lxlgu
Posts: 954
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2000 7:12 pm

Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:47 pm

According to News 24
A Westjet aircraft flying from Calgary to Halifax Thursday was hit by servere turbulence
At least 8 paxs were injured
The captain had asked paxs to buckle up but some did not were thrown to the ceiling and some
fell from their seats
A nurse on board provided first aid to the injured whom most escaped serious injuries but two pax
were taken off by stretcher in Halifax

Cheers!
Tony
 
UAEflyer
Posts: 1036
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:29 pm

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:51 pm

I am one of those who are very scared from turbulence, although i fly alot, but i couldn't stop hearing my heart beating (BP high) until i dis-board the aircraft
 
pacifica
Posts: 140
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 4:56 am

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:58 pm

Not to be mean but this really is sort of karma...Every flight I'm on there are always a select few who I notice don't put their seatbelts on when the captain announces to do so for whatever reason. Now if all of these people were injured due to their own ignorance, I have no sympathy (sounds harsh eh?) but if they got hurt because it wasn't there own fault (maybe they were in the washroom already, maybe they didn't hear the announcement) then that really is unfortunate as turbulence like this isn't all that common.
 
Red Panda
Posts: 1433
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2000 12:58 pm

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:01 pm

That is why cabin crew always ask their pax to buckle up especially when the seat belt is sign. What some pax talk back to cabin crew is, " Is it bumpy,huh?!" They jump a little up and down as they talk back just pretending it is really bumpy. Afterall it is pax's choice whether they want to buckle up or not. Just like some on the street still choose to J walk without watching the traffic. Your choice, your risk.

R Panda
 
Red Panda
Posts: 1433
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2000 12:58 pm

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:04 pm

Quoting Pacifica (Reply 2):
Now if all of these people were injured due to their own ignorance, I have no sympathy

Pacifica, I am totally with you.

R Panda
 
manu
Posts: 265
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:22 am

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Fri Sep 07, 2007 9:17 pm

Injury count is 9 according to the CBC.

Main CBC story
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3943
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Fri Sep 07, 2007 9:34 pm

Add to that the dozens of people who unbuckle as soon as the wheels touch down to grab their carryon and scramble to the front, bumping passengers the whole time, just to be first in line.

I think is should be standard to snap the brakes on hard at least one while taxiing to the gate...just to test them...
What the...?
 
RussianJet
Posts: 5982
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:15 am

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:14 pm

Quoting Red Panda (Reply 3):
Your choice, your risk.

Not exactly - you fall off the ceiling during severe turbulence where are you going to land? Quite possibly on the guy next to you. So no, it's actually for EVERYBODY'S sake, not just your own personal choice to buckle up or not.
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
 
avroarrow
Posts: 804
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2001 10:40 am

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:40 pm

I guess the people can't have been injured all that badly since the CBC article says they hit turbulence north of Sudbury yet they continued to Halifax and didn't divert. I guess having a nurse on board who helped out made it an easier decision for the crew.
Give me a mile of road and I can take you a mile. Give me a mile of runway and I can show you the world.
 
jimbobjoe
Posts: 450
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2001 2:04 pm

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Sat Sep 08, 2007 4:40 am

Does anyone know at what altitude this occurred? Would this have been with a 300 series or an NG series aircraft?
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18971
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Sat Sep 08, 2007 4:50 am

Quoting Jimbobjoe (Reply 9):
Does anyone know at what altitude this occurred? Would this have been with a 300 series or an NG series aircraft?

39,000 ft. according to news reports. All WestJet 737s are NGs. They operate the 600, 700 and 800.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7876
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Sat Sep 08, 2007 4:55 am

I hope they sue, and get nothing. Perhaps booted off the court with Westjet's legal bills.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7876
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Sat Sep 08, 2007 4:59 am

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 7):
Not exactly - you fall off the ceiling during severe turbulence where are you going to land? Quite possibly on the guy next to you. So no, it's actually for EVERYBODY'S sake, not just your own personal choice to buckle up or not.

Good point, however that should probably be settled between the injured/victim pax and the rule-offender pax, not Westjet. Ultimately Westjet can't force someone to buckle up*, short of pulling a gun (which wouldn't be right).

*Even enforcing it would be difficult. Certainly exposes their own employees.

[Edited 2007-09-07 22:00:55]
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
Boeingluvr
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 1:56 am

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Sat Sep 08, 2007 7:45 am

Quoting Pacifica (Reply 2):
Not to be mean but this really is sort of karma...Every flight I'm on there are always a select few who I notice don't put their seatbelts on when the captain announces to do so for whatever reason. Now if all of these people were injured due to their own ignorance, I have no sympathy (sounds harsh eh?) but if they got hurt because it wasn't there own fault (maybe they were in the washroom already, maybe they didn't hear the announcement) then that really is unfortunate as turbulence like this isn't all that common.

Agreed.
 
ZBBYLW
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:17 am

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Sat Sep 08, 2007 7:54 am

Quoting Pacifica (Reply 2):
Not to be mean but this really is sort of karma...Every flight I'm on there are always a select few who I notice don't put their seatbelts on when the captain announces to do so for whatever reason. Now if all of these people were injured due to their own ignorance, I have no sympathy (sounds harsh eh?) but if they got hurt because it wasn't there own fault (maybe they were in the washroom already, maybe they didn't hear the announcement) then that really is unfortunate as turbulence like this isn't all that common.

I dont think anyone here things your mean, I fully support what you said. Perhaps next time they will learn from their mistakes. If they sue (not hoping they do) I also agree that they should also have to pay WS's legal fees and this is coming from someone who hates WS :p.
Keep the shinny side up!
 
User avatar
WildcatYXU
Posts: 2606
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 2:05 pm

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Sat Sep 08, 2007 7:59 am

Well...I buckle up before pushback and unbuckle once we stop at the gate. Only exceptions being (very seldom) if I have to use the can. I guess there is a reason to do so.
OTOH I'd like to be on this flight. Call me crazy, but I love turbulence.
310, 319, 320, 321, 333, 343, 345, 346, 732, 735, 73G, 738, 744, 752, 762, 763, 77L, 77W, 788, AT4, AT7, BEH, CR2, CRA, CR9, DH1, DH3, DH4, E75, E90, E95, F28, F50, F100, Saab 340, YAK40
 
Boeingluvr
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 1:56 am

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Sat Sep 08, 2007 11:36 am

If they sue... How is turbulance WS's fault? It's not like a fault with the aircraft that caused injury or on the airlines policies in flight could warrant it... perhaps. But the thing is they advised of turbulance, the captain put the seat belt sign on light on and the fact that they didn't means that as they were given sufficient and fair warning and advised of what to do for safety reasons by the crew, it is their own ignorance for the injury. I could see them right now in a court gettin questioned... "so you claim you banged your head on the overhead compartment because of turbulance, yet your seat belt was done up?" Like how would someone justify sueing them. It's retardedness and it's people trying to get something for nothing from an airline... I can't stand retards... the worlds full of em.
 
SFO777200LR
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 1:40 am

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Sat Sep 08, 2007 11:46 am

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 11):
PPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 3883 posts, RR: 14
Reply 11, posted Fri Sep 7 2007 12:55:50 your local time (6 hours 44 minutes 34 secs ago) and read 423 times:


I hope they sue, and get nothing. Perhaps booted off the court with Westjet's legal bills.

Couldn't have said it better myself!
To take flight is like to make love; one must have ecstasy, passion, and a majestic partner.
 
jimbobjoe
Posts: 450
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2001 2:04 pm

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Sat Sep 08, 2007 4:38 pm

Quoting Boeingluvr (Reply 16):
How is turbulance WS's fault?

Severe forms are often but not always avoidable. A 300 meter altitude change is pretty intense. (I'm estimating 30 meters/sec for about 10 seconds. Is that reasonable?) Naturally there will be some sorta investigation, as indicated in the article, to see if there was something that the pilots failed to do.

Having said that, all of the successful turbulence suits I've heard of had to do with psychological trauma. (The fact is, moderate to severe turbulence is traumatic for a wide variety of individuals, it's "reasonably" avoidable and it's not common enough to legitimately say it's a part and parcel of the flying experience.)
 
Boeingluvr
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 1:56 am

RE: Westjet In Turbulence Incident

Sun Sep 09, 2007 3:34 am

Yes that is true. Turbulance however, especially that of unforecasted turbulance in this incident is at no fauilt to WS. I can understand if it was forecasted or had they known and taken earlier precautions then it is understandable. An act of nature is simply that. Bad winds or weather is not the fault of the airline.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AsiaTravel, Baidu [Spider], BoeingVista, cougar15, etops1, Google Adsense [Bot], KarelXWB, Mani87, mtnwest1979, pdx, RalXWB, withak, Zaf and 225 guests