4 Aer Lingus Crew hospitalized after turbulence

[PPRuNeUser0176]

4 Aer Lingus Crew members were hospitalized last night after an MXP-DUB flight arrived in Dublin at around 22.00. Turbulence en route caused serous injuries to crew including crew breaking there legs. Airline conducting an investigation.

[fjencl]

Oh dear that sounds nasty.

[nasirrakhangi]

Aer Lingus cabin crew hospitalised after turbulence on flight from Milan (http://www.thejournal.ie/aer-lingus-turbulence-cabin-crew-589023-Sep2012/)

[Tom the Tenor]

Sorry to hear about the cabin crew being hurt in the turbulence. Hope they will be on the mend soon.

[DaveReidUK]

Happily, well relatively speaking, the referenced article suggests broken ankle rather than broken leg.

Could have been worse, I suppose.

[paddybiggles]

Glad to see that this flight had the benefit of 2 pilots. I'm glad they had that covered.:rolleyes:

[reverserunlocked]

Without knowing more it sounds like CAT. I remember a long while ago climbing out of AMS in a KLM 767 en route to BEY and just as the crew were released we literally fell into a hole in the sky. The skipper was quick to seat the crew but save for the initial drop, which I can only describe as having the floor fall away under your feet, we just flew on into perfectly still air. Scary stuff and all our crew were lucky that day. I later chatted with the skipper (pre 9/11, sigh) and he told me it was clear air turbulence, unforcasted and undetectable by the wx radar.

[Loose rivets]

Will there be an inquiry at a technical level, and if so, will it be able to detect if a sudden negative g was corrected too vigorously?

[J.O.]

I just want to know if this thread will disappear as fast as the ones that mention anything "negative" about the other Irish airline. :hmm:

[Fullblast]

This forum is full of things negative about the other Irish airline, and sometimes mods just do their job, clean the bull****s thrown in the forum just for the pleasure to talk bad about fr. By the way, whats your post got to do with this 3d? Do you probably think that getting caught in CAT turbulence is something negative about any airline?

[ayroplain]

You can no more blame Aer Lingus for this incident than you can blame Ryanair because some idiot turns up without all required documentation for a flight.

I've done a flew flights UK-IRL this "Summer" and experienced a higher level of turbulence than usual on some of them. On one flight the seatbelt signs were switched off for just 10 minutes so some desperate pax could visit the loo.

[Maddie]

Hi,

Firstly, hope that everybody affected are ok now. I sure it was very scary, even for the experienced crew.

Can I ask was it just unfortunate timing with the plane just happening to be flying through the area at the split second when the cloud/air formation changes caused the clear air turbulence?

What are the chances of this happening again? Do the conditions at Dublin make it more suspectible to CAT - sea and mountain backdrop?

How long would the turbulence have continued for?

Do you think any additional precautions can/will be taken to see if such turbulence can be picked up in advance in future. I understand that it is often virtually impossible to pick up clear up turbulence.

Also, would/could other planes have been affected and if not, how come there appears not to have been any other reports of turbulence around that time.

Sorry for the questions, but as you may know from my previous posts I am both a frequent and nervous flyer and my destination airport is always Dublin.

Thanks for any advice/information.

[DaveReidUK]

Do the conditions at Dublin make it more suspectible to CAT - sea and mountain backdrop?

There is nothing in the article to indicate that the aircraft was anywhere near Dublin when the incident happened.

[911slf]

As a humble slf I take this as a timely reminder that it is worth:
(a) doing what flight attendants say, including listening to the safety briefing
(b) keeping my seat belt fastened unless I need the toilet

[Maddie]

Good afternoon,

Accident: Aer Lingus A320 near Dublin on Sep 7th 2012, flight attendant injured (http://avherald.com/h?article=455911f9&opt=0)

To quote:-

"An Aer Lingus Airbus A320-200, registration EI-CVA performing flight EI-437 from Milan Malpensa (Italy) to Dublin (Ireland) with 62 passengers and 6 crew, was descending through FL140 towards Dublin at about 21:38L (20:38Z) when the crew declared PAN medical emergency and reported one cabin crew member had fallen on board and received a bad fracture of her ankle. The aircraft continued for a safe landing on runway 28 about 12 minutes later....."


The attached link suggests the turbulence occurred on the approach to Dublin, as do they after comments regarding the cloud situation in the vicinity at the time.

That is why I have asked the specific questions in relation to Dublin.

I hope this clarifies.

[wiggy]

Maddie

Where the PAN was declared may not be an accurate indicator of where the turbulence/injury happened.

It's obviously possible the incident happened in the descent but is also possible it happened earlier in the flight and that the PAN call was made for the first time in the descent - in order to get priority for an approach and expedite the arrival of the medics at the aircraft side on parking.

[Maddie]

Hi Wiggy,

Of course, that may be the case.

Thanks for your answer.

[Sober Lark]

ATC recording from ATC Audio Archives | LiveATC.net (http://www.liveatc.net/archive.php)

Select 7th Sep 2012
Select feed - EIDW Del/Gnd/Twr
Select time 20:30-21:00z

First contact with EI437 is 05:00 mins into recording. PAN PAN at 08:34 mins into recording.

This link may take you directly to the recording if not try above http://archive-server.liveatc.net/eidw/EIDW2-Sep-07-2012-2030Z.mp3

[Blind Squirrel]

To answer Maddie's original question, there's nothing about DUB and its environs that makes it any more turbulence-prone than any other major airport in northwest Europe, and she should not feel any special concern about flying there.

[Maddie]

Hi Blind Squirrel,

Thanks for your reply too.

It is crazy, I fly every couple of weeks, (it used to be every week), for almost 9 years now, cos of caring commitments in Dublin and I still am a nervous flyer. I would give anything to be able to get over this fear.

I am also a very analytical and 'grounded' person, my own work is all about numbers!! so if you or anyone else can give me any re-assurance on the odds of this happening again (first question - right place, bad time!) and how long the turbulence may have lasted for, it would be great, then I feel a little bit more prepared.

I know my fear is very illogical and believe me I try to confront it, but still given the choice I would be on the ocean liner instead...

It is a case of needs must..

[lenhamlad]

but still given the choice I would be on the ocean liner instead...

Presumably not with an Italian captain.

[Nervous SLF]

Maddie you are not the only one - see my sign in name :) However I also hate rough sea crossings as well as air turbulence :O

[reverserunlocked]

Maddie,

At the risk of moving us off topic the chances of anything very bad happening as as a result of turbulence is incredibly low. The aircraft is stress tested to limits far beyond that ever encountered in day to day operations and stuff that could really ruin your day is usually detectable on radar and avoided by crew. Clear air turbulence is just that; it occurs in clear air and is more often than not over as soon as its begun. The biggest risk here as seen in this case is usually to the cabin crew. This is why as a passenger it's always wise to keep your seatbelt fastened while seated, just like they tell you.

It's an old adage, but you're a lot safer up there than you are in the car on the way to the airport.

[Blind Squirrel]

Maddie:-

What Reverserunlocked says is quite right. Turbulence -- some version of which will be encountered on almost every flight -- doesn't break aircraft. They're quite incredibly strong, and even more incredibly flexible: you can practically tie a knot in the wings and they still won't break. Nobody likes being bounced around, of course, but in terms of danger to the passengers, as long as you're strapped in -- even reasonably loosely -- the risk is so vanishingly low that it truly isn't worth worrying about. In the past thirty years there have been only three fatal incidents attributable to turbulence in the entire worldwide airline system: one case in Africa, one in the U.S., and one over the Pacific. In all three cases the people concerned weren't wearing their seat belts. In Northwest Europe, where you do most of your flying, the risk is still lower because there aren't any large mountain ranges to cause very serious wave or rotor turbulence and the temperatures aren't high enough to form the kind of big cumulonimbus clouds that you find in, say, West Africa.

Long story short, as long as you're strapped in you can afford to dismiss the entire matter from your mind and concentrate on more important subjects, like whether the 'bus home is going to be on time or not.

[stator vane]

not doubting the wisdom of one with such a nomenclature, but primarily for my own education, could you give the source which covers such a range of coverage, and the specific reference flights and dates of those three?

how long ago was the one over the mountain in Japan? I think it was a DC-8?

and to this event itself, the turbulence need not be much at all to break an ankle. a slight loss of balance whist reaching to put something in an overhead compartment. a broken ankle can be done at home, misjudging the last step going up or downstairs to toilet. ankles are like all our other joints. amazingly strong in most events, but just a slight off angle, they all have serious weak spots.

[a330jockey]

Maddie, what all the others are saying, you are very safe in an airplane. I flew for 33 years and experienced all sorts of turbulence on flights. My conclusion is that one will get some sort of turbulence on most flights. Some of this is very light, whilst on some occasions, it will be more pronounced. But, remember this, what you call turbulence may not be called turbulence by crew! Nevertheless it's still a scary time for you.
I never liked turbulence either! Still don't! But on a flight to/from Dublin, you won't experience it for long and if it is bad or bad turbulence is forecast, the pilots will opt for a different and smoother altitude.
If you can, go on to youtube and find out somewhere that an aircraft is being tested for certification. See how strong an aircraft is!!
Aer Lingus used to give courses for nervous fliers. Maybe google that and I know it would be a worthwhile course for you to take.
I don't know if this helps, but, really flying is such a thrill! Try and relax. Even on my last few flights before retiring, I was still getting goose bumps as I was taking off, I was so excited!! :ok:

[talent]

Stator Vane: At Mount Fuji it wasn't a DC-8, was a Boeing 707 and it belonged to a British airline, BOAC and I just happened to be reading about it last night (in a great book on air crash investigation I got called FLight 427:Anatomy of an AIr Disaster). In 1991 a Boeing 737 had just crashed in turbulent weather at Colorado SPrings killing all 25 aboard and investigators compiled a list of accidents which were blamed on turbulence to see if there was any similarity (Colorado Springs is in the lee of the Rockies)

The BOAC 707 detoured in 1966 to give passengers a good view of Mount Fuji but ran into dreadful turbulence which caused the tail fin to collapse. All 124 aboard died. A US fighter sent up to investigate ran into the same turbulence and was so badly shaken up that it was grounded for checks. The fighter pilot banged his head off the side of cockpit and his oxygen mask came loose. The flight recorder showed G forces ranging from plus 9 to minus 5.

They found another one, again over mountains, when, in 1964, a USAF B-52 bomber lost a large chunk of its tail but managed to land safely when it encountered turbulence over the Rockies. In Alaska in 1968 the right wing was ripped off a Fairchild F-27 and 39 died. In 1966 42 died when a BAC 1-11 disintegrated due to turbulence passing through a line of thunderstorms near Falls City, Nebraska. The last one was not over mountains, but was included to show how turbulence can wreck airplanes.

Spoiler alert: The Colorado SPrings crash wasn't caused by turbulence, it was decided.

[talent]

a330jockey:

Given that there hasn't been a major change in the construction of aluminium aircraft since the 1960s I wonder if the modern rarity of aircraft losses due to turbulence is not due to their strength, but the growing wisdom of pilots applying the lessons learned from MOunt Fuji and other disasters listed above? Added to which, of course, is the terrific improvement in weather forecasting, radar, wind shear detection, and other flying aids?

[Blind Squirrel]

The three episodes to which I referred are as follows:-

1. Oct. 30, 1991: Eastern Air Lines DC9. Florida. One passenger fatality.
2. Sept. 5, 1996: Air France B747. Ougadougou. One passenger fatality.
3. Dec. 28, 1997: United Air Lines B747. Japan. One passenger fatality.

Remember, I said: "the last thirty years." I didn't go back as far as 1966, which is nearly half a century ago.

[angels]

Once you've flown through the stuff they over the Andaman Sea/Bay of Bengal you don't call European bumps turbulence!

Maddie, if you're a numbers person reverseunlocked has said it -- you ought to be more concerned in the car on the way to the airport!

Hope the crew hurt in this incident all recover quickly. :ok:

[lenhamlad]

Once you've flown through the stuff they over the Andaman Sea/Bay of Bengal you don't call European bumps turbulence!

+1

Flown that way many times as a passenger. Earlier this year coming out of KL bound for Muscat during daylight hours, the air was quite hazy but no evidence of CBs. Neverthless we were rocked around for a good hour whilst the captain took us west to avoid the main cell. Despite my many hours in the air as a pax and more recently as a PPL I still get quite disconcerted when being bumped around.

[Maddie]

Good evening all,

Thank you all for taking the time to reply.

I feel a lot more re-assured now, I know I am in good hands and my fears are irrational.

All your words of advice do make a difference and also I feel a little better knowing I am not the only nervous person out there.

[stator vane]

thank you for that. and I certainly was not contesting your statement at all....I was uncertain as to when that, now known to be 707 over Fuji was.
thank you again, squirrel and talent!

[mercurydancer]

Maddie

I am a very nervous flyer and have been since my days in the military. The flight crew are really reassuring when they state quite correctly that you are safe. That is a rational view. However, flight anxiety has some irrational elements to it. The crew can be trusted to get on with the flight and to get you to your destination safely. I have no fear of the aircraft crashing, or turbulence, what I fear is within my own mind.

If it helps, the nervousness is not always a product of rational thought, its a subconscious reaction. It can't be thoroughly controlled by rational thought as the effects can be biological, such as adrenaline release. This can do some odd things to you. You can sometimes recognise the triggers for anxiety and learn to deal with them, such as the take off acceleration. I usually count. One per second. Thousand and one, thousand and two etc. Its a simple thought process and has a progression about it. You just count from one number to the next. Its also finite in that each flight has an estimated arrival time and its possible, although tiring, to count each second. Eventually the anxiety subsides and you miss numbers, for me about 5 minutes after take off. You can then convert the time counting into the length of songs on an ipod, (just 20 songs until we land) or 2 more movies or TV shows. That is the sign that you have successfully controlled the fear.

I have loved ones in the south of Russia, and its usually a three flight journey there. I cant say I enjoy the trip but I can do it. Feel the fear and do it anyway.

[funfly]

The phrase "you are a lot safer in an aircraft than in your car going to the airport" is misleading.
Virtually all car accidents are the result of driver error a high proportion of which are alcohol related. Car drivers are of mixed ability, age and health. Deaths on the road due to car structural faults or environmental issues are so rare as to be non-existent. Car accidents are predominantly non fatal.
It would appear to me that over the last few years passenger most aircraft accidents have been caused by bad decisions made by highly trained, medically fit people.
As a happy flier as long as I have the stick, but nervous commercial passenger, I am aware that flying is inherently safe because I trust guys like most of you. However this does not stop me from feeling nervous every time I board a commercial flight. It seems that I share this with many many others and no amount of statistical information will change this.
As far as cockroaches are concerned...get me out Scotty!

[Maddie]

Good evening all,

Just want to say thanks for the latest contributions.

Believe me it all helps and some of what ye are saying I can identify with, for example, when I put on my ipod and think by the time I get to song x (believe me you wouldn't want to know my music choice), I will have landed.

Also, I know the fear feels worse when I am already feeling a bit under (additional) stress, for whatever reason and/or when I am flying away from my family, rather than travelling towards them.

At the end of the day though, I know I am in very good hands, everybody working on the plane has family and friends they want to return to at the end of the day and are all highly trained and qualified in what they do.

This along with the necessity to get to my family as quickly as possible, is what keeps me flying..


Thanks again.


Maddie

[Thunderbirdsix]

With respect to maddie and her fear of flying amazing how the post went way off topic about the injured crew members which was the original post of this thread, I hope all the crew are ok and make a speedy recovery, strange how the mods did not mention that the posters were off thread, wonder if it was another airline crew that were injured would they have acted different.