SQ Turbulence
Thread Starter
SQ Turbulence
I see the resident "Expert " GT has been on TV telling us just what happened to the SQ flight and he is also a n Expert on turbulence. Lucky we have such a clever fellow eh.
The following 8 users liked this post by RodH:
The following 2 users liked this post by Stationair8:
And he managed to get a plug in for QF in that they “helped develop multi-scan radar, built by Rockwell Collins”. Some research and development department QF must have 🤔
I wouldn’t be surprised if CAAS drops their investigation now that the oracle has spoken.
I wouldn’t be surprised if CAAS drops their investigation now that the oracle has spoken.
The following 4 users liked this post by kitchen bench:
https://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...92a09d6e987da2
How long has Richard Quest been a self appointed expert panelist? Thought he was more of a business journalist?
How long has Richard Quest been a self appointed expert panelist? Thought he was more of a business journalist?
The following 2 users liked this post by Upgraded:
Couple decades ago he was the travel expert and this extended to aviation expert . Business expert has become his thing in the last decade or so . They wheel him out when there is an aviation story .
The following users liked this post:
multi-scan radar,
Didn't this same clown tell us that the Air Asia A320 accident was because it wasn't fitted?
Every time I read something he's written the old adage "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" comes to mind. And yet the RAC of WA's Old Fliers group think he's wonderful - they should know better.
The following 3 users liked this post by Dora-9:
I remember being in the kitchen at the Sim Building in Sydney when he walked in. There were about 10 other pilots in the room and they all shunned him. Amusing to watch and not one pilot walked over and spoke to him.
The following 2 users liked this post by mudguard01:
Originally Posted by Dora
And yet the RAC of WA's Old Fliers group think he's wonderful - they should know better.
[QUOTEWas that jibe really necessary?][/QUOTE]
Well, yes it was or I wouldn't have said it. There's some impressive experience amongst the Old Fliers Group (some of whom are friends of mine), yet they seem to laud GT for all his known failings. I'm baffled as to why.
Well, yes it was or I wouldn't have said it. There's some impressive experience amongst the Old Fliers Group (some of whom are friends of mine), yet they seem to laud GT for all his known failings. I'm baffled as to why.
The following 5 users liked this post by Track5milefinal:
It was day time. They clearly flew through a weather cell. Singapore flight crew are renowned for reading the newspaper. I reckon they just weren't paying attention. The fact that they turned on the seatbelt sign before all sh.t hit the fan, backs up my theory. If they were actively scanning the radar they would have not flown into it, nor would they have turned on the seatbelt at the last second. I reckon they put down the paper and realised too late that they were about to unavoidably hit the CB.
The following 2 users liked this post by Capn Rex Havoc:
Capn Rex:
While I agree it's most likely they flew through a cell and that a CAT event, given the location, is highly unlikely, the rest of your post raises more questions.
Are SQ crews really renowned for "reading the newspaper"? I spent a long time with another Asian carrier, SQ were often discussed, I know many ex-SQ crew, but I'd never heard them accused of this - particularly in this area, where you can really need your wits about you. Can you support this statement please? How do you know they weren't actively scanning the radar? A cell penetration doesn't automatically preclude using the radar. Possibly there was an interpretation error, with the B777 radar you can get into a situation where the entire screen paints red - how do you avoid the most dangerous cells then? There was a theory floating around that in this situation you took the Gain out of Auto and fully decreased it, what still painted was to be avoided - I got an epic lightning strike trying this! Or maybe there was an issue with the multi-scan radar (this happens too, from my own experience).
I really would like to know. From what I know (first hand) about this airline though, they can be quite tight-lipped about incidents - they'll promulgate changed procedures, but either not tell you what actually occurred or omit pertinent factors. I truly hope this is not the case with this episode.
While I agree it's most likely they flew through a cell and that a CAT event, given the location, is highly unlikely, the rest of your post raises more questions.
Are SQ crews really renowned for "reading the newspaper"? I spent a long time with another Asian carrier, SQ were often discussed, I know many ex-SQ crew, but I'd never heard them accused of this - particularly in this area, where you can really need your wits about you. Can you support this statement please? How do you know they weren't actively scanning the radar? A cell penetration doesn't automatically preclude using the radar. Possibly there was an interpretation error, with the B777 radar you can get into a situation where the entire screen paints red - how do you avoid the most dangerous cells then? There was a theory floating around that in this situation you took the Gain out of Auto and fully decreased it, what still painted was to be avoided - I got an epic lightning strike trying this! Or maybe there was an issue with the multi-scan radar (this happens too, from my own experience).
I really would like to know. From what I know (first hand) about this airline though, they can be quite tight-lipped about incidents - they'll promulgate changed procedures, but either not tell you what actually occurred or omit pertinent factors. I truly hope this is not the case with this episode.
Last edited by Dora-9; 24th May 2024 at 22:05.
The following 3 users liked this post by Dora-9:
Just heard a radio news reader say, with no hint of irony or humour: “Singapore Airlines are tightening their seatbelt rules.”
The following 3 users liked this post by Lead Balloon:
While a seatbelt will not protect the wearer from objects flying around the cabin, what we really need to know about this incident is; did all the seatbelts work as advertised?
The following users liked this post:
Capn Rex:
While I agree it's most likely they flew through a cell and that a CAT event, given the location, is highly unlikely, the rest of your post raises more questions.
Are SQ crews really renowned for "reading the newspaper"? I spent a long time with another Asian carrier, SQ were often discussed, I know many ex-SQ crew, but I'd never heard them accused of this - particularly in this area, where you can really need your wits about you. Can you support this statement please? How do you know they weren't actively scanning the radar? A cell penetration doesn't automatically preclude using the radar. Possibly there was an interpretation error, with the B777 radar you can get into a situation where the entire screen paints red - how do you avoid the most dangerous cells then? There was a theory floating around that in this situation you took the Gain out of Auto and fully decreased it, what still painted was to be avoided - I got an epic lightning strike trying this! Or maybe there was an issue with the multi-scan radar (this happens too, from my own experience).
I really would like to know. From what I know (first hand) about this airline though, they can be quite tight-lipped about incidents - they'll promulgate changed procedures, but either not tell you what actually occurred or omit pertinent factors. I truly hope this is not the case with this episode.
While I agree it's most likely they flew through a cell and that a CAT event, given the location, is highly unlikely, the rest of your post raises more questions.
Are SQ crews really renowned for "reading the newspaper"? I spent a long time with another Asian carrier, SQ were often discussed, I know many ex-SQ crew, but I'd never heard them accused of this - particularly in this area, where you can really need your wits about you. Can you support this statement please? How do you know they weren't actively scanning the radar? A cell penetration doesn't automatically preclude using the radar. Possibly there was an interpretation error, with the B777 radar you can get into a situation where the entire screen paints red - how do you avoid the most dangerous cells then? There was a theory floating around that in this situation you took the Gain out of Auto and fully decreased it, what still painted was to be avoided - I got an epic lightning strike trying this! Or maybe there was an issue with the multi-scan radar (this happens too, from my own experience).
I really would like to know. From what I know (first hand) about this airline though, they can be quite tight-lipped about incidents - they'll promulgate changed procedures, but either not tell you what actually occurred or omit pertinent factors. I truly hope this is not the case with this episode.
I heard from a number of Expat pilots who flew with SQ pre Covid and now work for my airline. They emphatically stated that the local SQ crews would put the "Strait" newspaper over the windshield to block out the sun, and avidly read the paper. I don't know what they did, obviously, but I am sure that SQ will bury and spin the real cause to avoid any loss of face and minimise the impending court cases that they are going to experience.
The following users liked this post:
They emphatically stated that the local SQ crews would put the "Strait" newspaper over the windshield to block out the sun, and avidly read the paper
Capn Rex - PM sent.