Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
mikelive
Topic Author
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:45 am

24 injured due to severe turbulence on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 11:25 am

I guess the A320 took quite a good beating aloft.

"People were floating," said passenger Rhonda Lynam of Pebble Beach, California. "All of a sudden, it was as if you're on an elevator, 50 stories high, and it goes out of control. Then you hit the bottom."

Lynam described how passengers were lifted out of their seats, with several of them being slammed into the ceiling and overhead compartments as the plane dropped violently. "People were being tossed around like rag dolls," she said. "Everybody was crying and screaming. The plane was like a disaster.'


http://abcnews.go.com/US/jetblue-flight ... d=41323011
Last edited by qf789 on Mon Aug 15, 2016 4:23 am, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: spelling in title
 
Scorpio
Posts: 5043
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SAC flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 11:29 am

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why you always keep your seatbelt on while on an aircraft...
 
B6JFKH81
Posts: 2171
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 6:35 am

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SAC flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 11:43 am

I was wondering why I was seeing ferry flight notifications from RAP this morning. Yikes.

Suggest thread title change from SAC to SMF which is the airport code for Sacramento.

Looks like a/c is OOS in RAP as it goes through inspections.

Wishing the injured customers a speedy recovery!
"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
 
sk736
Posts: 734
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:47 am

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SAC flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 11:48 am

Serves them right if they were seated but not wearing their seat belts.
 
ktof
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 11:31 am

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SAC flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 11:56 am

sk736 wrote:
Serves them right if they were seated but not wearing their seat belts.


Although personally I keep my seatbelt on throughout flights, only taking it off to use the WC, I think it's very unpleasant to say it "serves them right."

At the end of the day, as soon as that seatbelt sign is switched off, passengers are welcome to stand up and take their seatbelt off as they please. Be it for comfort reasons or just for ease of movement.

What you're saying is if someone takes their seatbelt off on an aircraft they deserve to be tossed around like clothes in a washing machine and injured....how pleasant.
 
b747400erf
Posts: 3165
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SAC flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 12:11 pm

sk736 wrote:
Serves them right if they were seated but not wearing their seat belts.


And did you see what the women were wearing?? They deserved it!
 
User avatar
787fan8
Posts: 517
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 8:05 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SAC flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 12:14 pm

Yikes! I wish those injured a speedy recovery.
Atlanta is an incredibly cool city - Andrew Lincoln

Future Auburn graduate
 
User avatar
tjwgrr
Posts: 2505
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2000 4:09 am

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SAC flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 12:28 pm

B6JFKH81 wrote:
Suggest thread title change from SAC to SMF which is the airport code for Sacramento.


Actually, SAC is Sacramento Executive Airport with the longest runway at 5500 ft.
Direct KNOBS, maintain 2700' until established on the localizer, cleared ILS runway 26 left approach.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 5992
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SAC flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 1:11 pm

sk736 wrote:
Serves them right if they were seated but not wearing their seat belts.



Why would you say that? Such a mean spirited thing to say. Especially since you weren't there and dont know the circumstances.
 
Bald1983
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 1:53 pm

mikelive wrote:
I guess the A320 took quite a good beating aloft.

"People were floating," said passenger Rhonda Lynam of Pebble Beach, California. "All of a sudden, it was as if you're on an elevator, 50 stories high, and it goes out of control. Then you hit the bottom."

Lynam described how passengers were lifted out of their seats, with several of them being slammed into the ceiling and overhead compartments as the plane dropped violently. "People were being tossed around like rag dolls," she said. "Everybody was crying and screaming. The plane was like a disaster.'


http://abcnews.go.com/US/jetblue-flight ... d=41323011


I do not mean this to be judgmental, but the moral of the story is keep your seatbelts on.
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18197
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SAC flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 2:33 pm

sk736 wrote:
Serves them right if they were seated but not wearing their seat belts.

I always like to peak into these turbulence threads to see who the perfect, almighty, always-seat belted at all times sanctimonious a-holes are
I don't take responsibility at all
 
richierich
Moderator
Posts: 3629
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2000 5:49 am

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SAC flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 2:38 pm

MaverickM11 wrote:
sk736 wrote:
Serves them right if they were seated but not wearing their seat belts.

I always like to peak into these turbulence threads to see who the perfect, almighty, always-seat belted at all times sanctimonious a-holes are


Hahaha! You are so right on this one!
In my flying experience, I've always noticed it is kind of difficult to use the lavatory while seated with your seat belt fastened.
None shall pass!!!!
 
User avatar
ssteve
Posts: 1398
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 2:39 pm

Serves those lap infants and toddlers right! Flight attendants and people struck in the head, too!
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 3830
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 2:44 pm

If the seatbelt sign was off and people were up and about and the turbulence hit suddenly then you really can't say "it serves them right." If people that were seated had their belts un-fastened then I'd be less sympathetic to their mis-fortune. Most airlines will state in their safety briefing that it is their policy that when seated your belt should remain fastened at all time.
 
cat3appr50
Posts: 185
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:44 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 2:55 pm

Sadly here is what CNN's online news allowed to be written in their news article (even though a quote) about this incident, quoting, "People were flying out of their seat belts and hitting their head on the ceiling; it was very scary..."

Passengers don't "fly out of their seatbelts" upon a severe turbulence encounter. IMO this is as ridiculous as saying that when riding a roller coaster during the first major drop, that people fly out of their roller coaster cart under those similar negative g's. Doesn't happen with roller coasters and it doesn't happen with commercial aircraft when belted in. Allowing such information in a news article, even though a quote (surely CNN could have found another passenger to quote that was not obviously hype) is one of the reasons many people are afraid to fly and experience constant stress while flying when they read such things.

People exit their seats on commercial aircraft during serious turbulence encounters when they don't listen to the Crew request/recommendation to wear their seat belt when seated (and unless your going to the restroom don't mill around the aisles for extended times out of their seat). This announcement is made these days on every commercial flight.
 
flyrocoak
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 3:14 pm

I totally believe that passengers should always wear their seatbelt at all times except when getting up to use the lavatory or get something out of the overhead. Given that this occurred midway through their flight, it wouldn't be unusual that some of those injured were out of their seat for legitimate reasons assuming this was unexpected and the seatbelt light was off. And, the flight attendants were simply doing their job. I'm guessing it was sudden and unexpected.

I'm a frequent flyer and I have been in some pretty decent bouts of turbulence. My biggest worry about turbulence is that it could be so severe that the auto pilot gets kicked off and the pilots simply can't respond to the controls as they are being thrown about. Does that ever occur? Or is it that no matter how bad the turbulence, pilots can always manage the controls at every moment? I know that I am holding on when it occurs :-). I can't imagine trying to fly the aircraft in those moments and maintain navigational awareness.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 5992
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 3:37 pm

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/JBU4 ... /KBOS/KRAP

Let me say this, Captain, Dispatcher, and JetBlue have to answer for this one.

Sorry, don't mean to second guess, but this flight went right thru areas of known convective activity when just moving the flight plan 100 miles north would have kept the aircraft in the clear.

No reason for this garbage. 1. Saving fuel $$ 2. Saving time.

Now there are people hurt.

Unacceptable.
 
User avatar
LeCoqFrancais
Posts: 418
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:03 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 3:48 pm

I must say that I find it very ironic that the plane involved in this incident is named Clear Blue Sky...
Sébastien C. Tourillon
 
N757ST
Posts: 1031
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 6:00 am

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 3:50 pm

Flight aware radar isn't accurate for the whole flight. You can't hang the crew for that. You weren't there, wait for the facts to come out.
 
ASFlyer
Posts: 1726
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 1:25 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 3:59 pm

jfklganyc wrote:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/JBU429/history/20160811/2125Z/KBOS/KRAP

Let me say this, Captain, Dispatcher, and JetBlue have to answer for this one.

Sorry, don't mean to second guess, but this flight went right thru areas of known convective activity when just moving the flight plan 100 miles north would have kept the aircraft in the clear.

No reason for this garbage. 1. Saving fuel $$ 2. Saving time.

Now there are people hurt.

Unacceptable.


Why would you say that? Such a mean spirited thing to say. Especially since you weren't there and dont know the circumstances.
 
User avatar
SomebodyInTLS
Posts: 1855
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 3:59 pm

flyrocoak wrote:
My biggest worry about turbulence is that it could be so severe that the auto pilot gets kicked off and the pilots simply can't respond to the controls as they are being thrown about.


The last thing you want when you hit turbulence is for someone at the controls to be slinging the yoke or joystick around as well. There's no way a human can respond as fast as the gusts, nor can the aircraft beat its own inertia to "steer" through it. If an over-reactive and disorientated pilot made things worse by trying to fight the turbulence, then I'd be worried...

Automated systems can reduce the effects by actively countering the fluctuating forces on the wings (gust alleviation) but in terms of "responding to controls" you pretty much want to leave it be. The turbulence is not really changing the direction of the aircraft, so just ride it out... (or turn gently)
"As with most things related to aircraft design, it's all about the trade-offs and much more nuanced than A.net likes to make out."
 
flyrocoak
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 4:24 pm

SomebodyInTLS wrote:

The last thing you want when you hit turbulence is for someone at the controls to be slinging the yoke or joystick around as well. There's no way a human can respond as fast as the gusts, nor can the aircraft beat its own inertia to "steer" through it. If an over-reactive and disorientated pilot made things worse by trying to fight the turbulence, then I'd be worried...

Automated systems can reduce the effects by actively countering the fluctuating forces on the wings (gust alleviation) but in terms of "responding to controls" you pretty much want to leave it be. The turbulence is not really changing the direction of the aircraft, so just ride it out... (or turn gently)



Thanks. I think you just cleared that up for me. With severe turbulence, a pilot doesn't need to react to every movement, lets the inertia push it through and go with it as much as possible. Flying out of LAS Sunday afternoon, as we were making the first left turn to avoid the mountain range after takeoff, we suddenly shot upward to the point where we were strongly pushed down into our seats, and then seconds later we started dropping into a fall. I was thinking it was a counter reaction initiated by the pilots or auto pilot. Good times!
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 4:30 pm

I'd imagine some of the injuries could be people struck by other people. Regardless, I'd think 20 ish out of 150 ish (not sure of the load) is not a huge number unbelted. If some were actually belted but injured by others, it could be 10-15 people unbelted, not a huge number. Still, that's a lot of injuries.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
piedmont762
Posts: 456
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 9:14 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 4:44 pm

Why the hell would the pilot even risk flying through such conditions - or was this an extremely rare event?
 
mcogator
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:51 am

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 4:55 pm

My biggest fear when I'm flying is when I go to the bathroom to go #1. I'm quite tall at 6'6(198 cm), and on narrow bodies I'm always bending my neck at odd angles in order to fit. If one of these incidents happen, it's quite possible I could break my neck and become paralyzed. I always wear my seat belt when seated.
“Traveling – it leaves you speechless, then turns you into a storyteller.” – Ibn Battuta
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 3830
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 5:19 pm

mcogator wrote:
My biggest fear when I'm flying is when I go to the bathroom to go #1. I'm quite tall at 6'6(198 cm), and on narrow bodies I'm always bending my neck at odd angles in order to fit. If one of these incidents happen, it's quite possible I could break my neck and become paralyzed. I always wear my seat belt when seated.

My suggestion is that you have a seat - #1 or not
 
User avatar
baldred05
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 5:32 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 6:29 pm

We will have to wait until the investigation is complete. I wonder where exactly the turbulence took place. I'll assume it was somewhere over South Dakota. I was just flying to RAP a few weeks ago with my wife and it was pretty bumpy on a clear day. I pulled up a radar loop on intellicast for the time period over South Dakota and Minnesota. The green and orange echoes didn't begin to spawn until around 2100 GMT from what I could tell. Also JBU471 BOS-SJC and JBU487 BOS-LAX appeared to be on the same route as the affected flight and were ahead of them according to flightradar24. I wonder if they experienced anything. I tried to find PIREPs on AWC, but they only have it for a 12 hour period, so I'm a little late in my amateurish investigation. I'm happy everyone is safe given the circumstances.
 
User avatar
baldred05
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 5:32 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 6:42 pm

jfklganyc wrote:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/JBU429/history/20160811/2125Z/KBOS/KRAP

Let me say this, Captain, Dispatcher, and JetBlue have to answer for this one.

Sorry, don't mean to second guess, but this flight went right thru areas of known convective activity when just moving the flight plan 100 miles north would have kept the aircraft in the clear.

No reason for this garbage. 1. Saving fuel $$ 2. Saving time.

Now there are people hurt.

Unacceptable.


2 JBU flights appeared to be on the same route ahead of the affected flight. I wonder how their ride was. I wonder what the investigation will yield. It's easy to play Monday morning quarterback, so let's not jump to accusing anyone right now. mod-svr echoes hadn't started developing in the SD-MN area until 2100 UTC.
 
dfwjim1
Posts: 2453
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:46 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 8:28 pm

When my wife heard the new about this flight she thought it was a regularly scheduled flight that B6 ran between BOS and RAP. Such is the life of someone who is not an A-Nutter!
 
mcogator
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:51 am

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Fri Aug 12, 2016 10:26 pm

ER757 wrote:
mcogator wrote:
My biggest fear when I'm flying is when I go to the bathroom to go #1. I'm quite tall at 6'6(198 cm), and on narrow bodies I'm always bending my neck at odd angles in order to fit. If one of these incidents happen, it's quite possible I could break my neck and become paralyzed. I always wear my seat belt when seated.

My suggestion is that you have a seat - #1 or not


You know how difficult that is? I might not be able to get up.
“Traveling – it leaves you speechless, then turns you into a storyteller.” – Ibn Battuta
 
User avatar
LeCoqFrancais
Posts: 418
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:03 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Sat Aug 13, 2016 12:01 am

mcogator wrote:
ER757 wrote:
You know how difficult that is? I might not be able to get up.

You lost me there, how is doing #1 sitting down any different then doing #2 sitting down?? And how is it difficult too sit on a toilet? I mean, I'm a man who does #1 and 2 sitting down most of the time and I don't find it difficult at all, at the end sitting down on a toillet is just like sitting on any other chair, so if you can't sit down on a toillet how do you sit down point?
Sébastien C. Tourillon
 
rjdiego
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 11:42 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Sat Aug 13, 2016 12:16 am

jfklganyc wrote:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/JBU429/history/20160811/2125Z/KBOS/KRAP

Let me say this, Captain, Dispatcher, and JetBlue have to answer for this one.

Sorry, don't mean to second guess, but this flight went right thru areas of known convective activity when just moving the flight plan 100 miles north would have kept the aircraft in the clear.

No reason for this garbage. 1. Saving fuel $$ 2. Saving time.

Now there are people hurt.

Unacceptable.


You really can't conclude anything from the Flightaware flight track. First, can you determine when the weather radar data was taken in relation to the flight time? Is it frozen relative to the airplane position as the flight passes or stored from what was existing at the time of landing? The height of the weather in question is not depicted. The storms cells south of the flight track most likely have considerable vertical height, but the flight, where it was positioned, may have been in the clear 20,000 ft above the depicted weather. Also, ATC Ground base radar does not display the intensity of the storms relative to the aircraft the same as airborne radar. ATC controllers frequently inform pilots of severe weather that is low level and not relevant to the actual flight path. The flight track looks like it is 50 plus miles north of the actual active cells. Typical storm avoidance vectoring looks similar to the track close to Rapid City. You can safely skirt thunderstorms by only a few miles if upwind of the cell. I'm not sure this is a case of bad planning. The flight could have been planned 200 miles north and still encountered severe turbulence. Much of the weather avoidance regarding turbulence is by pilot reports. Lets not rush to judgement.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Sat Aug 13, 2016 3:23 am

PlanesNTrains wrote:
I'd imagine some of the injuries could be people struck by other people. Regardless, I'd think 20 ish out of 150 ish (not sure of the load) is not a huge number unbelted. If some were actually belted but injured by others, it could be 10-15 people unbelted, not a huge number. Still, that's a lot of injuries.


One passenger interviewed at RAP after landing said some overhead bins opened and contents fell out onto passengers. Considering how big and heavy many carry-on bags are these days, that probably accounted for some of the injuries.
 
fri3degg
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2016 10:09 pm

Re: 24 injured due to severe turbulance on B6 BOS-SMF flight

Sun Aug 14, 2016 12:48 am

jfklganyc wrote:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/JBU429/history/20160811/2125Z/KBOS/KRAP

Let me say this, Captain, Dispatcher, and JetBlue have to answer for this one.

Sorry, don't mean to second guess, but this flight went right thru areas of known convective activity when just moving the flight plan 100 miles north would have kept the aircraft in the clear.

No reason for this garbage. 1. Saving fuel $$ 2. Saving time.

Now there are people hurt.

Unacceptable.


I hope this is considered on topic: my flight suffered moderate turbulence nearby but a few hours after.

From the flightaware log for JetBlue possibly the worst turbulence appeared shortly before 01:09 UTC (43.4264, -100.4096 near Mosher, South Dakota), and might the climb to 33,400 be the pilot's response to the turbulence? Anyway, by 01:39 UTC the flight was on the ground.

I was on a Norwegian 7096 LAX-LGW and we experienced moderate turbulence for about 40 minutes starting at about 04:50 UTC, approximately at position (43.1670 , -101.3491) near to Vetal, South Dakota, approximately 60 miles away from Mosher. Supposedly the 787 is one of the better aircraft to be in for turbulence, nevertheless I was pretty uncomfortable with it. Obviously it was nothing compared to the experience of the unlucky people on the JetBlue.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/NAX7 ... /KLAX/EGKK

So my flight was 5,000 feet higher, and flying through 60 miles to the east 3 hours 40 minutes later. The G-Airmet turbulence advisories map for the USA (02:45 UTC on 12 August) shows high level turbulence for 36k to 43k feet in the very eastern part of the Dakotas and east towards Lake Superior.

Could Norwegian have re-routed our flight further to the west given the report that they may have heard about the JetBlue and the turbulence reports which would have been available to them? Or perhaps severe turbulence events are so unpredictable that flights have to just go through the same region regardless? My flight does seem to have made efforts to avoid the storm activity indicated on the weather map as it appears on the Flightaware page though I don't know what the timestamp is on that: it appears as 2345 but why that timestamp and for what time zone?

Dave

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos