Qantas A330-300 Turbulence Incident Over Borneo

[Razoray]

Lomapaseo.....

I do not. But the press is running wild.

And the more negative press that comes out the more concerned passengers will become.

[lomapaseo]

the press is running wild.

And the more negative press that comes out the more concerned passengers will become.

Most of the passengers concern from reading the press will be confusion, but they will remain as passengers hoping for a better outcome. Eventually the press will turn to something else like an earthquake or a bus plunge off a bridge.

[vapilot2004]

Razoray:

Airbus really has no public confidence issues now. In their early days, there was a concerted effort by the media to focus on them and their new-to-the-world-of-commercial-aviation aircraft, particularly on any shortcomings, real or imagined - but no more.

This is simply how the mass media operates. Had there been a highly publicized and very negative incident involving, say for example a Braniff Airlines Captain (sorry Braniff - RIP), it's a safe bet that in the coming weeks we would be subjected to a stream of news reports even if a Braniff pilot were to merely break wind. It's the nature of the beastly media.

[P2bleed]

The press

I spoke to a friend of mine (pilot) who was on the flight. He explained that as he was asleep with his seat belt on he was unaware of the occurance. When he did wake up a baby was crying and a hotess explain the situation.

He gave Qantas a 10 for the debriefing after the arrival into Perth.

[Hydroman400]

I don't think Airbus need to worry, this seems to be another case of flight crew not using the weather radar correctly....ciampino incident, dragon air and many more. The buck stops with the airline to ensure that the crew are fully trained to use the equipment.

[DC-ATE]

Hydroman400 -

I don't think Airbus need to worry, this seems to be another case of flight crew not using the weather radar correctly....

While that is possible, unless you were in the cockpit AND know how to use airborne radar yourself, I think you should reconsider your accusation.

[Hydroman400]

With all due respect DC-ATE I don't think I will. I'll wait for the report on this one but it would not be the first time incorrect use of the weather radar was a contributing factor.

[falconer1]

WX radar & such

there is a halfway decent thread in the Tech section here about WX radar and training..

so please be our guest there..

and no, WX radar has not changed THAT much in the last 40 years..

it's been dressed up in bits & bytes, and low or high power X or C band, whatever you prefer, but it still carries exactly the same limitations as it did 40 years ago..only in color now.. a bit like TV...actually the program has gotten worse a bit...

so let's discuss that in the tech section down below

[Groaner]

Pax/CC discipline

I've also noticed pax are slooowly getting better at keeping their belts on. But IMHO it is not-so-subtly discouraged by cabin crew who ignore seatbelt warnings.

Sure, many do the right thing, and of course there are phases of the flight where the CC are supposed to be walking around whilst the pax are belted up.

But surely everyone here can recall cases of CC sitting on jump seats doing not much without belts on? Pax see this, and (a natural human instinct) feel that if they (the CC experts) don't bother, then why should they?

[filejw]

Using wx radar is not a perfict when it comes to turbulence avoidance. You can be using every tool in the box and still get crap beat out of you...

[A37575]

so let's discuss that in the tech section down below

Aircraft clipping the tops of CB's in IMC and then getting into all sorts of trouble, is a common occurrence world wide. Only the pilots concerned will know why they didn't "see" the offending cloud on their weather radar and for obvious reasons involving legal liability, media interest and job security they ain't gonna talk! While most of the new radars may give give a better "view", at medium altitudes the problem will always exist of low reflectivity of CB tops at high altitudes.

Some Pilot Radar Information Handbooks are supplied with the radar installation. From my experience, these POH are very often not made available to pilots unless they are keen enough to search for them in operator's technical libraries. Occasionally, selected paragraphs from these POH may find their way into company operations manuals. The result is that the art of radar weather interpretation is often a case of learning on the job, with the occasional "mistake" causing broken bones and scared passengers.

Some of the best lessons are learned by "playing" with the radar tilt and Gain controls while looking at isolated CB cells as you pass them by in VMC.

I have no experience of the latest radars installed in the big jets, but believe me, it was the careful use of the variable Gain Control set to max gain in the older radars, that allowed you to pick up the dry tops of big cells and thus warn you of something big ahead and allow time to take whatever action was necessary to avoid the weather.

The Auto or CAL setting of the radar Gain control is not always the optimum setting at high altitudes. If a variable Gain is available, then taking it out of Auto or CAL to the Maximum Gain stop at high cruise altitudes (30,000 to 37,000 ft in the 737 I flew), can often give a tiny "echo" within 40 miles ahead of the top of a CB. But it goes without saying you must know what you are looking for. It appears as a few almost indiscernable dots on the screen - and if you have that dot(s) with zero tilt, then you can be sure there is a big bugger ahead.

If you return to Auto or CAL (depending on the radar type) the echo vanishes and you wouldn't have a clue about what is ahead unless you lower the tilt control. It is the CB top that concerns you because in IMC you can't always "see" it.

You can have all the mathematical calculations you like when talking about tilts and ground returns and so on but I could never remember them anyway. But I do know from long experience that the variable Gain control set to maximum setting at high cruise levels was a life saver on more than a few occasions among seriously nasty areas of CB's.

[Yaw String]

A37575
Agree on your technique and do the same, most successfully, so far!
Patrolled the cabin on way back home yesterday and reminded the 20% of pax to strap in! Not to say that they didn't just unstrap after I had gone!

[linksys]

I agree,

Don't forget about "Wx/turb" function which is really good up to 40nm range.

[Phlap1]

Its not about functions. These low power digital toys simply
do not penetrate nor show enough of the true weather ahead.
Is the power output 10% or less of older (inferior) radars NO
probably less.So, the radars are low powered toys , the aircraft
are thin, minimally structured toys, the biased aft C of G toy
flight control systems all save weight and fuel.
Until
Bang, we hit a bad cell
All the toys reach their design limits at once

Aviation has reached a watershed, all the toys have come
home to roost, at the bottom of the ocean!

[linksys]

i Agree..

latest RDR-4000 weather radar system, really sucks when it comes to
wx detection beyond 80nm.

[Beausoleil]

Re seatbelts.

I always have my seatbelt on when in my seat. Most people I see do.

That said, please only use the seatbelt sign when there is good reason to expect turbulence. It seems to me passengers have now got used to ignoring it when they want to use the restrooms. partly I think because I've been on a lot of flights where it has been left on for hours on end with no sign of trouble.

Anyone who flies regularly knows that when the pilot expects turbulence that would actually hurt someone not strapped in, he or she doesn't just put the seatbelt sign on, he or she asks the crew to strap in too. Just how dangerous is the threat of turbulence if it's ok for cabin crew to be handing out scalding hot cups of coffee from unsecured trolleys?

It seems to me that passengers should strap in whenever seated. What's needed is a sign that tells people there is a significant danger from getting up and moving around.

[priapism]

AR1 and falconer1,

The reports I have heard indicate that the fasten seat belt sign was not on.
Obviously , neither of you have had to get up to use a toilet on an international flight. It seems nearly all of the pax injured were waiting to use the loo at the time the turbulence hit.

[HarryMann]

Bladders, diuretics and endless visits to the wee-room

It seems nearly all of the pax injured were waiting to use the loo at the time the turbulence hit.

Possibly off topic... possibly relevant?

Seems to me from going to concerts, going to the cinema, and sitting in a/c as SLF, that a helluva lot (of 20 & 30 year olds of both sexes) have a bladder retention time of less than an hour or two, or they are overdrinking..

Constant alcohol/coffee/tea/cola drinking to excess (all diuretics) should be 'discouraged', where it is currently 'encouraged!' - they're all creating a BIG problem for when they get to 40 or 50 IMHO

Being honest, I'm 60 next year, and whilst I know my bladder isn't quite what it was, am astonished that youngsters today can be up and back for a wee 2 to 3 times whilst I 'might' go once, sometimes for comfort rather than absolute necessity.
There 'are' limits to this ridiculous emphasis on 'hydration'... what's the point if water is being replaced by strong diuretics? Seen the size of Americanos & cappucinos being sold as 'small or medium' in the Uk lately - very vulgur and a cheap marketing trick - THAT much coffee is madness - it's meant to be a 'short, sharp quick hit' and not for taking a bloody bath in

PS1. Also worth noting that women have a larger bladder than men, maybe something to do with cave-living & nurturing young c.f fight-or-flight of the hunter...

PS2. Also worth noting that carrying heaps of bottled alcohol on-board (some to be carried off as duty frees) is also 'madness' when so much effort has been put into saving weight in a/c design & manufacture. This not only is heavy itself, but requires space and extra structural weight to constrain and contain it.

[TyreCreep]

Originally Posted by HarryMann

Also worth noting that carrying heaps of bottled alcohol on-board (some to be carried off as duty frees) is also 'madness' when so much effort has been put into saving weight in a/c design & manufacture. This not only is heavy itself, but requires space and extra structural weight to constrain and contain it.

Cask wine in a cardboard box to be served into a paper cup should be fine for economy class, considering how low the fares are anyway. This should save quite a bit of weight, reduce waste and be safer (cannot easily be used as a weapon unlike a glass bottle, and it tends to do people less harm if it flies around the cabin). Potentially more environmentally friendly than plastic bottles and cups too.

[Xeque]

Why do airlines bother with in-flight duty free when just about every major airport now offers arrival duty free at (sometimes) very competitive prices?