Qantas A330-300 Turbulence Incident Over Borneo
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Pretty far away
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Folks, I'm a pilot...............and I hate turbulence because no matter what, you are never really sure of what you're going to get. Maybe I am in the wrong line of work ?
However, asking for flight without turbulence is like asking for a channel crossing without surf.
I do my darned best to avoid them, starting with a thorough flight planning and so far, specially with CAT it's worked well.
It's created some tension with dispatch because they were just lazy and didn't feel like doing the flight plan all over gain. I couldn't care less.
But sometimes, unfortunatly, it's unavoidable. If you have bad weather over the airfield, you still have to go in and that involves bumps.
Having said this, I agree, some pilots do not give a hoot about what the pax feel at the back. This will be the same kind that keeps his PA to a minimum, will let you wonder why you're still taxiing after an hour or why you ve been circling for an hour only to discover that they've diverted to another airport.
However, asking for flight without turbulence is like asking for a channel crossing without surf.
I do my darned best to avoid them, starting with a thorough flight planning and so far, specially with CAT it's worked well.
It's created some tension with dispatch because they were just lazy and didn't feel like doing the flight plan all over gain. I couldn't care less.
But sometimes, unfortunatly, it's unavoidable. If you have bad weather over the airfield, you still have to go in and that involves bumps.
Having said this, I agree, some pilots do not give a hoot about what the pax feel at the back. This will be the same kind that keeps his PA to a minimum, will let you wonder why you're still taxiing after an hour or why you ve been circling for an hour only to discover that they've diverted to another airport.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Auckland, NZ
Age: 79
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seatbelts from pax pov
@Beausoleil--absolutely right. I always have my seatbelt on when seated, and I get annoyed when the Seatbelts sign is left on for ages with no apparent reason, and the cabin crew up. I assume it's sometimes for kya legal reasons. @HarryMann--try not taking a leak Auckland-Los Angeles, or even Auckland-Hong Kong. There's a real problem in the advice given to pax: on the one hand, move around to avoid DVT; on the other, seat belts on at all times. To avoid dehydration, consume lots of fluids, but keep seat belts on at all times. So the sensible passenger keeps their belt fastened, but has to take a leak occasionally. So in any unexpected turbulence, there will always be a chance of a few injuries. So may the skygods remember that some of their passengers are actually quite intelligent, but may have bad luck. Less contempt, please.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nirvana..HAHA..just kidding but,if you can tell me where it is!
Posts: 350
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Groundedpolly,... my new policy when seatbelts have been on for some time due appearance ahead (day) or radar indications (night) of likely turbulence.: When conditions indicate the sudden onset of turbulence..a short PA urging those people in washrooms to make there way back to seats in a timely fashion..whilst trying not to cause nasty accidents due rushing!!! As in ALL situations beyond the norm..good communication will always keep 98% of the folks happy! Depends on how much one cares about ones job me thinks.
..
..
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Confusio Helvetica
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Points of fact in no particular order:
Duty Free generates more profit per kilo than pax.
Women have larger bladders probably because waiting in line is less an option for them than it is for men.
In airliner design, a good way to save money is to delete a lavatory. Duty free generates revenue; serving alcohol makes sure the alcoholics don't fly with someone else, and probably generates revenue as well. Besides, the less a lav is free, the less likely people will try to use it. So you keep them to the required minimum.
Load factors are very high these days.
So on LH you will have people standing in the aisle, waiting to use the head. It only takes one inoperative toilet to make that a crowd.
Duty Free generates more profit per kilo than pax.
Women have larger bladders probably because waiting in line is less an option for them than it is for men.
In airliner design, a good way to save money is to delete a lavatory. Duty free generates revenue; serving alcohol makes sure the alcoholics don't fly with someone else, and probably generates revenue as well. Besides, the less a lav is free, the less likely people will try to use it. So you keep them to the required minimum.
Load factors are very high these days.
So on LH you will have people standing in the aisle, waiting to use the head. It only takes one inoperative toilet to make that a crowd.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Herts, UK
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
... 
Was just pointing out the factors mitigating towards longer queues at the loos... and diuretic drinks are on that list - don't shoot the messenger!
As far as dehydration is concerned, it's probably too late once on-board and slightly dehydrated, as it can take 2 days to rehydrate. Ideally one should be hydrating several days before a long flight, and not exacerbating the situation at altitude by drinking lots of alcohol or coffee.
But of course, we can't 'tell' people what to do, maybe there is some small print in the 'recommendations to pax' when booking a long distance flight
Heaven forfend - we might offend... however well intentioned!
As for 'duty-free profits', why the heck can't that be sorted out at destination, without carrying tons of it around at 35,000 ft and Mach .8 something or other... surely that's not be beyond the wit of man or enterprise, nor negotiation
Was just pointing out the factors mitigating towards longer queues at the loos... and diuretic drinks are on that list - don't shoot the messenger!
As far as dehydration is concerned, it's probably too late once on-board and slightly dehydrated, as it can take 2 days to rehydrate. Ideally one should be hydrating several days before a long flight, and not exacerbating the situation at altitude by drinking lots of alcohol or coffee.
But of course, we can't 'tell' people what to do, maybe there is some small print in the 'recommendations to pax' when booking a long distance flight
Heaven forfend - we might offend... however well intentioned!As for 'duty-free profits', why the heck can't that be sorted out at destination, without carrying tons of it around at 35,000 ft and Mach .8 something or other... surely that's not be beyond the wit of man or enterprise, nor negotiation
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SoCalif
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Duty Free should be killed by special import tariffs. It's an inexcusable waste of energy, unless its value density is so high it would be air cargo anyhow.
What happened to the talk of the QF A330?
GB
What happened to the talk of the QF A330?
GB
Points of fact in no particular order:
Duty Free generates more profit per kilo than pax.
Women have larger bladders probably because waiting in line is less an option for them than it is for men.
In airliner design, a good way to save money is to delete a lavatory. Duty free generates revenue; serving alcohol makes sure the alcoholics don't fly with someone else, and probably generates revenue as well. Besides, the less a lav is free, the less likely people will try to use it. So you keep them to the required minimum.
Load factors are very high these days.
So on LH you will have people standing in the aisle, waiting to use the head. It only takes one inoperative toilet to make that a crowd.
Duty Free generates more profit per kilo than pax.
Women have larger bladders probably because waiting in line is less an option for them than it is for men.
In airliner design, a good way to save money is to delete a lavatory. Duty free generates revenue; serving alcohol makes sure the alcoholics don't fly with someone else, and probably generates revenue as well. Besides, the less a lav is free, the less likely people will try to use it. So you keep them to the required minimum.
Load factors are very high these days.
So on LH you will have people standing in the aisle, waiting to use the head. It only takes one inoperative toilet to make that a crowd.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bath, UK
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, I can't see any reason at all why the size of women's bladders, passengers regardless of gender wanting liquid refreshment and (God forbid!) needing to use the in-flight facilities, has completely taken over what was an interesting thread.
As a probationer here, I hesitate to say that the debate might be better if everyone were to sit down and belt up!
As a probationer here, I hesitate to say that the debate might be better if everyone were to sit down and belt up!
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: In the sky/under a jetway
Age: 55
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As SLF, child of a now retired pilot, I always keep my seatbelt on & have flown through bad turbulence in the past & it never ceases to amaze me how many PAX don't wear their seatbelts.
I've preached to my neighbours around me about keeping it on. But from my point of view, the emergency briefing is often ignored as it's always done in the same routine on every flight on every type of aircraft.
Maybe if trainers were a little ingenious about emergency briefing to change it, make PAX sit up & think there may be a little more concentration on it AND for CC to explain & demonstrate at the end; KEEP your BELT FASTENED LOOSELY throughout the flight!
Show a couple of simulated videos to PAX about what can happen whilst flying through turbulence during taxi-ing - radical but could be effective!
Arik
I've preached to my neighbours around me about keeping it on. But from my point of view, the emergency briefing is often ignored as it's always done in the same routine on every flight on every type of aircraft.
Maybe if trainers were a little ingenious about emergency briefing to change it, make PAX sit up & think there may be a little more concentration on it AND for CC to explain & demonstrate at the end; KEEP your BELT FASTENED LOOSELY throughout the flight!
Show a couple of simulated videos to PAX about what can happen whilst flying through turbulence during taxi-ing - radical but could be effective!
Arik
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Herefordshire
Age: 61
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turbulence incidents
I agree - there seems to be a proliferation of recent turbulence incidence on Airbus aircraft - or is this just a reporting issue. Any reports on other aircraft types of injury-causing turbulence?
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: RSA
Age: 79
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying over, under, etc. CB's
I've always followed a great statement " It's better to say I could have, than to say I should have "............could've gone thru that gap?, is always better than, should've gone round the storm!!!
If you think there is a small chance of a blip being a CB,... AVOID IT !!
Just like B73757 said, those dots are bad news, believe me, been there, done that!
I'm sure this will be helpful in the tech column.
If you think there is a small chance of a blip being a CB,... AVOID IT !!
Just like B73757 said, those dots are bad news, believe me, been there, done that!
I'm sure this will be helpful in the tech column.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For sheer unadulterated stupidity this one is hard to beat even though it happened over 20 years ago;
737 operator flying from Guam to Nauru then to Noumea and Sydney. Typhoon brewing up on 737 track Nauru to Noumea abeam of the Santa Cruz islands. The aircraft weather radar had been u/s all the way from Guam (and before that from Hong Kong). Rather than wait at Guam or Nauru for radar spares and technician from Australia or New Zealand, someone decided the flights should continue all the way to Melbourne where spares available. As a frequent passenger with this company I was aware the radar was u/s and wasn't too happy about travelling but business was urgent and I did.
The captain on the Nauru - Noumea - Melbourne legs decided wisely to keep seat belts on through any IMC. We were in IMC and light chop in the last known position of the typhoon astride our track abeam the Santa Cruz islands. Children were running around the cabin and climbing over seat while seat belts were on. Me, down the back knew radar was u/s and was shi...ting blue lights that we would run smack into CB circling the storm centre. I warned one of the local island flight attendants that the children were in danger as we could clobbered any minute as the crew were flying blind. I was curtly told to mind my own business by the idiot female islander and that the captain knew what he was doing. She had no idea about u/s radar because the captain kept it to the cockpit crew only and had decided not to tell his flight attendants. After all, he reasoned, the seat belts were on so what you don't know won't hurt you.
We hit a couple of CB tops without warning and kids flew in all directions but unhurt. In fact they laughed at free flight. The flight attendants sat down with relatives in the cabin and didn't stop the kids from playing up and down the aisle. No one in that 737 knew what monster CB's were ahead unseen. The FA's had absolutely no bloody idea of the potential danger and the captain never informed them. We arrived in Melbourne eventually.
Heard the 737 departed next day with radar still inop due nil spares and flew same route in reverse with CB's still around. Following day it flew Nauru to Nandi, Fiji and back and encountered very severe turb in CB and on arrival at Nauru airport, captain of that flight grounded the aircraft for turbulence inspection. Spares arrived all the way from Australia a couple of days later. Some operators like to keep to schedule regardless of risk... But as I said, it was well over 20 years ago..
737 operator flying from Guam to Nauru then to Noumea and Sydney. Typhoon brewing up on 737 track Nauru to Noumea abeam of the Santa Cruz islands. The aircraft weather radar had been u/s all the way from Guam (and before that from Hong Kong). Rather than wait at Guam or Nauru for radar spares and technician from Australia or New Zealand, someone decided the flights should continue all the way to Melbourne where spares available. As a frequent passenger with this company I was aware the radar was u/s and wasn't too happy about travelling but business was urgent and I did.
The captain on the Nauru - Noumea - Melbourne legs decided wisely to keep seat belts on through any IMC. We were in IMC and light chop in the last known position of the typhoon astride our track abeam the Santa Cruz islands. Children were running around the cabin and climbing over seat while seat belts were on. Me, down the back knew radar was u/s and was shi...ting blue lights that we would run smack into CB circling the storm centre. I warned one of the local island flight attendants that the children were in danger as we could clobbered any minute as the crew were flying blind. I was curtly told to mind my own business by the idiot female islander and that the captain knew what he was doing. She had no idea about u/s radar because the captain kept it to the cockpit crew only and had decided not to tell his flight attendants. After all, he reasoned, the seat belts were on so what you don't know won't hurt you.
We hit a couple of CB tops without warning and kids flew in all directions but unhurt. In fact they laughed at free flight. The flight attendants sat down with relatives in the cabin and didn't stop the kids from playing up and down the aisle. No one in that 737 knew what monster CB's were ahead unseen. The FA's had absolutely no bloody idea of the potential danger and the captain never informed them. We arrived in Melbourne eventually.
Heard the 737 departed next day with radar still inop due nil spares and flew same route in reverse with CB's still around. Following day it flew Nauru to Nandi, Fiji and back and encountered very severe turb in CB and on arrival at Nauru airport, captain of that flight grounded the aircraft for turbulence inspection. Spares arrived all the way from Australia a couple of days later. Some operators like to keep to schedule regardless of risk... But as I said, it was well over 20 years ago..
What I find interesting about your story Tee Emm is that you allowed the pressure of business to get you on an aeroplane for a flight that you thought was unsafe. Sounds very similar to the thought processes that lead to the operator flying the aircraft with no weather radar so it could get back to a maintenance base.
