shut down until they are free. Also a fire on an aircraft often means people on the tarmac, people who are not usually supposed to be there, those people can wander and easily get into places you don't want them. Better to stop all traffic than risk someone hitting a panicked passenger who has run off.
@@cgi2002 ok look you admire china's dictatorship that's cool good for you. if you ever read a textbook you'd realize this and overbuilding infrastructure is not a symptom of competence. but they space planes like 15 miles apart and you can only fly military airspace lanes therefore there's an airspace capacity issue to the point that it's regular to have departures at 0230 and 0315 on weekdays. it's not safety related it's incompetence related
Seems to be a compressor stall or engine surge. That would produce abnormal indications and flames; but it's not the same as a fire. Essentially, the fuel to air mixture in the engine is wrong or the airflow through the engine is disturbed, mostly at high levels of thrust. I love the calm voice and way ATC and the pilots dealt with it. If the types of engine malfunction that can occur interests you, check out "Turbofan Engine Malfunctions Recognition and Response." Even if you don't fly, it is a decent watch and shows good footage of compressor stalls on a 747.
@@AEMoreira81 - not necessarily, maybe just a compressor wash. The pilots also said that they had 2 good engines, so it didn’t manifest itself for long, whatever it was.
I was actually on this flight. From watching lots of these videos and other aviation videos it did sound and feel like a compressor stall. It was quite a few violent stalls though and it shook the aircraft a bit like heavy turbulence. However once it stopped and we levelled out it seemed smooth all the way in, even with the landing which was obviously heavier than normal.
Possible engine fire and the guy sounds like he's sitting at his local with a pint of Guinness and not a care in the World. I want that guy to be my pilot if I ever fly Aer Lingus.
Finally, a proper PANPAN call in US airspace, even if it was by a European carrier. It shows how rare these are as ATC didn't register it and had to ask whether they declare an emergency
@@buckhorncortez ☝🏼☝🏼☝🏼 this this this. The only people that seem to get their shorts in a twist over terminology are folks sitting at home and commenting on the internet. As long as ATC and the flight crews are communicating the essential information to each other that’s all that really matters at the end of that day.
I'm amazed as to how Kennedy Tower allowed several departures to take off before a landing with possible engine fire. Seems to be standard procedure in the US, as ATC in Germany I'm required to allow for a 20NM gap before an emergency arrival in case of a take-off abort.
Granted, but remember that these videos are edited, so what may seem like only seconds delay (to us, the viewers) between the pilots and ATCs actually takes place over several minutes. There was probably a 5 minute pause in comms b/t the pilot/ATC after the pilot said "standby" so that he could run his checklists. Cheers.
That's true, but around JFK is crazy busy airspace and they can't afford to not know what is happening. I think the Lingus guys were smart to get a heading ASAP and let ATC point them out of the way.
What I take away from these is, despite how crazy some incidents are (this isn't even that crazy), that there is so much redundancy in the planes and the crews are extremely talented.
I think US ATC tend to treat a PAN PAN the same as they would a MAYDAY - and for good reason. Lessons learned the hard way after the tragedy of Swissair flight 111.
*JFK TWR:* JetBlue 1723, we're checking for FOD. Would you like to takeoff and clean that up for us? *JB1723:* Nah, fam. We'll wait right here, thank you.
For those that aren't Pilots...we practice EXACTLY this emergency countless times...to the point that as long as the Engine isn't burning its way through the wing, that there's really not a big deal when this happens.
@@Lerxstification As TO weights on larger aircraft are larger than landing weights. Hence the need to dump fuel to bring the weight down to safe landing weight.
@@RichPAFC1987 This a/c did not dump fuel. ANY plane, regardless of size, weighs more at TO than landing, regardless of the time spent in the air. Why didn't he dump?
@@Lerxstification The plane can have a maximum weight of about 185,000 kg at landing and they probably didn't need more fuel for a flight to Ireland from JFK to go over that.
Strange that the ITA605 was cleared onto the runway with the emergency aircraft on a 9 mile final. The last thing the Shamrock would need is a "Go Around" if the departing ITA605 had a slow departure or a problem. Surely a wait of a minute or two would have been better.
Now, THAT'S how it's done!! Well done, ATC, well done! And, thanks again, Victor, for including the overlays -- they really do help with everything. Superb job, as always! If I were the Tower controller, the only thing I *might* have done differently, would be to sequence ITA605 to take off after Shamrock 106's landing, just in case '106 had to go around. Regardless, the separation between the aircraft was more than adequate, and safety was never in question. Without changing the above sequencing, three alternative scenarios were probable: 1. ITA605 taking too long to initiate their takeoff roll, 2. ITA605 aborting takeoff before V1, or 3. Shamrock 106 executing a go-around as EIN605 took off. For 1 & 2, Tower would simply have'106 execute a go around. For 3, Tower would do what they normally do when a plane goes missed approach. The only benefit of sequencing ITA605 after EIN106, would be that ATC's workload would be less intense if '106 executed a missed. However, with *all* things considered, including no recent go-arounds for 31L, ATC was stellar in handling this incident!
I thought the same, but then I thought if ITA605 did abort takeoff or something similar, maybe Shamrock could sidestep to 31R? Although if I were the controller I wouldn't want to put extra workload on a crew already dealing with an engine issue so I'd have made ITA605 wait. Disclaimer: I'm not an ATC so happy to be corrected
I thought ITA605 should have been told to hold short and wait. Why did the controller risk the A330 (that had a potentially faulty engine) perhaps have to go-around where full thrust might have been necessary, and a delayed landing certain? The safer approach would have been to let the A330 land as soon as possible, without the risk of a potential go around, by making the waiting aircraft on the ground (both such aircraft perhaps) wait until after the A330 had landed. Can you imagine the trouble there would have been if the A330 had had to go around and then suffered a calamity during its second climb, circuit or approach? Poor judgment by ATC me thinks, despite it "just" being a Pan. (I'm a private pilot btw, that has flown a full Mayday. I really don't think that many controllers get enough training in how to handle in-flight emergencies.)
Now imagine Itarrow 605 or JetBlue 1723 having a rejected takeoff and unable to clear the runway in time (burst tires from the debris the sweep car accidentaly missed or something). Now Shamrock has to do overweight go-around on possibly just one engine. I mean, it's a bit of a stretch and it's only a panpan, but I am still not sure whether the cumulative savings of 10-15 minutes of the two departures were really worth it.
Aren’t they supposed to keep this runway clear till Air Lingus has landed? In case of rejected takeoff by another aircraft the runway would be blocked and Air Lingus would have to go around which is undesired in this case.
I was going to say so. Where I work, no one takes off 15NM before the emergency landing traffic. We have paralell runways too, and even no departures from the paralell one if the traffic is 5NM on final
This is true, but I believe that since Aer Lingus reported both engines operating normally I guess they figured it was safe. Kennedy guys are almost always spot on with these things 🤷♂️
@@fly2golf985 Sounds to me like spinning plates for extra money, add an extra plate or 2 = a bit more extra money. Oh except if ya drop a plate, someone(s) can die.
Shamrock heavy declared PANPAN PANPAN PANPAN Good for them 👋, following ICAO Urgency procedures. It's a pity that JFK doesn't understand the difference between Urgency and Mayday
Because there isn’t one. We’re not on the high seas where a mayday might command other ships to steam towards the vessel in distress to pick up passengers. If you say you’ve got engine trouble and you’re coming back to the airport, you’re going to get the same handling either way. The entire pan vs. mayday distinction is archaic and pointless.
There was a delta flight DL312 that flew from JFK intended to honolulu, but diverted back after 2 hours. Do you know anything about that @vasaAviation - ?
JFK tower sounds just like Maggie's instructor (from the VASA video a few years back, where a 17 year old student pilot solo, Maggie, lost her landing gear on takeoff)
Two things I have picked up listening to these May Day declarations on here. One is that all pilots are very reluctant to declare an emergency. So much so that you would think they receive demerits for declaring one. The other thing is that the ATC always wants the fuel amount in pounds, but it is usually reported in time remaining by the pilots. You would think there would be a univrsal standard for reporting these things. It would save time and eliminate confusion.
That's not quite on point. The consequences for not declaring an emergency when there is one is greater but the whole "declaring an emergency" is a very US thing. A "Mayday" is an emergency by default, a Pan-Pan as well more or less. As an Aussie flying in the US after flying in Australia and throughout Asia the US is fairly non standard with a few things. For example most SOPs will say an "emergency" is anything requiring the emergency section of the QRH. Something like an overweight landing in an A320/21 and A330 isn't listed under emergency procedures as it's considered an abnormal one and treated as such. In the US it's overkill and becomes an "Emergency". Various scenarios come to play etc but it's a bit like saying a student practicing flapless landings in the circuit was "Emergency", doesn't make much sense. Even a contained engine failure at KA was treated as a Pan call in the SOPs.
Funny enough my Mams friend who is a flight attendant was on that flight and heard 4 big bangs and she looked out the window and seen fire from the engine and had to run and tell the pilot and they had to make the emergency landing she said it was such a scary situation
Technically there is no "overweight " aircraft or limit...at least not with transport level aircraft...the gear is built to take the load...at least in my aircraft (737/767)
@@Bigsky1991 got it. Ya was thinking of times when commercial are “required”? to return to airport and prior request to burn or dump fuel prior to landing.
@@Bigsky1991 Technically there is. The A330 MTOW is 535,500 pounds, while the MLW is 412,300 pounds. Similarly, the 764 has an MTOW rating of 450,000 lbs while the MLW is 350,000. And the 738 has an MTOW of 174,170 lbs and a MLW of 146,275 lbs. It’s not an issue of the landing gear at all. The landing gear can withstand impacts greater than MTOW being slammed into a deck. It’s an issue of other components like the hull. Every pilot knows this. Thereby you’re lying.
Technically you need to be qualified to make technical pronouncements, when I did my _Performance A_ class one student had failed the exam nine times previously. Big plane performance is HARD.
I didn't know Liam Neeson flew for Aer Lingus. In all seriousness, I thought during an emergency, ATC wanted fuel given in terms of flight time instead of pounds, or is that incorrect? Also, tower cleared Jet Blue and Itarro for takeoff from 31L with the troubled jet on a long final. Though they did not declare an emergency, they asked for emergency vehicles to be standing by. I am surprised tower cleared Jet Blue and Itarro for takeoff. If something happened to them on takeoff, such as a rejected takeoff, blown tire, etc., that could put Aer Lingus in jeopardy by having to force them into a go around. I suppose they could sidestep to 31R, but then they have a shorter runway, might hot have their performance calculated for that runway, etc.
Always amazes me that airports run departures right before an inbound emergency is due to land. I understand JFK is super busy and any delay causes major problems but this doesn't compare to the life-threatening challenge of an emergency even if you think it's all just a precaution. I also remain confused as to why the US still is able to dictate imperial measurements over metric given that the overwhelming majority of the world uses metric. The absurdity of having to covert metric tons to pounds makes no sense nor does it to use feet to measure altitude rather than meters.
I often wonder how English second language pilots can understand some JFK ATCs, the first controller sounded robotic talking at near fast forward, by contrast the latter ATCs were easy to follow.
There seems to be some disagreement regarding the proper, or improper, use of the ICAO distress call "PAN-PAN". Not being an expert in the field, but appreciating the importance of shared terminology that is mutually understood, I asked ChatGPT, because that is what one does these days to get arbitration.... Here's what it came back with: "In aviation, the word "pan-pan" is used as a distress signal. It is used to indicate a situation that is urgent, but not necessarily life-threatening. Examples of situations that might warrant a pan-pan call to air traffic control (ATC) include: An engine failure or other mechanical problem that requires immediate attention A navigation or communication system malfunction A medical emergency on board the aircraft A fuel emergency, such as running low on fuel or having a fuel leak Here are some examples of how a pan-pan call might be used in aircraft-to-ATC communications: Example 1: Pilot: "Seattle Center, this is Delta Romeo Four Five Six Seven, pan-pan, pan-pan. We have an engine failure and are declaring an emergency." Example 2: Pilot: "Boston Approach, this is Niner Three Two One, pan-pan, pan-pan. We have a medical emergency on board and need to land as soon as possible." Example 3: Pilot: "Chicago Tower, this is Bravo Tango Six Five Four, pan-pan, pan-pan. We have a fuel leak and need to divert to the nearest airport." In each of these examples, the pilot uses the word "pan-pan" twice to indicate the urgency of the situation. The pilot then provides additional information about the specific problem and the actions they need to take."
Whilst there are times when ICAO phraseology may be advisable (particularly if one of the parties is not a native English speaker for example), but so long as there is clear communication with full understanding on both sides that is what is key here. As a pilot (mere PPL) who flys in both the U.K. and the US, it is far more common for ATC in the US to declare an emergency on behalf of the flight crew in my experience.
"but so long as there is clear communication with full understanding on both sides that is what is key here." The problem is that both side might not realize the communication wasn't clear until there is a problem. There is a reason the proper communication is specific.
@@HitechProductions I could not agree more. The whole point of ICAO standard phraseology is not so that the people speaking are understood by others, but instead so that there is minimal chance of them being misunderstood! That subtle difference is important all the time and especially so during emergencies and during times when the airport resembles a busy beehive...
When atc asked 2:49 if he wanted to declare an emergency, pilot replied it's a Pan call.... I thought a pan pan is declaring an emergency? What's the difference?
Yeah, in indian country - US - don't use ICAO 'Pan" like the rest of the world. Just declare an emergency. Nice that the Shamrock didn't bother with the fuel in pounds rubbish.... Leave that conversion to someone with a lower workload. JFK ATC, busy as they are, in my experience create much of their own stress. Better when they slow down and lose the attitude - as exhibited by some here -well done those!
![ละลาย (LALALYE) - DAOU PITTAYA ต้าห์อู๋ พิทยา [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wo6r9TgausI/mqdefault.jpg)
Untrimmed version: available soon
That Itarrow pilot is the most Italian sounding man I've ever heard
😂😂😂
You must be from Iowa
'itsa me, itarrow sixa zero fyve a heavy lineup and a waiting runnaway 3-1 lefta'
@@Dingosean 🤣🤣
Liam Neeson looking for his problem, finding it and killing it. 100/10.
I don't know who you are, I don't know what you want. If you are looking for ransom, I can tell you I don't have money, but what I do have are a very particular set of skills, skills I have acquired over a very long career, skills that make me a nightmare for people like you..
Thank you! Was just thinking that he had a particular set of skills...
@@johndaly9843 Good Luck!
That's definitely an Antrim accent.
I thought down deff not Derry or Tyrone or Fermanagh ☘️☘️☘️
The air space overlay on the map was great, very instructive, we’ll done on all parts
Thank you!
I agree.
Great job remaining calm. Saying what he wanted/needed. ATC doing great as support as well
Calm? He sounded bored! 😂😂
My uncle was the Captain of this flight, I'm currently training to become a pilot so it was scary seeing some of the video footage but very proud of him and the crew and happy everyone got home safely!🙂
Did he mention the actual problem?
@@saito125 Pretty much the same as the FO says on the comms to ATC, no indication of any issues for them!
I'm glad your uncle was ok as everyone else on board , thank goodness ❤
is he a Nordie like me or was that the FO?
My god that pilot was so calm, props to them.
That’s their job. Should they not be calm they’d be fired and prosecuted.
No matter how hard you try, you will never be as relaxed as this pilot
He's Irish,if we were any more laid back we'd fall.
I’m way more laid back
He sounds very disappointed in his aeroplane.
Just another boring day in the office.
Pilots and ATC doing a good job at such a busy airport. Keeping passengers safe in an otherwise hectic business. Especially appreciate JetBlue waiting for sweep.
It would have been a bold call to crack on though wouldn't it?! "Nah we'll just go for it" - cue engine debris puncturing a couple of tires and a fuel tank...
I'm surprised why the tower was giving B6 an option to take off even before the runway sweep. Ridiculous.
Proud of our pilots ☘
I flew Aer Lingus to Dublin. Great flight.
GOBSHITE!!!!!
@@johncoyle8139 not a nice comment
@@corglass 😁😁😁😁
For once, I can understand Kennedy ATC. Slow, concise, and clear
That itarrow on departure at the end😍 pretty rare to hear that beautiful italian accent on this videos. By the way, great job as usual!!
Amazing work by everyone involved. Efficient. Kept asking for updates but respected the pilots needed time to process and do their checks etc. fills me with confidence that these people are this good 👍🏻
Couple of things are interesting.
1. Runway might be covered in bits of engine but you're cleared to take off if you want (?)
2. Is it a good idea to be squeezing off departures in front of a priority landing aircraft? What if one of them has a problem and they have to stop on the runway?
Welcome to american ATC.
1: Good point, but its basically allowing the aircraft to assume responsibility rather than the airport.
2: Separate runway is the usual rule here, larger airports with 2+ runways generally use one for arrivals and one for departures. A good sign is 31 left means there is also a 31 right, there can also be a 31 center.
this is nyc not china they can handle the traffic. and just because there's an engine fire doesn't mean there's debris or fod.
@@brianlacroix822 that's not really a fair call. China has several airports that are much larger than any in the US (they built them that way on purpose), and they actually have a very good track record on aircraft safety (better than the US). If you actually looked at the distribution of global flights, you'd see that south east asia and China has more air traffic than the rest of the world combined, so their ATC systems & training are definatly not lacking.
The reason for shutting other runways isn't debris or anything else. Its safety related, airports don't have 2 seperate fire crews, if your emergency crew is engaged with an ongoing emergency, you can't afford the risk of having a 2nd, so you shut down until they are free.
Also a fire on an aircraft often means people on the tarmac, people who are not usually supposed to be there, those people can wander and easily get into places you don't want them. Better to stop all traffic than risk someone hitting a panicked passenger who has run off.
@@cgi2002 ok look you admire china's dictatorship that's cool good for you. if you ever read a textbook you'd realize this and overbuilding infrastructure is not a symptom of competence. but they space planes like 15 miles apart and you can only fly military airspace lanes therefore there's an airspace capacity issue to the point that it's regular to have departures at 0230 and 0315 on weekdays. it's not safety related it's incompetence related
Seems to be a compressor stall or engine surge. That would produce abnormal indications and flames; but it's not the same as a fire. Essentially, the fuel to air mixture in the engine is wrong or the airflow through the engine is disturbed, mostly at high levels of thrust. I love the calm voice and way ATC and the pilots dealt with it. If the types of engine malfunction that can occur interests you, check out "Turbofan Engine Malfunctions Recognition and Response." Even if you don't fly, it is a decent watch and shows good footage of compressor stalls on a 747.
Ultimately, a new engine has to be installed there.
@@AEMoreira81 - not necessarily, maybe just a compressor wash. The pilots also said that they had 2 good engines, so it didn’t manifest itself for long, whatever it was.
I was actually on this flight. From watching lots of these videos and other aviation videos it did sound and feel like a compressor stall. It was quite a few violent stalls though and it shook the aircraft a bit like heavy turbulence. However once it stopped and we levelled out it seemed smooth all the way in, even with the landing which was obviously heavier than normal.
Possible engine fire and the guy sounds like he's sitting at his local with a pint of Guinness and not a care in the World. I want that guy to be my pilot if I ever fly Aer Lingus.
Not me... he is terrible on the radio and probably full of himself. The worst kind.
@@danielleclare2938 But he was perfectly fine on the radio? Calm and communicated well.
I've only flow Aer Lingus once but it was a super pleasant flight -- Dubrovok to Seattle via Dublin.
@@danielleclare2938 how is he terrible? if any communication is to blame its the ATC not understanding the terminology of PAN PAN
@@fastfaps slow distracted and inarticulate. Not proper radio comm.
Finally, a proper PANPAN call in US airspace, even if it was by a European carrier.
It shows how rare these are as ATC didn't register it and had to ask whether they declare an emergency
The only people that care are on Internet comment sections...ATC just has a job to do...
@@buckhorncortez ☝🏼☝🏼☝🏼 this this this. The only people that seem to get their shorts in a twist over terminology are folks sitting at home and commenting on the internet. As long as ATC and the flight crews are communicating the essential information to each other that’s all that really matters at the end of that day.
@@davidpearson3304 @buckhorncortez read page 19 on Emergency Communications www.skybrary.aero/sites/default/files/bookshelf/115.pdf
@@davidpearson3304 are you declaring an emergency?
Comms in the US are a joke. Always far too much chit chat. Quite a contrast to the UK where it remains professional far more often than not.
I couldn't be as relaxed as this pilot even if I was lying on a sunbed sipping a mojito.
Exactly why I feel like I could never be a pilot. Anxiety is a bad idea in the cockpit.
He had an almost buddha approach to the situation.. which is exactly what you want.
Calm careful and to the point. Well done, who could ask for better?
I'm amazed as to how Kennedy Tower allowed several departures to take off before a landing with possible engine fire. Seems to be standard procedure in the US, as ATC in Germany I'm required to allow for a 20NM gap before an emergency arrival in case of a take-off abort.
Kennedy controllers are solid. This captain has done this so many times in a simulator.
You can't get more Italian accent than that itarrow 🇮🇹
I think if you respond to ATC with nothing but "standby" they'll actually leave you alone for more than five seconds so you can work on your problem.
Granted, but remember that these videos are edited, so what may seem like only seconds delay (to us, the viewers) between the pilots and ATCs actually takes place over several minutes. There was probably a 5 minute pause in comms b/t the pilot/ATC after the pilot said "standby" so that he could run his checklists. Cheers.
@@jamesrau100 Is the top left time? If so he got 10 seconds to troubleshoot before ATC said "whatever you need let me know"
That's true, but around JFK is crazy busy airspace and they can't afford to not know what is happening. I think the Lingus guys were smart to get a heading ASAP and let ATC point them out of the way.
You might be shocked at what ATC can tell by your voice in your transmission -- I did the job for 20 years.
@@MCMXI1 Yeah I don't know if anyone can take aim at the ATC here, it sounded like both sides followed the book professionally.
Me sitting on the boarding gate watching VASAviation videos: 😳
What I take away from these is, despite how crazy some incidents are (this isn't even that crazy), that there is so much redundancy in the planes and the crews are extremely talented.
I think US ATC tend to treat a PAN PAN the same as they would a MAYDAY - and for good reason. Lessons learned the hard way after the tragedy of Swissair flight 111.
EI-EAV flew back to Dublin on the 30th. As of January 2nd it’s still not back in service
*JFK TWR:* JetBlue 1723, we're checking for FOD. Would you like to takeoff and clean that up for us?
*JB1723:* Nah, fam. We'll wait right here, thank you.
😂😂
Spirit: Lets go for it!
Exactly what I was thinking. TWR still working the business angle of pushing tin.
Thinking all the poor souls on that Concorde that ran over sharp debris.
@@nitehawk86 Yeah, we just got new tires and it's a long way to Cancun.
Love the beautiful quiet calm voice.
For those that aren't Pilots...we practice EXACTLY this emergency countless times...to the point that as long as the Engine isn't burning its way through the wing, that there's really not a big deal when this happens.
why do some flights dump fuel before the emergency landing, and others, like here, just land?
@@Lerxstification As TO weights on larger aircraft are larger than landing weights. Hence the need to dump fuel to bring the weight down to safe landing weight.
@@RichPAFC1987 This a/c did not dump fuel. ANY plane, regardless of size, weighs more at TO than landing, regardless of the time spent in the air. Why didn't he dump?
@@Lerxstification runway length at jfk
@@Lerxstification The plane can have a maximum weight of about 185,000 kg at landing and they probably didn't need more fuel for a flight to Ireland from JFK to go over that.
Was there at the airport, sounded like Thunder. Was so confused to not see any rain or thunderstorm on forcast. Glad everything worked out
He had the same composure and gusto as I do in the morning before I've gotten out of bed..
Strange that the ITA605 was cleared onto the runway with the emergency aircraft on a 9 mile final. The last thing the Shamrock would need is a "Go Around" if the departing ITA605 had a slow departure or a problem. Surely a wait of a minute or two would have been better.
Never knew Liam Neeson was a pilot for Aer Lingus.
Was Jim Browning flying this plane?
Checked comments before posting this, good work. 10/10.
No - it was Liam Neeson
Now, THAT'S how it's done!! Well done, ATC, well done! And, thanks again, Victor, for including the overlays -- they really do help with everything. Superb job, as always!
If I were the Tower controller, the only thing I *might* have done differently, would be to sequence ITA605 to take off after Shamrock 106's landing, just in case '106 had to go around. Regardless, the separation between the aircraft was more than adequate, and safety was never in question.
Without changing the above sequencing, three alternative scenarios were probable: 1. ITA605 taking too long to initiate their takeoff roll, 2. ITA605 aborting takeoff before V1, or 3. Shamrock 106 executing a go-around as EIN605 took off. For 1 & 2, Tower would simply have'106 execute a go around. For 3, Tower would do what they normally do when a plane goes missed approach. The only benefit of sequencing ITA605 after EIN106, would be that ATC's workload would be less intense if '106 executed a missed. However, with *all* things considered, including no recent go-arounds for 31L, ATC was stellar in handling this incident!
I thought the same, but then I thought if ITA605 did abort takeoff or something similar, maybe Shamrock could sidestep to 31R? Although if I were the controller I wouldn't want to put extra workload on a crew already dealing with an engine issue so I'd have made ITA605 wait. Disclaimer: I'm not an ATC so happy to be corrected
I thought ITA605 should have been told to hold short and wait. Why did the controller risk the A330 (that had a potentially faulty engine) perhaps have to go-around where full thrust might have been necessary, and a delayed landing certain? The safer approach would have been to let the A330 land as soon as possible, without the risk of a potential go around, by making the waiting aircraft on the ground (both such aircraft perhaps) wait until after the A330 had landed. Can you imagine the trouble there would have been if the A330 had had to go around and then suffered a calamity during its second climb, circuit or approach? Poor judgment by ATC me thinks, despite it "just" being a Pan. (I'm a private pilot btw, that has flown a full Mayday. I really don't think that many controllers get enough training in how to handle in-flight emergencies.)
I'm sitting here watching this trying to make adjustments to my STARS console -- nicely done on the graphics!
"Shamrock 107 heavy say intentions"
"Intentions"
Liam Neeson killing it in his new career
Airline pilots are trained not for the 99.99% of things that go right, but for the 0.01% of things which go wrong. This pilot was amazing
Now imagine Itarrow 605 or JetBlue 1723 having a rejected takeoff and unable to clear the runway in time (burst tires from the debris the sweep car accidentaly missed or something). Now Shamrock has to do overweight go-around on possibly just one engine. I mean, it's a bit of a stretch and it's only a panpan, but I am still not sure whether the cumulative savings of 10-15 minutes of the two departures were really worth it.
Let's check it out....✈️
So if ITA603 had to reject they’d make the emergency aircraft go around. 😮
Aren’t they supposed to keep this runway clear till Air Lingus has landed? In case of rejected takeoff by another aircraft the runway would be blocked and Air Lingus would have to go around which is undesired in this case.
I was going to say so. Where I work, no one takes off 15NM before the emergency landing traffic. We have paralell runways too, and even no departures from the paralell one if the traffic is 5NM on final
This is true, but I believe that since Aer Lingus reported both engines operating normally I guess they figured it was safe. Kennedy guys are almost always spot on with these things 🤷♂️
@@fly2golf985 Sounds to me like spinning plates for extra money, add an extra plate or 2 = a bit more extra money. Oh except if ya drop a plate, someone(s) can die.
@@no_rubbernecking true true
@@fly2golf985 👍🏼
Shamrock heavy declared PANPAN PANPAN PANPAN
Good for them 👋, following ICAO Urgency procedures. It's a pity that JFK doesn't understand the difference between Urgency and Mayday
Because there isn’t one. We’re not on the high seas where a mayday might command other ships to steam towards the vessel in distress to pick up passengers. If you say you’ve got engine trouble and you’re coming back to the airport, you’re going to get the same handling either way. The entire pan vs. mayday distinction is archaic and pointless.
Thank you very much!🙂
There was a delta flight DL312 that flew from JFK intended to honolulu, but diverted back after 2 hours. Do you know anything about that @vasaAviation - ?
Yeah… major turbulence.
JFK tower sounds just like Maggie's instructor (from the VASA video a few years back, where a 17 year old student pilot solo, Maggie, lost her landing gear on takeoff)
Legendary photo from flight radar
Great job 👍🏽🇺🇸
Out here in SLC early in the morning on January 7th we had a FedEx emergency landing. Something to look into maybe 👍🏼
Scary D: glad all the 313 souls are safe and sound ^^
Ny is the best for everything especially ATC great job
Our big Liam a pilot now ☘️
Two things I have picked up listening to these May Day declarations on here. One is that all pilots are very reluctant to declare an emergency. So much so that you would think they receive demerits for declaring one. The other thing is that the ATC always wants the fuel amount in pounds, but it is usually reported in time remaining by the pilots. You would think there would be a univrsal standard for reporting these things. It would save time and eliminate confusion.
That's not quite on point. The consequences for not declaring an emergency when there is one is greater but the whole "declaring an emergency" is a very US thing. A "Mayday" is an emergency by default, a Pan-Pan as well more or less. As an Aussie flying in the US after flying in Australia and throughout Asia the US is fairly non standard with a few things. For example most SOPs will say an "emergency" is anything requiring the emergency section of the QRH. Something like an overweight landing in an A320/21 and A330 isn't listed under emergency procedures as it's considered an abnormal one and treated as such. In the US it's overkill and becomes an "Emergency". Various scenarios come to play etc but it's a bit like saying a student practicing flapless landings in the circuit was "Emergency", doesn't make much sense. Even a contained engine failure at KA was treated as a Pan call in the SOPs.
@@goodshipkaraboudjan Good information, thank you.
Howard stern did a great job on the tower
Thought Howard Stern got a job at Kennedy there at the end
Haha same!
For all he said it wasn't an emergency, they got it back on the ground with no significant wasted time.
Very well handled by Ireland’s best as some of them are ex air corps! Plus as the time of typing this the views are at 333 the A330-300
Oh yes the air corps are unbelievable. Lots of ex-jet fighter pilots🤣
I never heard such nonsense.....
Sur aren't we great!
Everyone loves us🙄
@@fredhealy3416 actually no offence you sound like a fun person at parties I mean that they have a highest turn over of ex servicemen and women
@@johncoyle8139 🙄🙄🙄
@@fredhealy3416 I know there’s a video of their ex air corps recruitment drive
Im in Ireland rn leaving on Friday. Thanks for the video. Really looking forward to being the next one-
That last ATC sounded like Howard Stern! Lol
The ATC guy sounds almost exactly like the controller who was dealing with Cactus 1549. His voice is rather recognizable.
ATC voice, they mostly sound very similar.
@@cageordie Wrong. In this case it is the same controller.
@@mikek5298 They still mostly sound the same, so not wrong, despite how good you felt about correcting someone on the Internet.
Kennedy Steve?
Patrick Harten
at 2mins 12s the captain said: "313 passengers onboard and..gross weight 200 tons"
Shamrock 106 sounds like a radio station.
If it doesn't exist we'll have to invent it
Playing the Dropkick Murphys 24/7, this is South Boston's favourite, Shamrock 106 FM.
@@eroche913 Maybe a bit of The Pogues and The Gloaming from time to time?
Nice to hear Al Michaels at JFK tower! xD
2 Helicopters collided on the Gold Coast QLD Australia 🇦🇺 Would be interesting if you can pull anything
Funny enough my Mams friend who is a flight attendant was on that flight and heard 4 big bangs and she looked out the window and seen fire from the engine and had to run and tell the pilot and they had to make the emergency landing she said it was such a scary situation
Would you happen to have the ATC communications for HA 12 landing at SFO today? There was a double go around
Please upload the Delta sliding off the taxiway.
Imagine that was pretty heavy to land. Lot of fuel left onboard.
Technically there is no "overweight " aircraft or limit...at least not with transport level aircraft...the gear is built to take the load...at least in my aircraft (737/767)
@@Bigsky1991 got it. Ya was thinking of times when commercial are “required”? to return to airport and prior request to burn or dump fuel prior to landing.
@@Bigsky1991 Technically there is. The A330 MTOW is 535,500 pounds, while the MLW is 412,300 pounds.
Similarly, the 764 has an MTOW rating of 450,000 lbs while the MLW is 350,000.
And the 738 has an MTOW of 174,170 lbs and a MLW of 146,275 lbs.
It’s not an issue of the landing gear at all. The landing gear can withstand impacts greater than MTOW being slammed into a deck. It’s an issue of other components like the hull.
Every pilot knows this. Thereby you’re lying.
Technically you need to be qualified to make technical pronouncements, when I did my _Performance A_ class one student had failed the exam nine times previously. Big plane performance is HARD.
Sounds like the same controller who worked cactus 1549 miracle in the Hudson
Was that ground control Steve? At the end?
I didn't know Liam Neeson flew for Aer Lingus.
In all seriousness, I thought during an emergency, ATC wanted fuel given in terms of flight time instead of pounds, or is that incorrect? Also, tower cleared Jet Blue and Itarro for takeoff from 31L with the troubled jet on a long final. Though they did not declare an emergency, they asked for emergency vehicles to be standing by. I am surprised tower cleared Jet Blue and Itarro for takeoff. If something happened to them on takeoff, such as a rejected takeoff, blown tire, etc., that could put Aer Lingus in jeopardy by having to force them into a go around. I suppose they could sidestep to 31R, but then they have a shorter runway, might hot have their performance calculated for that runway, etc.
Couldn’t even tell he was in trouble
Funny how he realised who he was after knowing he had an issue....
Wait wasn’t this aircraft the same as the one with cabin smoke?
what is it with Aer Lingus A330's engines and JFK...
44 tonnes from JFK to Dublin ? on climb out sound right ?
Big Liam Neeson had the situation under control
Hmm, Shamrock just had another right engine issue up at KBDL. Same bird?
any chance to have timestaps in the captions?
would make timing more understandable
Clock is top left
@@VASAviation LOL! Finally I noticed this!!
So is the number under their aircraft designation the altitude? Because it doesn't look like it always matches what they're saying.
Couldn’t drink a Guinness fast enough
Those pilots were very cunning. In fact I think it’s a pre-requisite
He didn't have to dump any fuel?
And here I am still pissed off at Aer Lingus about my missing luggage.
Always amazes me that airports run departures right before an inbound emergency is due to land. I understand JFK is super busy and any delay causes major problems but this doesn't compare to the life-threatening challenge of an emergency even if you think it's all just a precaution. I also remain confused as to why the US still is able to dictate imperial measurements over metric given that the overwhelming majority of the world uses metric. The absurdity of having to covert metric tons to pounds makes no sense nor does it to use feet to measure altitude rather than meters.
Itarrow is the most Italian sound Italian ever
I often wonder how English second language pilots can understand some JFK ATCs, the first controller sounded robotic talking at near fast forward, by contrast the latter ATCs were easy to follow.
Terrible local culture, they should be re-trained.
Damm shamrock, need a muff on that microphone
He was too busy to get up to that type of stuff.🤭
That one ATC sounded like Frank Gifford lol
No dumping fuel?
Small error at 3:55 audio says 6000 but subtitle says 4000.
There seems to be some disagreement regarding the proper, or improper, use of the ICAO distress call "PAN-PAN". Not being an expert in the field, but appreciating the importance of shared terminology that is mutually understood, I asked ChatGPT, because that is what one does these days to get arbitration.... Here's what it came back with:
"In aviation, the word "pan-pan" is used as a distress signal. It is used to indicate a situation that is urgent, but not necessarily life-threatening. Examples of situations that might warrant a pan-pan call to air traffic control (ATC) include:
An engine failure or other mechanical problem that requires immediate attention
A navigation or communication system malfunction
A medical emergency on board the aircraft
A fuel emergency, such as running low on fuel or having a fuel leak
Here are some examples of how a pan-pan call might be used in aircraft-to-ATC communications:
Example 1: Pilot: "Seattle Center, this is Delta Romeo Four Five Six Seven, pan-pan, pan-pan. We have an engine failure and are declaring an emergency."
Example 2: Pilot: "Boston Approach, this is Niner Three Two One, pan-pan, pan-pan. We have a medical emergency on board and need to land as soon as possible."
Example 3: Pilot: "Chicago Tower, this is Bravo Tango Six Five Four, pan-pan, pan-pan. We have a fuel leak and need to divert to the nearest airport."
In each of these examples, the pilot uses the word "pan-pan" twice to indicate the urgency of the situation. The pilot then provides additional information about the specific problem and the actions they need to take."
Whilst there are times when ICAO phraseology may be advisable (particularly if one of the parties is not a native English speaker for example), but so long as there is clear communication with full understanding on both sides that is what is key here.
As a pilot (mere PPL) who flys in both the U.K. and the US, it is far more common for ATC in the US to declare an emergency on behalf of the flight crew in my experience.
"but so long as there is clear communication with full understanding on both sides that is what is key here."
The problem is that both side might not realize the communication wasn't clear until there is a problem. There is a reason the proper communication is specific.
One unambiguous standard please, make cute local waffle _the wrong way._
@@HitechProductions I could not agree more. The whole point of ICAO standard phraseology is not so that the people speaking are understood by others, but instead so that there is minimal chance of them being misunderstood! That subtle difference is important all the time and especially so during emergencies and during times when the airport resembles a busy beehive...
Didnt realise Liam Neeson was a pilot
When atc asked 2:49 if he wanted to declare an emergency, pilot replied it's a Pan call.... I thought a pan pan is declaring an emergency? What's the difference?
Mayday is for life threatening emergencies and pan pan is non life threatening
Yeah, in indian country - US - don't use ICAO 'Pan" like the rest of the world. Just declare an emergency. Nice that the Shamrock didn't bother with the fuel in pounds rubbish.... Leave that conversion to someone with a lower workload. JFK ATC, busy as they are, in my experience create much of their own stress. Better when they slow down and lose the attitude - as exhibited by some here -well done those!
I was on this flight…. Damn
Fuel in pounds , is something European pilots won’t have instantly . I’d be like xxxxxx kilos, multiply by 2.2 yourself, I’m busy …
Compressor stall?
Possibly
The did respond that both engines were working fine, so maybe it was just some transient thing or unrelated to the engine entirely.
@@EdOeuna That's why I thinking compressor stall.
@@Boodieman72 - compressor stalls, generally, don’t go away unless you bring the thrust back and reduce the airflow through the engine.
@@EdOeuna Could have been one of the items on the checklists.
JFK TWR is not set up for NORN IRSH accent.