What is an Emergency?

[AuntPeggy]

I was recently taken to task for my definition of an emergency. Here is the definition from the AIM as published on AOPA (Underscore added by me for emphasis).

[SIZE=+2]Chapter 6. Emergency Procedures[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]Section 1. General[/SIZE]​

[SIZE=-2]REFERENCE-[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-2]14 CFR Section 91.185.[/SIZE]
6-1-2. Emergency Condition- Request Assistance Immediately
a. An emergency can be either a distress or urgency condition as defined in the Pilot/Controller Glossary. Pilots do not hesitate to declare an emergency when they are faced with distress conditions such as fire, mechanical failure, or structural damage. However, some are reluctant to report an urgency condition when they encounter situations which may not be immediately perilous, but are potentially catastrophic. An aircraft is in at least an urgency condition the moment the pilot becomes doubtful about position, fuel endurance, weather, or any other condition that could adversely affect flight safety. This is the time to ask for help, not after the situation has developed into a distress condition.

b. Pilots who become apprehensive for their safety for any reason should request assistance immediately. Ready and willing help is available in the form of radio, radar, direction finding stations and other aircraft. Delay has caused accidents and cost lives. Safety is not a luxury! Take action!​

The statement in the following quote is precisely what the AIM is opposing:

I've always approached emergencies with a different mindset. If it's a "land as soon as possible" requiring priority handling, fire/rescue on the ground, or shutting down a runway, it's an emergency. Anything other than that requiring me to terminate what I'm doing is likely going to be an NAR (No Assistance Required).

I would welcome a discussion of what constitutes an emergency -- hoping all of us are civil in the discussion.

Here are some examples I've heard of:

1. Pilot of Piper Cherokee taking off from airport, before attaining pattern altitude, has terrified passenger.

2. Two hours into cross-country pleasure trip (IFR flight plan) passenger experiences explosive diarrhea.

3. Air-taxi trip where landing-gear light doesn't come on. Commercial pilot is convinced it is a problem with the light, not the landing gear.

 

[Greebo]

Personally, I think that all 3 of the examples you listed are justifiable for the pilot to request priority handling - a PAN PAN, not a MAYDAY. Heck, I had a motion sensitive passenger on board once, who'd gotten sick on approach to Leesburg, and on the return flight I let ATC know that I had a motion sick pax on board and could I please get higher alt through Dullas' Bravo. Potomac was very understanding and while I had to go off course a bit, I got the altitude and smoother air my pax needed.

I don't think any more needs to be said on it, m'self. The Pilot should never hesitate to request additional assistance whenever they feel its necessary.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I would welcome a discussion of what constitutes an emergency -- hoping all of us are civil in the discussion.

Peggy,

Did the thought of "Urgency" (Pan Pan, not Mayday) ever cross your mind? It's not used much, but it seems that it might have been appropriate. What are your thoughts about urgency vs. E-M-ergency?

Of course, IMHO it was your butt in the seat and you shouldn't worry about what anyone else here says.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I can probably come up with an exception, but I would almost always consider an ill or distressed passenger as an emergency in a small airplane. It's not like you have a flight attendant to help make them more comfortable.

I wouldn't consider a stuck landing gear an "emergency" requiring immediate action in most circumstances - mostly because I don't think it poses an imminent safety of flight issue. Of course, if the gear problem is combined with a terrified passenger with explosive diarrhea, that =is= an emergency!!

But Kent's answer is the one that really counts:

Of course, IMHO it was your butt in the seat and you shouldn't worry about what anyone else here says.

 

[steingar]

I think anyone who took Peggy to task in any way shape or form should keep their stupid gobs shut (or their idiot hands away from the terminal). If someone is frightened enough to declare an emergency they should just do so. Better to overreact than underreact and die. The controllers would much rather have to deal with your situation than your crash.

 

[markb5900]

To me if the PIC thinks it is an emergency then it IS an emergency. No matter what the cause of it is. That is why they are PIC to make that decision. Not ATC's or us sitting in our leather office chair. The person in the plane is the only one qualified at that moment in time to decide.

Mark B

 

[AuntPeggy]

Please keep it friendly.

 

[AuntPeggy]

I have never heard anyone call "MAYDAY". Simple statement, "I'm declaring an emergency." There are 2 kinds of emergency. All these would be urgent.

BTW, of my 3 examples, #1 & #3 declared an emergency. #2 explained the situation and ATC declared the emergency.

 

[steingar]

Sorry Peggy, but if the someone who publicly took you to task affects someone else, that someone else could die from that attitude (and until recently that someone else could have been me).

Kudos to you for pointing out the less than obvious.

 

[poadeleted20]

I've called "MAYDAY-MAYDAY-MAYDAY," most recently two years ago when my engine rolled back at 50 feet on takeoff with nowhere at all to go straight ahead. I didn't even think about it -- it was an instinctive reaction. 'Course, I've spent near 40 years and over 7000 hours doing this stuff, and there's a lot that's instinctive for me which isn't for folks of lesser experience.

I'll stick with my original statement -- if you think it's an emergency, it is an emergency, and if there's any doubt in your mind about whether it is or isn't, the presence of doubt is sufficient reason to declare an emergency, either as a distress or urgency situation. On that basis, I'd say all three are emergencies, although in the terrified passenger case, I'd try to find a way to say it without saying it, lest the passenger further freak.

 

[RotaryWingBob]

I've called "MAYDAY-MAYDAY-MAYDAY," most recently two years ago when my engine rolled back at 50 feet on takeoff with nowhere at all to go straight ahead. I didn't even think about it -- it was an instinctive reaction. 'Course, I've spent near 40 years and over 7000 hours doing this stuff, and there's a lot that's instinctive for me which isn't for folks of lesser experience.

I'll stick with my original statement -- if you think it's an emergency, it is an emergency, and if there's any doubt in your mind about whether it is or isn't, the presence of doubt is sufficient reason to declare an emergency, either as a distress or urgency situation. On that basis, I'd say all three are emergencies, although in the terrified passenger case, I'd try to find a way to say it without saying it, lest the passenger further freak.

Amen, Ron.

 

[bbchien]

Peggy, an emergency is whatever the pilot says it is, or he/she perceives it to be at the time. It gets sorted out LATER, on the ground.

That is what PIC authority is about. If the emergency was of one's own making, and apparently seen to be used to gain the system to advantage, that's one thing. But disoriented along the LI sound in crappy vis - unless it was forecast to be IFR, it's whatever you say it was, as in....

"Emergency"

 

[Patch]

Since you're using my quote, I feel obliged to respond.

BTW, 14 CFR 91.185 deals with radio failure on an IFR flight plan.

I would welcome a discussion of what constitutes an emergency -- hoping all of us are civil in the discussion.

My question is why everyone is so anxious to declare an emergency? In most cases, the guy on the ground can't help you. They don't have your aircraft's checklist sitting in front of them. A lot have probably never even piloted an aircraft.

When the stuff hits the fan, it's always AVIATE, NAVIGATE, THEN COMMUNICATE. In that order. Period.

My recommendation is always to fly the plane first, come up with a gameplan, then TELL ATC what you intend to do. That is the PIC part and the authority to deviate in an emergency. If you can't talk and fly at the same time, then there is no requirement for you to do so because you're the PIC authorizing yourself to deviate.

What happens when you declare an emergency? ATC will ask you a ton of questions (Fuel remaining in minutes, souls on board, intentions, serial number, etc. etc.) then give you priority handling to land, vectors, roll fire trucks, etc.

Is that necessary in every situation? Of course not! In fact, it can be distracting when you should be focused on flying your airplane. Don't let someone on the radio fly your aircraft.

So, if you have a screwed up situation - lost, spatial D, whatever. Do you need to declare an emergency? Maybe, maybe not. The question you have to ask AS PIC is whether priority handling and approach asking you to "say intentions" every three seconds will help you safely terminate the situation, or will it be a nuisance. Even then, I'd wait until I had a solid gameplan that I could TELL them so that I'm driving the fight, not them.

As I was quoted above, my criteria is pretty simple - Land as soon as possible, I need priority handling, so I'm going to declare an emergency with ATC and tell them what I'm doing with my aircraft and what assistance I'll require. Land as soon as practical situation or something that requires me to terminate whatever I'm doing, probably won't tell anyone anything unless I suspect further complications.

Your situation? Depends. Low on gas? Declare an immediate emergency. Everything normal except your primary navaid (in VFR) is inop, ask for help from approach, explain the situation. If they refuse, declare an emergency.

1. Pilot of Piper Cherokee taking off from airport, before attaining pattern altitude, has terrified passenger.

What's the emergency? Turn around and land.

2. Two hours into cross-country pleasure trip (IFR flight plan) passenger experiences explosive diarrhea.

Could go either way. It's a physiological problem. What airspace are we in? Are they sending dudes to holding fixes for extended periods of time?

3. Air-taxi trip where landing-gear light doesn't come on. Commercial pilot is convinced it is a problem with the light, not the landing gear.

Emergency.

 

[Chas]

I think anyone who took Peggy to task in any way shape or form should keep their stupid gobs shut (or their idiot hands away from the terminal). .

Will you calm down for Pete's sake..... Peggy is perfectly capable of looking after herself on the forum and your repeated insults to others trying to make reasonable and respectful posts are becoming very tiresome. She has asked a legitimate question and people are entitled to express an opinion, even if they happen to question a specific decision that she made. I don't think anyone has a definitive answer that covers every conceivable possibility and certainly if a pilot feels they need emergency status from ATC, s/he shouldn't hesitate to declare and be given it. But doesn't this beg Peggy's interesting question more than a tad, or do we just end the conversation here ... ? [rhetorical]

IMO a situation should represent in the mind of the PIC a "clear and present danger" to the lives of those on board, or those in other ships or on the ground, for an emergency to be declared - otherwise I would simply state my unfortunate predicament to ATC and take it from there. Depending on ATC's response, I always have the option of raising the ante and declaring, do I not? Those guys are the experts on many such situations and have been trained to handle most things likely to crop up. But if in any real doubt, declare an emergency of course.

Peggy did much better than I did the one time I flew VFR into IMC off-shore at night at low altitude (dense but shallow coastal layer). I was monitoring SoCal at the time and should have explained to them what had happened within a few seconds of the total blackout, instead of which I treated it as a sort of exercise in demonstrating my newly-developing instrument skills (half way through IR training) and handled it solo. I was out and on top in less than ten minutes, but this was Not Smart. To me at the time, or now, this would not be an "Emergency" in the declarative sense, but it would sure require the immediate attention and cooperation of ATC. Whether it's an emergency to them is a matter of semantics - they will act to protect you and other aircraft as they have been trained to do.

My guess is that people's definitions of an emergency situation (apart from the obvious imminent catastrophes) will to some extent change with time and experience, which is as it should be. Obviously, to the low time pilot, more situations are going to represent real threats to health. The main thing is to get the word out to the guys with the scopes, pronto. Nice thread Peggy! ... and nice post Patch. And what's wrong with "Pan Pan" for a compromise position like Chuck said? - let's show we can use some discretion up there.

 

[poadeleted20]

As I was quoted above, my criteria is pretty simple - Land as soon as possible, I need priority handling, so I'm going to declare an emergency with ATC and tell them what I'm doing with my aircraft and what assistance I'll require. Land as soon as practical situation or something that requires me to terminate whatever I'm doing, probably won't tell anyone anything unless I suspect further complications.

Interesting, as that is not in consonance with what I learned in 15 years flying jets in the military. The standard I was taught was that any time you were into the EP pages of the PCL, it was an "emergency," including the "land as soon as practicals." For example, I've declared an emergency (a PAN, mind you, not a MAYDAY) for single hydraulic failure, or single engine failure, even though neither is a "land as soon as possible," and never got told I was wrong for doing it. Maybe the views of the USAF on the subject have changed since I retired.

 

[Henning]

I was recently taken to task for my definition of an emergency.

I would welcome a discussion of what constitutes an emergency -- hoping all of us are civil in the discussion.

An emergency in my opinion is when there is an immediate risk of loss of life or property, this is cause for a Mayday call. When there is an imminant or high potential risk to loss, you make a Pan-Pan call. In your case, a pan pan call would likely have been more appropriate, but what the heck, if you felt an immediate risk, then to you it was an emergency. The worst that could come out of declaring an emergency when there isn't one is a 44709 ride which is preferable to the outcome of not declaring an emergency when there is one.

 

[Henning]

I have never heard anyone call "MAYDAY". Simple statement, "I'm declaring an emergency." There are 2 kinds of emergency. All these would be urgent.

BTW, of my 3 examples, #1 & #3 declared an emergency. #2 explained the situation and ATC declared the emergency.

Emergency and Urgency are actually distinct from each other in this context as specifically and individually defined with their own call terms. You may have never heard a Mayday or Pan Pan called, but that does not mean the terms arent used, albiet more in the maritime sector than aviation, they both use the same term. I just spent the weekend listening to the USCG making Pan Pan calls for an unregistered ELT off the Dry Tortugas.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

The worst that could come out of declaring an emergency when there isn't one is a 44709 ride which is preferable to the outcome of not declaring an emergency when there is one.

This reminds me of a very wise quote uttered by Rick Durden on the Pilotcast a while back:

"You have to be alive to get in trouble."

 

[Patch]

Interesting, as that is not in consonance with what I learned in 15 years flying jets in the military. The standard I was taught was that any time you were into the EP pages of the PCL, it was an "emergency," including the "land as soon as practicals." For example, I've declared an emergency (a PAN, mind you, not a MAYDAY) for single hydraulic failure, or single engine failure, even though neither is a "land as soon as possible," and never got told I was wrong for doing it. Maybe the views of the USAF on the subject have changed since I retired.

Both instances you mentioned are land as soon as possible in every checklist I've seen, especially a single engine failure. In my posts above, I was referencing civilian flying. Military-wise, you get into NARs, dealing with the SOF, chase ship, etc. We're talking about declaring with RAPCON, right?

 

[Jeff S KDTW]

On a recent commercial checkride, I too was taken to task by the Examiner on what constitutes an emergency. I was asked if a landing gear issue was sufficient to declare an emergency. My answer was that I would NOT declare an emergency, because stuck landing gear (with sufficient fuel) is not an immediate and life threatening issue.

He response was, "Where are you going in the checklist to get the landing gear down?" "Emergency Procedures", was my answer. "Exactly. If it is in the Emergency Procedures section, it ~is~ an emergency and you should declare it."

You might be asked to write something up for the FAA. But, in that writeup you state, "At that time, I believed the situation constituted an emergency."

He also passed along a couple of illustrations:

1) One involved a local pilot who was being investigated after a landing gear incident. Apparently the gear was pumped down and the landing was without any damage. However, in the process of dealing with the failure, a number of pilot deviations occurred. The DE asked the FAA investigator "why were they pursuing this matter, it was an emergency." The investigator stated that the pilot never declared it as an emergency and thus why the deviations were being investigated.

2) The other illustration was more of a hypothetical--what if the pumped down gear didn't hold on landing and what if a passenger was injured. Perhaps the fact that an emergency was declared and emergency equipment was nearby (at some airports) might make a difference.

Following this discussion with the DE, I'm personally more inclined to declare than I was before.

A number of years ago I had a landing gear failure while intercepting an ILS and I did NOT declare it. If that occurred again, I think I might handle it differently.

I think there is sufficient room for "interpretation" here and, either way, I think it is up to the pilot to decide if it is an emergency.

 

[poadeleted20]

Both instances you mentioned are land as soon as possible in every checklist I've seen, especially a single engine failure.

I guess you're unfamiliar with the checklists for the F-4, F-111, and A-6. What have you flown in the military besides the single-engine T-6?

 

[etsisk]

No, ATC isn't there in the plane with you and can't lay hands on it. But sometimes that's not what a person needs. If someone's at the edge of their PERCEIVED abilities, then maybe what that pilot needs is the knowledge that they have the full attention of ATC. That someone who can see them, is LOOKING for them, watching them and ready and prepared to do whatever they need to have done. Psychological assurance can be enough to help the pilot deflate the rising panic and get on with the business of feeling in control and thus reassess what their TRUE range of ability is. There's enough distractions in that cockpit already.

Sometimes all we need is help getting grounded again - a touchstone - like when you were a kid climbing a tree, you get out on a limb and start feeling shaky. So what do you do? You grab ahold of whatever you can - might be a twig, but that twig will be enough to help ground you. It couldn't stop you from falling for even a second, but it CAN keep you from falling.

 

[Henning]

I guess you're unfamiliar with the checklists for the F-4, F-111, and A-6. What have you flown in the military besides the single-engine T-6?

I'd guess if you're carrying weapons and sensitive intel, not to mention potentially a nuke, they don't want to have you land just anywhere.

 

[Chas]

Tom, If that is what a person needs psychologically, then they should declare I suppose. But IMO this should not be the state of mind of a pilot who has lost situational awareness. They need help from ATC for sure, but they should not be given the same priority as someone experiencing an in-flight fire, life-threatening medical issue or major mechanical failure. By declaring, you are forcing ATC to give you a priority of handling that may not be appropriate in the circumstances. Better in many cases to explain the situation clearly and let them decide.

 

[kevin47881]

No, ATC isn't there in the plane with you and can't lay hands on it. But sometimes that's not what a person needs. If someone's at the edge of their PERCEIVED abilities, then maybe what that pilot needs is the knowledge that they have the full attention of ATC. That someone who can see them, is LOOKING for them, watching them and ready and prepared to do whatever they need to have done. Psychological assurance can be enough to help the pilot deflate the rising panic and get on with the business of feeling in control and thus reassess what their TRUE range of ability is. There's enough distractions in that cockpit already.

Sometimes all we need is help getting grounded again - a touchstone - like when you were a kid climbing a tree, you get out on a limb and start feeling shaky. So what do you do? You grab ahold of whatever you can - might be a twig, but that twig will be enough to help ground you. It couldn't stop you from falling for even a second, but it CAN keep you from falling.

As one who should have used that advise very recently, I concur!

 

[Danos]

I'd guess if you're carrying weapons and sensitive intel, not to mention potentially a nuke, they don't want to have you land just anywhere.

Good point. Remember that Russian sub that sank?

 

[Greebo]

I'm reasonably confident that if a pilot calls up, declares an emergency, and when asked the nature of the emergency, replies, "I'm completely lost and need help getting where I'm going", ATC is going to have the common sense and judgment to render appropriate assistance with vectors without giving the pilot an inappropriate level of priority.

Do we have an ATC member here who can confirm my faith in their intelligence?

 

[etsisk]

Tom, If that is what a person needs psychologically, then they should declare I suppose. But IMO this should not be the state of mind of a pilot who has lost situational awareness. They need help from ATC for sure, but they should not be given the same priority as someone experiencing an in-flight fire, life-threatening medical issue or major mechanical failure. By declaring, you are forcing ATC to give you a priority of handling that may not be appropriate in the circumstances. Better in many cases to explain the situation clearly and let them decide.

Yep, but nevertheless, if they aren't in a place to let them do that, then they get to do whatever they need to do to be ok.

And remember the original post that started this whole thing said, in part, "I was staring down the departure end of an unknown runway at pattern altitude. It took only seconds for everything to go straight into the crapper. I was in a 45* bank and couldn't maintain altitude or heading." (my emphasis). Peggy was quite capable of dealing with things, as she proved, but they were - right then - seeming to slip out of her grasp. She did good.

 

[poadeleted20]

I'd guess if you're carrying weapons and sensitive intel, not to mention potentially a nuke, they don't want to have you land just anywhere.

That was made pretty clear to every crewmember in USAFE in the mid-80's after some knucklehead A-10 flight lead landed his 4-ship of combat aircraft at Innsbruck Airport in neutral Austria after getting lost in the Alps on their way from their home base in Germany to Aviano, Italy, and waiting so long to call for help they no longer had enough fuel to get back into NATO territory. The four pilots were held at gunpoint by Austrian border guards until the US Ambassador made it from Vienna to take custody of them. When the generals were through with them, they probably wished they had just been put in an Austrian jail rather than being returned to USAF custody.

 

[AuntPeggy]

I'm reasonably confident that if a pilot calls up, declares an emergency, and when asked the nature of the emergency, replies, "I'm completely lost and need help getting where I'm going", ATC is going to have the common sense and judgment to render appropriate assistance with vectors without giving the pilot an inappropriate level of priority.

Do we have an ATC member here who can confirm my faith in their intelligence?

New York Approach did, in fact, have the intelligence to render appropriate assistance. There were no questions about amount of fuel or souls on board. I was given a squawk code, heading, and altitude instructions. No emergency equipment rolled. Since another POA member landed at BDR just ahead of me, he could say how much priority treatment was given.

Any input/opinions from ATC would also be appreciated.

Thanks to all for your comments and consideration.

 

[Skip Miller]

In most cases, the guy on the ground can't help you.

Sticking to the case at hand, as described by Aunt Peggy: She found herself off the departure end of an unknown runway. That runway could launch aircraft at her without notice (as she was not on the right freq at that point). That was a case where "the guy on the ground" could absolutely help by keeping traffic away or warning Aunt Peggy of conflicting traffic.

No doubt about it. In this case, Aunt Peggy's emergency was real.

-Skip

 

[Dan Smith]

"But disoriented along the LI sound in crappy vis - unless it was forecast to be IFR, it's whatever you say it was, as in...."

As in JFK Jr? Who knows what might have happened if he'd recognized his predicament and called someone.

When in doubt, call for help. It may seem embarrassing, but the alternative outcomes are a lot more so.

Dan

 

[Chas]

And remember the original post that started this whole thing said, in part, "I was staring down the departure end of an unknown runway at pattern altitude. It took only seconds for everything to go straight into the crapper. I was in a 45* bank and couldn't maintain altitude or heading." (my emphasis). Peggy was quite capable of dealing with things, as she proved, but they were - right then - seeming to slip out of her grasp. She did good.

Thanks for reminding me. If that were happening to me, I'd be declaring an emergency as well - if I had the presence of mind to do it, as Peggy did.

 

[ScottM]

I'd guess if you're carrying weapons and sensitive intel, not to mention potentially a nuke, they don't want to have you land just anywhere.

There are ways to deal with some of that stuff. We had a key command that started a wipe of all the disk drives in our plane, all paper was water soluble and the crew would start putting it in water, a couple of axes finished up the last couple of jobs. This is exactly what the EP-3 crew was doing when they landed in Hainan China after a mid air with a PLA fighter. It was a land or crash situation, they opted to land, and did not open the door until they were ready.

 

[ScottM]

Had an electrical failure in MVFR way back when, shut down most of the radios and notified ATC of the failure but did not declare as everything was going fine. But just letting them know that I got FF from C90 and even a hand off from RFD to C90 all the way back to the airport. It was only a 15 minute flight back after it happened and with just one comm, the GPS and transponder on I expected to have enough battery left to get back. Had smoke or something else started to happen then I would have declared, but at least I already had ATC attention. Had I waited and not said anything I probably would have been back in C90 airspace trying to declare an emergency only to hear "unable emergency suggest you try center on... "

 

[poadeleted20]

There are few things that foul up a contoller's day as bad as being surprised by an aircraft suddenly declaring an emergency when the problem was previously known for some time but not called an emergency.

What's the big deal here? The worst thing that can happen to the controller is he falls off his chair or misses the last donut in the break room. If you delay declaring or fail to declare an emergency, all you're doing is reducing the level of support you get during your time of difficulty, and while I don't know about anyone else, at times like that, I need all the help I can get. And again, I have never seen a case where a pilot honestly used the E-word and was taken to task for it by the FAA.

 

[ScottM]

There are few things that foul up a contoller's day as bad as being surprised by an aircraft suddenly declaring an emergency when the problem was previously known for some time but not called an emergency.

What's the big deal here? The worst thing that can happen to the controller is he falls off his chair or misses the last donut in the break room. If you delay declaring or fail to declare an emergency, all you're doing is reducing the level of support you get during your time of difficulty, and while I don't know about anyone else, at times like that, I need all the help I can get. And again, I have never seen a case where a pilot honestly used the E-word and was taken to task for it by the FAA.

Exactly Ron, What we have here are few people who seem to think that they will be thought less of at the club by their buddies if they use the 'e' word. We used to have a name for guys that displayed that attitude when I was still on active duty, we called them 'smoking black holes'.

 

[Chas]

There are few things that foul up a contoller's day as bad as being surprised by an aircraft suddenly declaring an emergency when the problem was previously known for some time but not called an emergency.
.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that ATC NOT be contacted in many "non-emergency" situations and a remedy sought - that's how the need for the E declaration is avoided, obviously. You have posed a false dichotomy - noone is suggesting that ATC should not be contacted and complied with as early as possible when safety dictates - I thought this thread was about what constitutes an emergency that should be so declared. The interesting question that Peggy poses for us, is what level of support do you need in different situations and when is it appropriate to pull that particular trigger?

The counterargument would be, if everyone declares an Emergency to ATC whenever they have an issue that concerns them but that is not an imminent threat, rather than contacting ATC and dealing with it as appropriate, the whole currency of the E word would be degraded - a most undesirable and unhealthy result for ATC and for the aviation community IMO.

 

[wsuffa]

Scott,
Why don't you do the right thing and tell us who you are talking about? Either that or keep quiet.
Charles.

Charles,

There's been discussion in another thread (and here, too) of some people who questioned the call of one pilot to declare an emergency.

Folks,

Let's please not turn this thread "personal", it has been a good discussion and the various moderators/management council would like nothing better than to leave it open without having to delete posts.

 

[wsuffa]

Folks, I deleted a handful of posts from this thread for review by the Management Council. The deleted posts offer nothing but personal sniping toward each other.

Again, we ask that folks "play nice".