No malfunction during typhoon but still declared Mayday for landing — Civil Aviation Authority: EVA Air indeed needs to review its actions

▲ EVA Air. (Photo / Reporter Huang Kexiang)

By Chen Jui-chung, Taipei

Recently, Typhoon Soudelor wreaked havoc across Taiwan, affecting not only land operations but also causing major disruptions in air traffic. On August 8, EVA Air Flight BR189 from Tokyo to Taipei Songshan was unable to land smoothly due to weather conditions: although air traffic control instructed the flight to divert to Kaohsiung, BR189 circled in the air and issued a “Mayday” distress signal, which led to its prioritized landing at the nearby Taoyuan Airport, prompting many members of the public to question the procedures involved. The Ministry of Transportation and Communications’ Civil Aviation Authority also believes that EVA Air’s approach indeed warrants a review.

EVA Air Flight BR189, which took off from Haneda Airport in Tokyo at 12:44 local time, was originally scheduled to land at Songshan Airport, with Okinawa Airport as the alternate. However, due to the extremely strong typhoon winds, the plane had to go around twice but still couldn’t land.

At the time, all parking spaces at Taoyuan Airport were full, so air traffic control initially instructed the flight to divert to Kaohsiung’s Xiaogang Airport. However, BR189 continued to circle in the northern airspace multiple times. In the end, considering the remaining fuel and the physical condition of the crew, the captain skipped the “pan-pan-pan” emergency procedure and directly issued the more serious “Mayday” distress signal, leading Taoyuan Airport to allow BR189 to land there. Although the captain canceled the Mayday status after a safe landing, the Civil Aviation Authority has conducted an in-depth investigation into this case.

▲ EVA Air Flight BR189 failed two go-arounds at Songshan Airport and then declared Mayday to land at Taoyuan Airport. (Photo / Screenshot from websitehttp://www.flightradar24.com/)

Director of the Standards Division of the Civil Aviation AuthorityLin Junliangstated that according to the latest preliminary review report, BR189 failed two go-arounds at Songshan Airport and circled in the air for about 90 minutes before the tower instructed the captain to divert to Kaohsiung’s Xiaogang Airport. At that time, Xiaogang Airport only had Runway 27, which did not have an ILS (Instrument Landing System), and the wind gusts were around 30 mph; whereas Taoyuan Airport had wind gusts of only around 10 mph, but all parking spaces were full. As for the originally planned alternate, Okinawa Airport, it had already accommodated two 777 passenger planes diverted from the U.S. by EVA Air and could not take BR189. Lin Junliang said that at the time, the captain in the air inevitably faced a dilemma between choosing Taoyuan and Xiaogang.

According to the fuel level test after BR189 landed, there was still enough fuel to fly to Xiaogang Airport, but if the weather at Xiaogang continued to be severe and a landing was not possible, it could indeed lead to a fuel shortage and another “Mayday” crisis. However, the Civil Aviation Authority preliminarily believes that according to airline and authority regulations, if two go-arounds fail, the flight should prioritize diverting to another airport rather than continuing to circle in the air and attempting a third landing. Additionally, the captain did not first issue a “pan-pan-pan” and instead directly called “Mayday,” both of which are considered flaws in EVA Air’s handling. Therefore, the Civil Aviation Authority still needs to review EVA Air’s actions. Nonetheless, the authority also acknowledged that the weather conditions and other factors at the time indeed constituted a special situation.

As for whether EVA Air’s case will lead to other pilots adopting a “declare first, then land” approach in the future, as well as issues related to public perception, Lin Junliang also stated that these would be among the key points for review and discussion.

EVA Airstated that when the captain contacted the Taoyuan approach control, the air traffic controller indicated that due to insufficient parking spaces at the airport, unless the captain made an emergency declaration, they hoped the captain would divert to another airport.Although there were no malfunctions at the time, taking into account the fuel situation for diversion and the overall circumstances, the captain still believed that diverting to Taoyuan was the best option, and mistakenly thought that making an emergency declaration was a necessary procedure to allow diversion to Taoyuan Airport, so the emergency declaration was made.After landing safely, the emergency declaration was promptly canceled with air traffic control.

EVA Air also stated that captains may face various dynamic factors such as passengers, weather, aircraft, and air-ground traffic during flights, resulting in different pressure scenarios — some urgent, some posing risks of distress. Aviation authorities worldwide have established a set of flight management procedures to respond to these unexpected situations and have granted captains full responsibility for safety judgments during flights. The pressure faced by pilots flying during typhoons is beyond what ordinary people can imagine, so captains have the authority to judge which airport is the safest to divert to based on the situation.