can you 'undeclare' an emergency?

[Badger]

Say you declare an emergency and ATC takes appropriate actions. Shortly thereafter your emergency resolves itself (maybe you checked the fuel switch and found it wasn't fully engaged so you click it into position).

Can ATC remove the 'emergency' status of your flight or are you obligated to land as soon as possible, fill out paperwork, etc?

 

[roncachamp]

Say you declare an emergency and ATC takes appropriate actions. Shortly thereafter your emergency resolves itself (maybe you checked the fuel switch and found it wasn't fully engaged so you click it into position).

Can ATC remove the 'emergency' status of your flight or are you obligated to land as soon as possible, fill out paperwork, etc?

You're not obligated to land as soon as possible in an emergency and there may not be any paperwork even if you don't un-declare.

 

[Gary F]

 

[Captain]

Yes, you can undeclare.

As an example, I was flying a CRJ into ORD once. There was a massive cell on our route and to the south. We were VMC at the time flying towards this thing. I asked for deviation to the noth and was told unable. We flew closer and I asked again and was again told unable due to departure traffic. This went on until we were finally right there and had to do something.

The FO had been working the comms and I took over for the transmission, "we are declaring an emergency and deviating to a heading of 350". The controller acknowledged and nothing further was said about it. We cleared the cell and resumed our arrival, so, in effect, we undeclared even though the words weren't actually said. We just started to comply with instructions again.

I filled out a company ASAP report over it but nothing else ever came of it.

 

[SkyHog]

Yes, you can undeclare.

As an example, I was flying a CRJ into ORD once. There was a massive cell on our route and to the south. We were VMC at the time flying towards this thing. I asked for deviation to the noth and was told unable. We flew closer and I asked again and was again told unable due to departure traffic. This went on until we were finally right there and had to do something.

The FO had been working the comms and I took over for the transmission, "we are declaring an emergency and deviating to a heading of 350". The controller acknowledged and nothing further was said about it. We cleared the cell and resumed our arrival, so, in effect, we undeclared even though the words weren't actually said. We just started to comply with instructions again.

I filled out a company ASAP report over it but nothing else ever came of it.

Why declare? Wouldn't it have been more appropriate to just say "we are deviating due to weather" rather than request a new heading? As PIC, you have that right (and obligation).

 

[Geico266]

Why declare? Wouldn't it have been more appropriate to just say "we are deviating due to weather" rather than request a new heading? As PIC, you have that right (and obligation).

Then there would have been no drama.

 

[roncachamp]

Why declare? Wouldn't it have been more appropriate to just say "we are deviating due to weather" rather than request a new heading? As PIC, you have that right (and obligation).

How does the PIC have that right outside of an emergency?

 

[SkyHog]

How does the PIC have that right outside of an emergency?

91.3 (a)

 

[overdrive148]

91.3 (a)

 

[midlifeflyer]

Say you declare an emergency and ATC takes appropriate actions. Shortly thereafter your emergency resolves itself (maybe you checked the fuel switch and found it wasn't fully engaged so you click it into position).

Can ATC remove the 'emergency' status of your flight or are you obligated to land as soon as possible, fill out paperwork, etc?

What is this "fill out paperwork" of which you speak?

Why declare? Wouldn't it have been more appropriate to just say "we are deviating due to weather" rather than request a new heading? As PIC, you have that right (and obligation).

There is a definite advantage in declaring the emergency in this situation after ATC denies the deviation. Practically speaking a denial will mean theres a traffic conflict. It provides additional evidence that there was one and, more importantly, tells ATC that what you do is necessary and they better get conflicting traffic out of your way.

There is a far greater likelihood of "paperwork" without the declaration if there is a loss of separation than with it.

And, of course, there's no rule that says that the event that resulted in the declaration is over, although there's some obvious enforcement risk if it was certain types of equipment failure.

 

[Velocity173]

91.3 (a)

Yeah, and it mentions in an emergency, deviation from the FARs is authorized. In Captain's situation, just because he asked to deviate for WX, that doesn't constitute an emergency. He took the situation as far as possible, then game over, he declared and deviate for the safety reasons. That's what 91.3 is all about. It doesn't mean that pilots can go do their own thing and disregard the rules without a declaration.

 

[SkyHog]

Yeah, and it mentions in an emergency, deviation from the FARs is authorized. In Captain's situation, just because he asked to deviate for WX, that doesn't constitute an emergency. He took the situation as far as possible, then game over, he declared and deviate for the safety reasons. That's what 91.3 is all about. It doesn't mean that pilots can go do their own thing and disregard the rules without a declaration.

Reread 91.3 (a) and tell me where it mentions that it only applies in an emergency...

 

[Corpsmaide]

I'd just say...siiiiiiike!

 

[poadeleted20]

Reread 91.3 (a) and tell me where it mentions that it only applies in an emergency...

I know it pretty well, and its says nothing which authorizes deviation from any regulation. Here is that section in its entirety:

Sec. 91.3

Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.
(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.
(c) Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under paragraph (b) of this section shall, upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.

The only thing paragraph (a) does with regard to deviations from the regulations is make the PIC responsible for any violation of a regulation during the operation of that aircraft. The only place you find PIC authority to deviate from the regulations is in paragraph (b), which directly ties that authority to an emergency situation.

In any event, all you need say to the controller once the situation is resolved and you no longer need unusual assistance or deviation from a regulation is "terminate the emergency".

 

[SkyHog]

I know it pretty well, and its says nothing which authorizes deviation from any regulation. Here is that section in its entirety:
The only thing paragraph (a) does with regard to deviations from the regulations is make the PIC responsible for any violation of a regulation during the operation of that aircraft. The only place you find PIC authority to deviate from the regulations is in paragraph (b), which directly ties that authority to an emergency situation.

In any event, all you need say to the controller once the situation is resolved and you no longer need unusual assistance or deviation from a regulation is "terminate the emergency".

Would you not consider navigating the airplane to be "operating" it?

I would, and therefore would consider the pilot to be the final authority when a dangerous situation presents itself that ATC has created.

 

[Velocity173]

Reread 91.3 (a) and tell me where it mentions that it only applies in an emergency...

Yeah, but 91.3 (a) doesn't mean you go out and deviate from an ATC instruction simply because you're PIC and responsible for the aircraft. If that was the case, we could just randomly decide which FAR we want to follow or not because we're PIC. ATC vectoring me for seperation, I'm not an emergency but I don't like this vector. I'm going to tell them that I'm resuming own navigation. It doesn't work that way.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Would you not consider navigating the airplane to be "operating" it?

I would, and therefore would consider the pilot to be the final authority when a dangerous situation presents itself that ATC has created.

Hmmm... ATC created a thunderstorm just for you? Wow! You must've ****ed someone off.

Ron's solid point is that (a) means two things - first that you are the final authority for the safety of the flight and second, that you are ultimately responsible for regulatory violations.

No, there does not need to be a "declaration" of an emergency. It just has to exist. There are definitely cases out there where there was no declaration but the pilot was not ultimately violated. And it may not require the "E" word, although it helps since it's a nice buzzword to make the situation absolutely clear. The declaration serves two important safety purposes - notifying ATC you might need some assistance (in this case an immediate deviation) and notifying ATC to clear the area for you.

Frankly, if I'm another aircraft in the vicinity that might be affected by your decision to simply refuse to obey an ATC instruction, I'd prefer you declared. It also perks up my ears to pay extra attention because I may very soon get a vector away from you.

And if I'm the pilot facing the emergency, I'd prefer to avoid a hassle by simply informing ATC I had an emergency on my hands and was deviating.

But if you want to skip the announcement, cause a loss of IFR separation with other aircraft, and then fight with the FAA in an investigation and/or enforcement action about whether there was in fact an emergency that you had no part in creating (even perhaps by inaction at an earlier stage - questions like that are what trials are for) or that you were careless or reckless by disregarding the fact that there were other aircraft in the vicinity when you took your unauthorized action, heck, as you say, you're the PIC and the reg says you're welcome to take responsibility for your actions.

 

[Captain]

Why declare? Wouldn't it have been more appropriate to just say "we are deviating due to weather" rather than request a new heading? As PIC, you have that right (and obligation).

I have no authority to deviate from an ATC clearance unless I declare. The only other possible option would be to cancel IFR, but that wasn't an option that day either since our OpSpecs didn't allow it unless I had the field in sight (I didn't), I was above a layer, And I was in Class A airspace. So I was left with fly into hail and death or declare an emergency and go around it. I did the later. AirAsia flight QZ8501 did the former. That's why my signature line is BPITW.

 

[Zeldman]

I heard this on center frequency years ago.

Winter night, clear and cold.

A/C: Center, I've lost oil pressure and need to land now! (high strained squeeky panicked voice)

Center: Who lost oil pressure?

A/C: I've lost oil pressure and need to land.!!

Center" Ok, I understand you lost oil pressure and need to land. What is your tail number?

A/C: This is November...... uuuuhhhhhh......uuuuhhhhhh.....what?....Ok........ never mind.

Center: Ok, what is your situation now?

A/C: I thought I had lost oil pressure. My instructor pointed to a gauge that is reading zero. I thought it was the oil pressure, but my instructor says it is the outside air temperature.

Center: (much laughter in the back ground) Ok sir, understand there is no emergency....(giggle giggle)....

 

[overdrive148]

I have no authority to deviate from an ATC clearance unless I declare. The only other possible option would be to cancel IFR, but that wasn't an option that day either since our OpSpecs didn't allow it unless I had the field in sight (I didn't), I was above a layer, And I was in Class A airspace. So I was left with fly into hail and death or declare an emergency and go around it. I did the later. AirAsia flight QZ8501 did the former. That's why my signature line is BPITW.

Googling "BPITW" says the acronym stands for "Black people in the way"

 

[Geico266]

I heard this on center frequency years ago.

Winter night, clear and cold.

A/C: Center, I've lost oil pressure and need to land now! (high strained squeeky panicked voice)

Center: Who lost oil pressure?

A/C: I've lost oil pressure and need to land.!!

Center" Ok, I understand you lost oil pressure and need to land. What is your tail number?

A/C: This is November...... uuuuhhhhhh......uuuuhhhhhh.....what?....Ok........ never mind.

Center: Ok, what is your situation now?

A/C: I thought I had lost oil pressure. My instructor pointed to a gauge that is reading zero. I thought it was the oil pressure, but my instructor says it is the outside air temperature.

Center: (much laughter in the back ground) Ok sir, understand there is no emergency....(giggle giggle)....

Captain during his training?

 

[Captain]

Captain during his training?

Yup, he wasn't my best student. Now he flies RVs out of KCEK.

 

[Geico266]

Yup, he wasn't my best student. Now he flies RVs out of KCEK.

 

[eman1200]

Maybe the Morning After pill?

 

[brian]]

Minus the IFR routing INTO a thunderstorm, I'm afraid that declaring an emergency with me as PIC will require me changing my underwear. Landing as soon as practicable would be less FAR and more biological.

But, to each their own...

 

[Captain]

Minus the IFR routing INTO a thunderstorm, I'm afraid that declaring an emergency with me as PIC will require me changing my underwear. Landing as soon as practicable would be less FAR and more biological.

But, to each their own...

I just declared tonight as a matter of fact. It's not a big deal. The guys in the trucks are nice and so was ATC. Getting direct and whatever vector you want in dead airspace is also a plus. Guess how much paperwork I filled out? None. The Crash team asked for my name and phone number for HIS report, but that's as close as I got to it.

Seriously, people...if you have ANY doubt as to the safe outcome of your flight just key the mic and declare an emergency. It's soooooooo easy even I can do it and the benefits provided far outweigh any silly fear instilled in you from some hangar story from a hack.

My guess is way back some pilot flew under a bridge and clipped a ferry full of nuns and wondered why he got violated when he declared an emergency.

 

[Henning]

Say you declare an emergency and ATC takes appropriate actions. Shortly thereafter your emergency resolves itself (maybe you checked the fuel switch and found it wasn't fully engaged so you click it into position).

Can ATC remove the 'emergency' status of your flight or are you obligated to land as soon as possible, fill out paperwork, etc?

Yep, no worries, "Yeah, we found the problem and got it worked out, everything back to good." You still likely will have a telephone call at the end of the flight to make to help them complete the paperwork, 5 minutes tops.

 

[Henning]

Why declare? Wouldn't it have been more appropriate to just say "we are deviating due to weather" rather than request a new heading? As PIC, you have that right (and obligation).

Because declaring is what gives you that right. Even if you don't declare, the controller still can. PIC has Emergency over ride authority, no worries, declaring is how you assert that authority and tell ATC "Look, I have to do this or we are ****ed, sorry."

 

[35 AoA]

Just declare a minor emergency. Much easier to recover from

Seriously though, I have "declared" lots of times. It is less than the smallest deal in the world. I'm not sure where the dreaded paperwork issue comes from. I have yet to experience this supposed pain. My most serious one ended with me played out in the field arresting gear, engine oil all over the aircraft and runway, and the only thing I had to do was tell tower my gross weight and engagement speed over the radio. That and I ended up writing a letter of rec for the head of the crash/rescue team, but that was totally a random occurrence Guys that think that uttering the "E" word on the radio will result in hours of questioning from the feds are really overestimating the time those guys have to hang out and BS. I'd venture an educated guess that those guys could care less, unless your declaration resulted in a large media fiasco involving multiple and seemingly non-required FAR busts. I'd also venture a guess that you would have a lot more explaining to do if you ran out of gas and crashed into a house because you were afraid of declaring and getting some priority handling in the first place. ATC is there to help, and I have yet to see them not do so if asked (ie declaring).

 

[Palmpilot]

I have no authority to deviate from an ATC clearance unless I declare.

91.3(b) gives you the authority to deviate in an emergency requiring immediate action, but it doesn't say anything about declaring. That having been said, I do recognize that if you need to deviate, concealing the fact that you are in an emergency situation would be counterproductive. I imagine that declaring might also make it less likely for the FAA to second-guess your actions later.

 

[roncachamp]

91.3 (a)

91.123(b)

 

[roncachamp]

Reread 91.3 (a) and tell me where it mentions that it only applies in an emergency...

So you're saying that that 91.3(a) trumps 91.123(b)? If that's the case, what's the purpose of 91.123(b)? For that matter, what's the purpose of any of the flight rules?

 

[roncachamp]

Would you not consider navigating the airplane to be "operating" it?

I would, and therefore would consider the pilot to be the final authority when a dangerous situation presents itself that ATC has created.

I don't see any mention of "a dangerous situation presents itself that ATC has created" in 91.3(a).

 

[Henning]

Look, it's really simple, you declare whenever you need to be able to do whatever it is you may need to do to assure a safe outcome to a flight so ATC knows you have a problem and can keep people out of your way. While in an emergency you have priority, you are not the only person in existence and you having an emergency does not give you the right to endanger others, so as soon as you can reasonably do so, you let ATC know so they can do their job and protect others from what you may need to do. Not only that, when you declare they know you are in a bind and may not think of everything available to you, and they start becoming awfully helpful at presenting you options.

THERE IS NO DOWNSIDE TO DECLARING, just "Do It", it's the way the system is designed to function best for everyone involved.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Minus the IFR routing INTO a thunderstorm, I'm afraid that declaring an emergency with me as PIC will require me changing my underwear. Landing as soon as practicable would be less FAR and more biological.

But, to each their own...

My own:
When I lost power while IFR in the clouds over the Colorado Rockies a few years ago, I'm glad to say (1) I declared an emergency and (2) a change of underwear wasn't required after I safely landed and the diversion ATC helped me to choose.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Look, it's really simple, you declare whenever you need to be able to do whatever it is you may need to do to assure a safe outcome to a flight so ATC knows you have a problem and can keep people out of your way. While in an emergency you have priority, you are not the only person in existence and you having an emergency does not give you the right to endanger others, so as soon as you can reasonably do so, you let ATC know so they can do their job and protect others from what you may need to do. Not only that, when you declare they know you are in a bind and may not think of everything available to you, and they start becoming awfully helpful at presenting you options.

THERE IS NO DOWNSIDE TO DECLARING, just "Do It", it's the way the system is designed to function best for everyone involved.

Go up to the board and write than 100 times until you never question it. (In fact, I'm going to use those exact words, including caps and punctuation on a slide for a program I'm doing)

 

[Alexb2000]

I've had plenty of similar situations to Captain. I usually say, "N1234 needs an immediate deviation to 350". That is my way of telling ATC that they need to work this out in the next few seconds or I will declare and move myself. It usually works fine. I have also been told, "Advise when able to fly 270" when I was working around a storm. Facing another storm directly in front and unable to get through to ATC because of a busy frequency, I turned to 270. They asked why I didn't tell them, my response, "I had to make the turn because of a storm ahead and couldn't get through". "OK, just try to let us know next time". None of these issues have been a big deal.

Bottom line some of you guys need to stop worrying about your tickets. Do what is required to stay safe, completely forget about the ticket. If the FAA feels I have acted incorrectly, then I'll take the consequences.

 

[poadeleted20]

Would you not consider navigating the airplane to be "operating" it?

I'm not sure I see any distinction, and I know I don't see the relevence.

I would, and therefore would consider the pilot to be the final authority when a dangerous situation presents itself that ATC has created.

I don't think the FAA or NTSB would agree with you where it comes to intentionally violating the regulations in the absence of an actual emergency. There's lots of case law to support my position, starting with Administrator v Eden. It is 91.3(a) which made Mr. Eden completely responsible for his actions in contravention of the regulations, and it is the absence of an actual emergency which prevented him from using the exemption in 91.3(b) as a defense. OTOH, there's nothing which requires the actual declaration of an emergency on the radio to trigger the exemption in 91.3(b), just the existence of an actual emergency. Further, as seen in Eden, telling ATC you have an emergency doesn't give you the protection of 91.3(b) if no emergency actually exists.

 

[poadeleted20]

I have no authority to deviate from an ATC clearance unless I declare.

That's not quite what the regulation says:

(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.

It is the existence of the emergency, not the declaration, which triggers the 91.3(b) authorization to deviate from any rule in Part 91. IOW, if you do not or cannot declare an emergency with ATC, the existence of an emergency still allows you to deviate from those rules "to the extent required to meet that emergency". So, if you can't get a word in edgewise on the frequency, or you're out of communication with ATC, you can still legally turn to avoid that thunderstorm you would otherwise enter even if that would put you in violation of some section of Part 91.

Of course, as Mark points out, you'd best be ready to justify your actions as being necessary to meet that emergency if you are called upon later to explain why you did what you did, but I'd always rather have to explain my actions to the FAA on the ground later than fly into a thunderstorm now.

 

[poadeleted20]

Because declaring is what gives you that right.

No. Declaring does not "give you that right", as Mr. Eden discovered. What gives you that authority is the existence of an emergency, not the declaration with ATC. If you need to do something immediately, don't delay doing that just to tell ATC you need to do it. Do your best to get that word to them ASAP, but first fly the plane., because as someone once told me, "The Italian who keeps the plane flying is Bernoulli*, not Marconi." Or, "While pilots have died because they let go of the stick to grab the mic, no pilot has ever died because s/he let go of the mic to grab the stick."

*Please, no debates on Newton vs Marconi -- the line just doesn't work with an Englishman.