Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

4 Aer Lingus Crew hospitalized after turbulence

Wikiposts
Search
Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

4 Aer Lingus Crew hospitalized after turbulence

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10th Sep 2012, 20:41
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
but still given the choice I would be on the ocean liner instead...
Presumably not with an Italian captain.
lenhamlad is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2012, 20:49
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maddie you are not the only one - see my sign in name However I also hate rough sea crossings as well as air turbulence
Nervous SLF is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2012, 21:44
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Middle East
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
reverserunlocked is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2012, 02:29
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rennes
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Blind Squirrel is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2012, 05:50
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: very close to STN!!
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
blind squirrel

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.
stator vane is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2012, 09:06
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Ireland
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Smile Turbulence

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!!
a330jockey is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2012, 10:14
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Ireland
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.

Last edited by talent; 11th Sep 2012 at 10:16.
talent is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2012, 10:24
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Ireland
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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?

Last edited by talent; 11th Sep 2012 at 10:27.
talent is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2012, 11:37
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rennes
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Stator Vane

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.
Blind Squirrel is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2012, 12:31
  #30 (permalink)  

FX Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Greenwich
Age: 67
Posts: 900
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
angels is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2012, 14:06
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
lenhamlad is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2012, 19:50
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: England
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Maddie is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2012, 20:52
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: very close to STN!!
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
blind squirrel

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!
stator vane is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2012, 21:23
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Durham
Age: 62
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
mercurydancer is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2012, 22:19
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Age: 85
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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!
funfly is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2012, 22:01
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: England
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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
Maddie is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2012, 22:23
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Belfast
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Thunderbirdsix is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.