Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AC34 Turbulence 22 Injured  
User currently offlineYfbflyer From Canada, joined Sep 2006, 299 posts, RR: 1
Posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 8010 times:

fair use

Nineteen passengers and three crew members were injured when Air Canada Flight AC34 from Australia to Vancouver hit severe turbulence about 150 kilometres southwest of Hawaii.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-col...09/04/24/bc-air-canada-flight.html

Status: Left the gate at 10:31.
The flight has been diverted to HNL.
Estimated time of arrival: 11:38.


any other flights hitting turbulance near Hawaii?

23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineChrisA330 From Canada, joined Oct 1999, 632 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 7982 times:

Press release from Air Canada:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Air-Ca...irms-flight-cnw-15025956.html?.v=1


User currently offlineMultimark From Canada, joined Jul 2006, 796 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7478 times:

That's a pretty good LF for this time of year.

User currently offlineHeathrow From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 979 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7396 times:

I'll be on her Monday YVR - YYZ. Hope everyone is okay

User currently offlineCgagn From Canada, joined Sep 2003, 345 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 7302 times:

I have no sympathy for those injured in turbulence who aren't wearing their seatbelts when the sign is on. Tough luck, maybe next time they'll pay attention to the seatbelt signs. They have them on for a reason.

C-GAGN



Widebodies flown on: A330-300,A340-300,A380-800,747-400,767-200ER,767-300ER,777-200A,777-200ER,777-200LR,777-300ER
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4917 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 7238 times:



Quoting Cgagn (Reply 4):
I have no sympathy for those injured in turbulence who aren't wearing their seatbelts when the sign is on. Tough luck, maybe next time they'll pay attention to the seatbelt signs. They have them on for a reason.

Just wanted to add to your bashing of the pax... The crew clearly state whilst in flight for pax to wear their seat belts as a safe measure if the aircraft hits unexpected turbulence...
When I travel I never take off my seat belt unless I head to restroom or bar...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineBluewave 707 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3152 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 7129 times:

Thank God, only 4 were taken to the hospital.

Which 777-200 was it? Flightaware.com listed ACA034 as such ...



"The best use of your life will be to so live your life, that the use of your life will outlive your life" -- D Severn
User currently offlineN593HA From Germany, joined Oct 2004, 152 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 6941 times:



Quoting Bluewave 707 (Reply 6):
Which 777-200 was it? Flightaware.com listed ACA034 as such ...

According to the ACARS Database the flight was operated by C-FIUJ, a B772 just like flightaware shows.
(http://www.acarsd.org/acars_search.html)



Next trip: KL+NW to HNL
User currently offlineYYZYYT From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 955 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6705 times:



Quoting EK413 (Reply 5):

Quoting Cgagn (Reply 4):
I have no sympathy for those injured in turbulence who aren't wearing their seatbelts when the sign is on. Tough luck, maybe next time they'll pay attention to the seatbelt signs. They have them on for a reason.

Just wanted to add to your bashing of the pax... The crew clearly state whilst in flight for pax to wear their seat belts as a safe measure if the aircraft hits unexpected turbulence...
When I travel I never take off my seat belt unless I head to restroom or

Not that I want to bash, but I will add, according to a passenger I heard interviewed most passengers were asleep when the sign came on. So if they weren't wearing theirs, they would not necessarily have heard put them on. I think FA's are supposed to check (I have heard announcements asking to put blankets under the seatbelt so they do not have to disturb you) but they might not make it around if the turbulence hits quickly or severely.

Another good reason to always wear them.


User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3375 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6458 times:



Quoting Cgagn (Reply 4):
I have no sympathy for those injured in turbulence who aren't wearing their seatbelts when the sign is on. Tough luck, maybe next time they'll pay attention to the seatbelt signs. They have them on for a reason.

If they were sitting down then I would agree with you but on a flight that long which is probably 14-15 hours there are several people getting up to walk around and go to the bathrooms, which is recommended on long haul flight like this.

I personally would hate to be in a plane bathroom when something like went down.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineJQFlightie From Australia, joined Mar 2009, 978 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 6114 times:



Quoting Cgagn (Reply 4):
I have no sympathy for those injured in turbulence who aren't wearing their seatbelts when the sign is on. Tough luck, maybe next time they'll pay attention to the seatbelt signs. They have them on for a reason.

C-GAGN

I completely agree with this statement, we dont say this on -board because its entertaining, its for passengers own safety! EG: QF flight last year SIN - PER that dropped couple thousend feet, the 34 people wouldnt have been injured if they had their belts on!!!



Next Trip: PER-DPS-LOP-CGK-KUL-PVG-LHR, LCY-MAD-VLC, BCN-LYS-TLS-IST-JED-KUL-SGN-CAN-MEL
User currently offlineSmi0006 From Australia, joined Jan 2008, 1533 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 6095 times:

The article states two crew had to be taken to hospital and then the flight continued on, they must have been close to max hours after a diversion and such along sector, how low can the crew compliment be on an AC77LR?

Quoting JQFlightie (Reply 10):
I completely agree with this statement, we dont say this on -board because its entertaining, its for passengers own safety! EG: QF flight last year SIN - PER that dropped couple thousend feet, the 34 people wouldnt have been injured if they had their belts on!!!

But wasn't it reported that some of their seat belts failed as well?


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4917 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 6095 times:



Quoting YYZYYT (Reply 8):
Not that I want to bash, but I will add, according to a passenger I heard interviewed most passengers were asleep when the sign came on. So if they weren't wearing theirs, they would not necessarily have heard put them on. I think FA's are supposed to check (I have heard announcements asking to put blankets under the seatbelt so they do not have to disturb you) but they might not make it around if the turbulence hits quickly or severely.

Your not bashing, just adding you thoughts...

I believe it is a standard practice to encourage the pax to wear their seat belts regardless of being told to wear the seat belt... Turbulence can hit anytime,anywhere without warning...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineSmi0006 From Australia, joined Jan 2008, 1533 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 6067 times:

I find it interesting that many European and American airlines (not sure about others) don't make their crew sit down to when the seat belt sign is on, not only is it dangerous for the crew but sets a bad example, confusing pax.

At QF when the sign is on every one is seated pax and crew
The captains PA is:
"All passengers and crew be seated at once"
The CSM or FA1, then follows with;
"As the Captain has now switched on the fasten seat-belt sign, all passengers and crew must now be seat at once, we apologies for the interruption to your service..."

I don't understand how can the danger be so great that a pax has to be seated but not the crew? Further more the less loose object in a cabin during turbulence the better, crew inclusive (lols Forget heavy hand luggage more than 7kg flying about imagine a senior Mama, holy hannah it that gonna cause a few injuries!!!!!)


User currently offlineFoxBravo From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2997 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5963 times:



Quoting Cgagn (Reply 4):
I have no sympathy for those injured in turbulence who aren't wearing their seatbelts when the sign is on.

While I understand this sentiment in principle, the unfortunate reality is that seatbelt signs are frequently abused by crews, especially on US airlines. Passengers become so accustomed to the sign being left on needlessly that it now commands much less respect than it should.

For example, I was recently on a 5-hour flight from Mexico to NY, and the seatbelt sign was never turned off--not once, from takeoff to landing--despite the fact that the skies were clear and the ride was mostly smooth. Maybe the pilots forgot, maybe because it was a packed flight full of vacationers and they just wanted to keep people seated--I'll never know. But in any event, after a couple of hours of smooth flying (and watching the cabin crew go about their duties as usual, as Smi0006 rightly pointed out), nature called and passengers started to get up and head to the lav. Can you really blame them? I fly pretty often, and although this is an extreme example, it's not at all uncommon on US airlines to see the sign left on for long stretches without turbulence. I rarely see this on foreign airlines.

The other phenomenon I see on US airlines since 9/11 is that many crews will turn on the seatbelt sign whenever the cockpit door is opened (e.g., for a pilot to use the lav). While I understand the reasoning behind this, if they must do it, there's no reason to leave the sign on more than a few minutes.

So, for everyone's safety, if any pilots are reading this, by all means turn the seatbelt sign on when needed for safety, but please don't forget to turn it off when it's not. It's like crying wolf--when the sign is left on all the time, how is a passenger supposed to know when it's the real deal and when it isn't?



Common sense is not so common. -Voltaire
User currently offlineDingDong From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 661 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5920 times:



Quoting FoxBravo (Reply 14):
It's like crying wolf--when the sign is left on all the time, how is a passenger supposed to know when it's the real deal and when it isn't?

There's a remarkably simple solution for that. Stay buckled in at all times. Wink

It's honestly not that onerous to wear a seatbelt, whether in an automobile or on an airplane. We're not talking about suiting up for launch and strapping in a Space Shuttle seat, after all. It takes less than a second to buckle up, doesn't cost extra to do so, and doesn't cause pain simply by wearing it.

People will have to make their own safety choices, but the wiser folks will just simply stay belted in unless in transit to or from the lavatory. For that small window of time, I agree, there is honestly normally not much that can be done if you hit unexpected turbulence without any known PIREPs or WX information suggesting its existence. But otherwise... it's still a better idea to be belted in when being hurtled across the sky at close to the speed of sound.



DingDong, honey, please answer the doorbell!
User currently offlineBA84 From Canada, joined Aug 2004, 418 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5861 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Unfortunately, belted passengers are injured by unbelted passengers.

Imagine a 250 pound guy plunging on you from the ceiling!

Those armrests hurt!

BA84


User currently offlineZBBYLW From Canada, joined Nov 2006, 1985 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 5781 times:



Quoting Smi0006 (Reply 11):
The article states two crew had to be taken to hospital and then the flight continued on, they must have been close to max hours after a diversion and such along sector, how low can the crew compliment be on an AC77LR?

It is not a problem on that flight. I believe (could be mistaken) that it is a min crew of 8 (min 7 for 270 pax but 8 doors).

The YVR-SYD-YVR actually have alot of F/As on them. I believe they have 14 on the flight, so by taking 2 off they are still doing well.

At AC you can fly past your max hours as long as you are returning to your base (ie not leaving a place where they can get fresh crew) and the Captain makes sure that everyone is ok with flying the extra (5 hours or so in this case). Alot of time on these longer flight if there is a delay the f/as will want to stay on and complete their flight because if they do get pulled off they will have to replace those hours with alot of unproductive hops around the country, instead of a flight to HKG or SYD.

Everyone has to agree though. If someone feels they are too sleepy then if it dips below the min crew the flt can not go.



Keep the shinny side up!
User currently offlineZKEOJ From New Zealand, joined Feb 2005, 1024 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 5770 times:



Quoting EK413 (Reply 12):
I believe it is a standard practice to encourage the pax to wear their seat belts regardless of being told to wear the seat belt... Turbulence can hit anytime,anywhere without warning...

In more recent times, they don't only "encourage" passengers, but say they "require" them to wear seat belts at any time they are seated (some mention it is company policy). That doesn't mean that you can't get up to stretch your legs or use the lav, but as soon as you are seated you are supposed to buckle up.

Quoting Smi0006 (Reply 13):
I don't understand how can the danger be so great that a pax has to be seated but not the crew?

It depends on the severity of expected turbulence. I remember a flight on DE, where we expected quite severe turbulence, and passengers walked around. The FA made another announcement, and after that didn't keep the passengers in their seats, even the captain made an announcement, saying that "even the FAs are required to be seated with the seat belts fastened, thus all passengers must stay seated until the seat belt signs come off"...

Cheers
micha


User currently offlineJimbobjoe From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 653 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5539 times:



Quoting DingDong (Reply 15):
Stay buckled in at all times.

And I'm perfectly fine with that. But echoing FoxBravo's thoughts, how would one know when it's ok to use the lavratory and when it's not, if the pilot keeps the seat belts fastened light on at all times?


User currently offlinePgtravel From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 446 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 5416 times:



Quoting Yfbflyer (Thread starter):

any other flights hitting turbulance near Hawaii?

I realize this is a day later, but on Saturday we hit some pretty good turbulence on AF673 from PPT to LAX. It was probably about midday Hawai'i time, and it was southeast of Hawai'i. Not sure how the weather moved since Friday, but this was definitely a large area of storms. We were in it for probably about an hour with moderate turbulence most of the way. Not much fun, that's for sure.

Both the flight down and back saw the pilots on AF avoid using the seatbelt sign unless it got bad. On the way down, it was only on for a few minutes, but on the way back, like I said, we had it on for an hour. At least I knew that when they put it on, they meant business and I wasn't going anywhere.


User currently offlineTradewinds From Japan, joined Jun 2008, 88 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5352 times:

Man. Sure, it's common sense to keep your seatbelts on at all times during a flight, and yes, this should be a lesson to everyone, but I have a hard time swallowing the finger-wagging when people are hurt.

Many people who don't fly a lot or aren't well-versed in aviation may never have experienced such turbulence; to many, turbulence is a bit of chop now and then, and if that's all you've ever experienced, it's easy to let your guard down. I'm not being an apologist -- having been through heavy turbulence a couple of times, and one sudden drop in the middle of hours of calm, I always buckle up. Just trying to add some perspective.



Tradewinds
User currently offlineDingDong From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 661 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 5285 times:

Quoting Jimbobjoe (Reply 19):
And I'm perfectly fine with that. But echoing FoxBravo's thoughts, how would one know when it's ok to use the lavratory and when it's not, if the pilot keeps the seat belts fastened light on at all times?

There are no absolutes here. There is indeed a small window in which they can get injured (such as the lavatory break) even if they did everything else right by the book.

But to answer your question, a pretty good indicator is if the flight crew is able to make an announcement about turbulence ahead or requests the cabin crew cancel any service they're doing and sit down. Either would be times I would try real hard to avoid lavatory trips. Not always possible to defer a trip to the lav, obviously.

But turbulence (whether aircraft-generated or weather-generated) is unfortunately not always foreseenable in advance. In that kind of situation, you'll just have to take your chances when making a decision to visit the lavatory and hope for the best. Usually works out almost always, but not always, unfortunately.

Quoting Tradewinds (Reply 21):
Many people who don't fly a lot or aren't well-versed in aviation may never have experienced such turbulence; to many, turbulence is a bit of chop now and then, and if that's all you've ever experienced, it's easy to let your guard down.

Ignorance of the dangers is common for just about any mode of transportation well beyond aviation, and is expected. But when you're committing yourself to a moving vehicle operated by someone else -- especially professionals, you generally also need to listen to and heed the directives given out by cabin and flight crew with respect to safety measures.

It's a choice for paxs. Not speaking specifically about this flight as it was honestly likely a tragedy that could not be reasonably prevented, but in general: too many paxs (for whatever reasons) are not being an active participant in their own safety -- which is most unfortunate.

Will this ever change? Honestly, probably not, no matter how many incidents like this occurs.

Would seat belts in the lavatory as a more widespread option work out well? Depends. Males using the lav for the quicker option probably wouldn't be sitting down (and thus, not be capable of wearing seat belts). Some females may want to hover above the seat which might make use of seatbelts difficult. Otherwise, it might potentially help some people. But then we get back to the people-not-being-likely-to-wear-seatbelts thing in the first place...

So I doubt there's a practical solution other than to continue R&D into weather systems detection and forecasting. More interesting ideas might be to have a lavatory call button accessible from every seat. Press it, and your seat number gets added to a queue (list) of those waiting for a lavatory. As a lavatory becomes available, there's a small overhead sign (or just a display visible on the PTV or small LCD at the seat) visible in the cabin showing which lavatory is now available for a particular seat number. This would minimize the number of paxs needing to stand in the aisles waiting their turn. Kind of the 'Now serving XXX' sign concept. That would probably only really work if people would uniformly agree to voluntarily abide by this.

[Edited 2009-04-27 00:17:23]


DingDong, honey, please answer the doorbell!
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2613 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 5114 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR



Quoting DingDong (Reply 22):
Would seat belts in the lavatory as a more widespread option work out well?

I normally would wear a seat belt when I'm seated, but I really do not want to wear a lavatory seat belt even if there was one. Can you imagine the seat belt being placed over someone's (naked) lap? No, thank you. Most lavatories have grip bars in them already, in case of turbulance. Sure, sudden, unexpected turbulance happens too quickly for most people to react to, but if there were more conveniently placed grip bars (to either side of the seat) then I would use them.



Boeing 777 fanboy
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Gulf Air Flight Hit By Turbulence Some Injured posted Mon Nov 4 2002 02:55:27 by GF-A330
15 Injured Onboard IB's A346 Due To Turbulence posted Thu Oct 16 2008 23:02:22 by IBERIA747
MU Flight Turbulence - 8 Injured posted Sat May 10 2008 02:27:54 by Musapapaya
15 Injured During Turbulence On SAA Flight posted Tue Jun 26 2007 08:46:26 by Andz
KLM Flight Attendant Injured (turbulence) posted Sun Jan 9 2005 14:39:51 by Floris
Turbulence On Iberia Flights Leaves 44 Injured posted Fri Apr 9 2004 16:43:45 by Summa767
Dragonair A330 Suffered Turbulence, 9 Injured posted Fri Jul 18 2003 10:06:18 by 9V-SPK
Crew And Pax Injured In Turbulence posted Mon Oct 14 2002 15:11:01 by LMML 14/32
CO Flight Encounters Turbulence posted Mon Apr 20 2009 19:00:48 by RonmacIAH
AC Ret. YUL Due "severe Mechanical Turbulence posted Wed Apr 15 2009 19:53:19 by Flood