Can ATC handle a flight as emergency although the pilots have not declared an emergency? The preliminary report for the LNI610 crash shows how much distractive conversation there was between ATC and LIN610 at a time when the pilots clearly didn't have the aircraft under control – as evidenced by the FDR data – and should have talked to each other to diagnose the problem, rather than to ATC. This violates the principle "aviate - navigate - communicate".

While it clearly falls within the responsibility of the crew to declare an emergency, my question is posed from the point of view of air traffic control:

(from the preliminary report, p.1+2)


  At 23:21:53 UTC, the LNI610 SIC requested approval to the TE controller “to some holding point”. The TE controller asked the LNI610 the problem of the aircraft and the pilot responded “flight control problem”.
  
  At 23:24:51 UTC, the TE controller added “FLIGHT CONT TROB” text for LNI610
  target label on the controller radar system as reminder that the flight was
  experiencing flight control problem.


The preliminary report reveals how much dispensable talk there was between ATC and LNI610 in this crucial moments even after the flight was marked as experiencing flight control problems.

My question is:

Seeing that the flight was marked by ATC as "FLIGHT CONT TROB", could ATC have handled the situation differently, e.g. bothering them less or even handling the situation outright as PAN PAN (don't restrict navigation, reroute other traffic, avoid communication as much as possible) even though it was not declared as such by the crew ?

Or did they essentially have their hands tied, obliged to treat the flight as any other as long as no emergency is officially declared via either MAYDAY or PAN PAN ?

I very much welcome any answers, including from pilots or ATC controllers who are unfamiliar with this particular accident, but can share their work experience (how this is handled in practice) AND/OR point to specific rules (how this should be handled in theory).


FDR data (timestamps + pink vertical lines added by myself at 23:21:53 and 23:24:51 UTC corresponding to the ATC excerpts quoted above):
In the US, a controller has the authority to treat any situation as an emergency, and they do.  I have had controllers &quot;declare&quot; an emergency multiple times, even when I thought I did not have an emergency.
There are some advantages to the controller.  His work gets shed to others, and his supervisor is at his side to assist.
At one point, after ice, delays and trying to get into a DC airport close to the Christmas holiday, I declared &quot;minimum fuel&quot; which I didn't consider an emergency.  I just wanted to let the controller know that if they vectored me towards West Virginia again, I would be landing close to or at reserves.  The weather at the destination was far better than the ice I have been flying through at 13,000, but I wanted to avoid plunking down at Martinsburg, away from my destination to buy another load of fuel.
Immediately I got handed off to a Dulles controller, whose radar had better coverage than Baltimore Approach who handled approaches normally for my destination.  I got kid glove treatment, and did not get further delays, and landed at my destination without any incident.  After the paperwork, I dipped the tanks, and figured I still had about 27 minutes more fuel than my minimums for IFR night flight with a diversion to better weather.
Similarly, having gear problems almost always gets an &quot;emergency&quot; status.
I will say one thing, when I was dealing with a cockpit fire, and the controller kept asking again and again the same questions it was distracting, but they are trying to get their job done the best as they can, just as the pilot is.  In my case, I just stopped answering lower priority questions.  In the case of the cockpit fire, I killed the master switch (at night), and another pilot in the back brought ATC up on his handheld radio.  Up front we dealt with the fire, and delegated the communications to a guy in back.
So in application to the LNI610 and other situations, it makes sense that the pilots exercise their ability to tell a controller to &quot;standby.&quot;  It works some of the time.
I am not as familiar with the US Controllers Handbook as I have been in the past, but I am confident that the controllers have authority to declare an emergency.  But keep in mind that they are products of their environment, just as pilots are, and they have training, objectives, experiences and organizational expectations which change and vary.