CX 708 Turbulence
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Thailand
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CX 708 Turbulence
Curious ?
I am not a jet jockey so excuse my ignorance but wouldn't the modern weather radar that airliners are now equipped with alert the flight crew to weather ahead which is very likely to cause severe turbulence. I would think that with such indications the crew could have diverted around such weather or hold untill it dissapated.
Hope all crew and pax are OK.
HONG KONG: Five passengers and three cabin crew on a Cathay Pacific flight from Bangkok to Hong Kong were injured after the plane encountered severe turbulence.
All eight injured people were taken to hospital. As at 10pm Hong Kong time, all fve passengers and one crew member had been treated and discharged. One passenger was from Japan and four from Mainland China.
Two injured cabin crew had suffered "more serious injuries" according to a Cathay Pacific statement and have been kept in hospital overnight for observation and further treatment.
Cathay Pacific staff have been with the injured passengers at all times, helping to keep them in touch with friends and relatives.
Flight CX708 encountered the turbulence when the 'fasten seatbelt' sign had been illuminated about 12 minutes prior to landing.
"The Captain sent a message at 13.51 alerting Hong Kong about the incident and ambulances were waiting when the aircraft landed at Hong Kong International Airport at 14.12. Cathay Pacific staff accompanied the injured passengers and crew to a local hospital and are awaiting an update on the extent of the injuries sustained," the airline said in an earlier statement.
"Cathay Pacific regrets the incident and will do everything possible to provide assistance to the affected passengers and staff."
The aircraft involved was an Airbus A330-300 with 241 passengers and 12 crew aboard.
I am not a jet jockey so excuse my ignorance but wouldn't the modern weather radar that airliners are now equipped with alert the flight crew to weather ahead which is very likely to cause severe turbulence. I would think that with such indications the crew could have diverted around such weather or hold untill it dissapated.
Hope all crew and pax are OK.
HONG KONG: Five passengers and three cabin crew on a Cathay Pacific flight from Bangkok to Hong Kong were injured after the plane encountered severe turbulence.
All eight injured people were taken to hospital. As at 10pm Hong Kong time, all fve passengers and one crew member had been treated and discharged. One passenger was from Japan and four from Mainland China.
Two injured cabin crew had suffered "more serious injuries" according to a Cathay Pacific statement and have been kept in hospital overnight for observation and further treatment.
Cathay Pacific staff have been with the injured passengers at all times, helping to keep them in touch with friends and relatives.
Flight CX708 encountered the turbulence when the 'fasten seatbelt' sign had been illuminated about 12 minutes prior to landing.
"The Captain sent a message at 13.51 alerting Hong Kong about the incident and ambulances were waiting when the aircraft landed at Hong Kong International Airport at 14.12. Cathay Pacific staff accompanied the injured passengers and crew to a local hospital and are awaiting an update on the extent of the injuries sustained," the airline said in an earlier statement.
"Cathay Pacific regrets the incident and will do everything possible to provide assistance to the affected passengers and staff."
The aircraft involved was an Airbus A330-300 with 241 passengers and 12 crew aboard.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fishing Expedition
Clearly this thread was started by either a journalist, or an ambulance chasing lawyer.
Let's all do ourselves a favour, and not give these scum sucking bottom dwellers any ammunition to attack our profession.
Let's all do ourselves a favour, and not give these scum sucking bottom dwellers any ammunition to attack our profession.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Singapore
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To he who knows it all.
I am none of what you accused me of. Especially as quoted below and I resent your remarks.
Are you so up yourself that you can make assumpions like that.
Or are you so unprofessional that you can't comment on a simple question and not be paranoid that someone is out to get you.
Your language does not go with the profession you CLAIM to be a part of but does give an indication of your mentality and lack of class.
You sir are a gutter dweller.
QUOTE: scum sucking bottom dwellers any ammunition to attack our profession.
Are you so up yourself that you can make assumpions like that.
Or are you so unprofessional that you can't comment on a simple question and not be paranoid that someone is out to get you.
Your language does not go with the profession you CLAIM to be a part of but does give an indication of your mentality and lack of class.
You sir are a gutter dweller.
QUOTE: scum sucking bottom dwellers any ammunition to attack our profession.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Thailand
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Bell 1st
Thanks for your reply.
The question was put to me by some of my cabin crew trainees.
Mainly they were asking about advanced warning of turbulence for cabin crew because in this incident some cabin crew were badly injured.
Having read your reply we can assume that the flight crew cannot always give advanced warning of turbulence and therefore give cabin crew the chance to strap in.
I thought this was the case with CAT but thought that in thunder storm conditions turbulence can be reasonably predicted.
P.S. Sorry to the others, didn't realise the term "Jet Jockey" was such a touchy subject. Thought it was common term worldwide. Meant no offence.
In futire will use the term " Pilots of fixed wing aircraft powered by gas turbine engines".
The question was put to me by some of my cabin crew trainees.
Mainly they were asking about advanced warning of turbulence for cabin crew because in this incident some cabin crew were badly injured.
Having read your reply we can assume that the flight crew cannot always give advanced warning of turbulence and therefore give cabin crew the chance to strap in.
I thought this was the case with CAT but thought that in thunder storm conditions turbulence can be reasonably predicted.
P.S. Sorry to the others, didn't realise the term "Jet Jockey" was such a touchy subject. Thought it was common term worldwide. Meant no offence.
In futire will use the term " Pilots of fixed wing aircraft powered by gas turbine engines".
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Thailand
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree yokebearer....
Weird bunch indeed.
I still don't understand the fuss about the term jet jockey ???
What about the term self loading freight ? Is that acceptable ?
Anyhow seams strange to me I just simply asked quite a simple question and got the sh....t blasted out of me.
Will know in future not to bother to ask this bunch their too far of up themselves.
Weird bunch indeed.
I still don't understand the fuss about the term jet jockey ???
What about the term self loading freight ? Is that acceptable ?
Anyhow seams strange to me I just simply asked quite a simple question and got the sh....t blasted out of me.
Will know in future not to bother to ask this bunch their too far of up themselves.
