Canadian PAX injured ?
 

Breaking news from CBC News:
_______________________________________________


Emergency crews are rushing to the Calgary airport in response to
reports that an Air Canadaflight from Cranbook, B.C.,has landed with
several seriously injured people on board.


Anybody know anything about this? CBC don;t normally use exaggerated headlines.

Emergency landing

Calgary Herald

Published: Thursday, January 10, 2008
Emergency crews are on the scene at Calgary Airport after an Air Canada plane travelling from Victoria to Toronto was hit by turbulence and passengers were injured this morning.
Nine ambulances are lined up on the departures level, ready to take patients to hospital.
Duty inspector Richard Hinse said between six and eight people were seriously injured while other passengers sustained minor injuries.
"It went up and then sideways," said one passenger, who said a friend of hers was hurt. "She flew up to the ceiling and right down."

Traffic at the airport is being diverted.
An Air Canada Airbus A319 headed from Victoria to Toronto made the unscheduled stop in Calgary at about 8:30 a.m. MT.
More details to follow.

According to recent CBC report the pax suffered injury whilst the aircraft encountered turbulence...

Latest CBC report:-

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/sto...s-landing.html

Air Canada A319 hits turbulence
 

Air Canada confirms emergency landing at Calgary

Thu 10 Jan 2008, 16:30 GMT

[-] Text [+]

TORONTO (Reuters) - Air Canada confirmed on Thursday that flight AC190, travelling to Toronto from Victoria, British Columbia, made an emergency landing at the Calgary, Alberta, airport because of unspecified passenger injuries.
The airline, owned by ACE Aviation Holdings Inc, said the Airbus A319 passenger list shows the plane was carrying 83 passengers and five crew members, but it said those numbers were based on the preliminary list and were subject to confirmation.
It also said the exact number of passengers taken to hospital was not available.

I'm hoping that the seatbelt signs were on when these people got injured. Nothing annoys me more than seeing folks walking around with the sign on. I'm convinced they think that pilots turn on the signs just because the chime sounds nice.

Annoys the hell out of me when they get up too.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7181801.stm

C-GBHZ ACA190 Airbus A319-114
 

Yup my thoughts exactly hope those seat belt signs were on.

Airport News Conference
 

There was a press briefing at Calgary airport about an hour ago. Six people transported to hospital, at least one described as condition "yellow" meaning stable but potentially life threatening. No information given on the incident itself or how the injuries were caused.
Jimbo

Seat belt signs??
 

Why all this talk of seat belt signs when no-one has posted the prevailing weather conditions yet? Could it not have been CAT? In which case, I feel sorry for the pax & crew wandering about at the time, pure bad luck & hope the injuries arent too severe...

http://www.flightplanning.navcanada....n&TypeDoc=html

http://www.flightplanning.navcanada....est-hltcan.png

Mind your words
 

SLF here...
I am usually not posting on this threads for professionals, but frankly I do not deem this post appropriate, as well as at least another one that follows it.
Yes we are SLF, but we are not idiots and I believe that you should give more respect to the passengers that are obeying to the sign belts when are on.
May I remind you that without SLFs you will just one of the cargo pilots that are flying a number of cargo aircrafts around the world?
Are you absolutely confident that anytime you switch on the seat belt sign there is danger? or even worse...how many times the you did not switch it on time? This thread should be addressing other issues than the SLF being fasten. Where was the cabin crew? Did they enforce the seat bealt sign? We can go on forever...
Regards

FYI
 

Part of Air Canada's onboard announcements include a reminder that seatbelts should be fastened at all times when the passenger is in their seat.

Frequent SLF, I do take your point. And in my many years as cabin crew, I found that most passengers were conscientious and intelligent about fastening belts and staying seated when the signs came on. But there were also far too many who made a point of ignoring them. As crew, we came in for a lot of abuse if we tried to enforce the signs. The situation was possibly not helped by the hare-trigger reaction of some flight crews, to switch on the signs at the slightest hint of a bump. It's the old Cry Wolf phenomenon.. "But you're walking around!" was a common protest (Protest.. As if by asking them to strap in we were in some way trying to put one over on them..!) I somtimes had to bite my tongue not to snap back, "Ah yes, but we're insured!" It was especially galling with the citizens of a certain famously litigious country, whom we knew would be the first to rush bleating to a lawyer if they were injured; we sometimes wondered if that was the whole point.

@Frequent SLF

Frankly, from a safety point of view, it's hardly relevant if there's no danger yet the crew switch on the signs; it just means the signs are on more often than the absolute minimum amount of time. Unless the "false warnings" become so prevalent as to cause a "chicken little" effect, what matters is that warnings be given when needed as much as is possible. A few false alarms are the price you pay for being warned when necessary.

Well, looking at that map it seems there was been mod to sev CAT forecast...even so, I don't really see the benefit of ridiculing those who have been injured until the whole story is known. Postulate on what caused this event by all means, but to make the implication this was entirely the fault of the injured pax is just plain stupid!

@MLS
I do agree with your comments. False alarms are part of the "game". I do not agree on the comments that wants to put the blame on the SLF. IMHO it is outrageous a comment such as
"I'm hoping that the seatbelt signs were on when these people got injured. Nothing annoys me more than seeing folks walking around with the sign on. I'm convinced they think that pilots turn on the signs just because the chime sounds nice."
I do fully agree with the basic principle of the statement (i.e. seat bealts sign on...fasten the seat bealt and be quite on your seat).
I do question the sarcasm (i.e. sounds of chime) and the use/abuse of the sign by some airlines. Really what I could not agree is the tone of the statement...
Anyway, let me aks you a simple question...why the cabin crew most of the times is walking around when the seat belt sign is on? Would be simplier that all cabin crew sits down, this will not give excuses for the SLF to walk around too? Anyway my point is not to the need of respecting an instruction (fasten seat belt), I disagree on the way it was expressed.
Regards

Look at the chart - moderate to severe CAT is nowhere near Alberta!! (Assuming this is the correct sigwx chart)

And yes - too many do have a hair-trigger reaction to a few little bumps!!! And Innuendo - FYI, most airlines these days have the same announcement. Certainly mandatory for us here in the sandpit..

I wish my English knowledge could have expressed the above in my earlier posts.

On certain airlines, at least in the UNITED States, the seat belt sign is treated as an advisory, not an order. Passengers will get up while the light is on, the crew will advise them that the light is on and they could be injured, and then they are free to use the lavatory or access the over head bins. If you want passengers seated while the seat belt sign is on, insist that they stay seated.

Yeah, but in the UNITED states, we can get good info on Channel 9, and words like "severe" or "extreme" tend to propagate through the cabin pretty fast. Sorry, couldn't resist ;)

Eleven pax were taken to hospital. One has been released. Status on the others has been downgraded in seriousness. News stations still don't have their act together with the CBC reporting the incident took place just after take-off from Victoria. If that is correct the diversion would have been to Vancouver not continuing another hour and a bit to Calgary.

Flying cargo does have it's advantages. And may I remind you: Without us, you would be a passenger on a bus. :E

I do it anyway
 

Whether the seat belt sign is off or on...........

Havign experienced CAT over the Pacific and seen my partner heading for the ceiling (quick reflexes prevented a head smack) I always have my seat belt buckled when I'm sitting in my seat. I may have it reallly loose to accomodate the beer-storage facility and to give me room to squirm around, but it isnt uncomfortable at all and it will sure as heck stop me from hitting the overhead bins.

Just my own little preventative measure.

Funny thing is as a PPL I find impossible to fly on an airliner without keeping my seat belt fastened

Air Canada Airbus 319 Incident
 

I am a former private pilot and the news director at Global TV News in Toronto. The pilots of the AC airbus 319 that made an emergency landing in Calgary say they landed the plane manually after the "incident", whether turbulence or what? Can anyone in this forum suggest what might have caused them to manually land the plane; autopilot failure due to turbulence? I'm speculating.

Please let me know.

Ron

Now being reported as computer failure
 

This is getting more into my area now:

An Air Canada flight which rolled suddenly from side to side then plunged in the air may have suffered technical problems, according to passengers interviewed after the plane was diverted to Calgary.

The pilot of Flight 190, heading from Victoria to Toronto, came over the intercom to say there had been a computer failure and that they were flying the plane manually, Richard Kool, a passenger from Victoria, said in an email to CBC News.



I am following this with renewed interest since I am presently teaching a course in computer engineering on preventing such failures!

I think what most SLF fail to realise is that air is clear, seeing turbulence is not like spotting a pothole in the road

Air crew have a job to do, they still move around the cabin because they need to, and they need to make sure that pax have heeded the sign. Exactly the same reason why crew of seagoing vessles are still moving around the deck to make sure everything is tied down in rough weather when most pax are looking green and clutching their sick bags!

Computer Failures in Flight
 

Can any of you professional airline pilots/engineers elaborate on in-flight computer failure? Possible causes? Does the 319 have any common computer problems? I remember airbus jets having autopilot override issues in the very early days, but since resolved.

r

Frequent SLF...if there were no passengers, I would be flying cargo and GETTING PAID ALMOST TWICE AS MUCH. Fedex and UPS pilots are getting more than pilots at major US passenger carriers.

its because the passengers won't pay full freight (excuse the pun)...but enough of that.

ALWAYS keep your seatbelt fastened...try to time your bladder to avoid using the airborne toilet...if possible. and if you get up , finish your business and get back to your seat and seat belt. I know of one CAT occurence in which the seat belt sign WAS ILLUMINATED and a passenger went to the LAV...hit his head, broke his neck and is now a quad.

so be careful!
PS

we must also consider the remote possibility that wake turbulence may have caused the rolling moment.

BUT the computer situation is worth a good long look...hope there is more posting about this aspect...and a manual landing...did they have to use rudder and trim only? Or,was it just a non autopilot landing?

From a computer engineering point of view, safety-critical systems are usually double or triple-redundancy. I believe in the airbus there are three control systems, each with a different type of processor and different software, although they are following the same algorithm. (My references are at work, or I would give a citation). The three different systems preclude the possibility of a virus or silicon mask fault from causing a failure in all three systems.

The actual algorithm is tested to the nth degree, and its implementation checked by the contractors for the three computers and airbus.

However, there is always the possibility that one or two systems may fail in a way that makes it look like the third system has failed,when in fact it is the only one working. This is called a Byzantine failure, after the difficulty associated with figuring out which of the Byzantine Generals is loyal and will attack an enemy. It is the computer engineer's worst nightmare, and a good reason to have two well-qualified and experienced pilots at the front of the bus!

CAT out of Vancouver
 

I have flown the Vancouver/Calgary route as a passenger on commercial aircraft (I'm a private pilot) dozens of times and have always felt that it was the worst area for CAT anywhere. You pass over the mountains in a clear blue sky and then sit on a roller-coaster almost all the way into Calgary.

mountain wave has been noted 700 miles downstream of mountains...we shall see..

Turbulence
 

I fly frequently also and always keep my seat belt loosely fastened. I would like to say to SLF that in my experience a lot of pax do not realise the danger of wandering about the cabin,some cannot even open the toilet door ,some dont even hear the message "please put your seat in the upright position"!! I have seen pax walking to the toilet while almost touching down so not all pax are frequent flyers ,most think they are on a large Bus!!!

:confused:
I fly frequently enough and do as many of you mention. Keep my seat belt on, loosely for this exact reason. But I have to question this "wandering around the cabin" statements....there's no place to wander! There's barely enough room for the beverage cart in the aisles, God help anyone if they have to wait to get back to their seat if the cart is blocking it by several rows. Since coach isn't allowed to use a vacant 1st class lav, we must stand in line quite often. I have often waited and waited to find an open time, then could wait no more.

From my experiences, this could easily be the factor that would cause a passenger to hit their head. And like another post mentioned, air is clear, the turbulence often hits first, THEN the pilot makes an annoucement.(unless there's been mention of such from another a/c passing through)

In appreciating the value of our roles in flight, please consider the factors that make many SLF's feel like more and more like freight and less like customers. :)

I feel better now....you may "go about the cabin..." ;)

I was not trying to imply that all pax are idiots. I think it's quite the opposite. However, there will always be the few bad apples who insist on ignoring the sign,and for such people, I have little pity if something bad happens.

The comment about the ding wasn't meant to be sarcastic, but I honestly wonder if they think it would be on if the pilots didn't think it necessary. Why on earth will the seatbelt sign be on?:ugh:

Here's what I found on-line with some PAX comments. AP press is still reporting turbulence even though PAX mentions computer failure. :confused:


Air Canada flight AC190, carrying 88 people, was en route from Victoria, British Columbia, to Toronto and was diverted to Calgary for the emergency landing, officials said.

"It landed safely at 8:30 a.m. with a request for medical units to meet the aircraft to injuries on board the aircraft," he said.

Ambulances surrounded the jet and paramedics and tended to the injured.

Stuart Brideaux of Calgary Emergency Medical Services said 10 people were taken to a hospital, including six who are in stable condition. Four others suffered minor injuries, he said.

Earlier, Brideaux said nine had minor injuries. He said he may have misspoke earlier and that the 10 injured have been confirmed by the hospital, ambulance service and airline.

Air Canada said the preliminary passenger list indicates the Airbus A319 was carrying 83 passengers and five crew members.

"All of a sudden there were three big drops," passenger Andrew Evans said. "One major drop and then two more that went `Oomph! Oomph!' And the plane rolled a bit after that.

"I was in the very, very front seat of the plane and was watching dishes fly through the air," Evans said. "There was a crash. The cart tipped over and there was a lot of squealing.

"It was over and done with in 10 or 15 seconds," said Evans, who was on his way to Washington, D.C.

Passenger Jayne Harvey said the plane dropped sharply, then rolled left and right as the pilots fought to bring it under control.

The pilots came on the intercom "and said they were flying manually and that the computer had been knocked out," she said.

"I thought that that was it for me," said the Ontario nurse, who added she was "incredibly scared" as the plane bucked and rolled.

One female passenger who was not identified told media at the airport that when the plane hit the turbulence, her friend "flew up and hit the ceiling and went back down."


Copyright 2007 The Associated Press.

Ive been in the freighter's on and off for over 20 years and have driven through lots of stuff. Mountain wave's, clear air turb and so on. Only a few times was it severe enough ( in the freighter ) that we took action and asked for an altitude change. Once on the L-1011 it scared the crap out of us because we lost several thousand feet over the mountains and it was a wild ride. While flying Pax we always asked for an altitude change at the first sign of bumps cause we had to. My point is..that most of the time it really isn't that bad to the experienced crew however, a passenger can get quite rattled over it and even more so when 50 or 100 pax are all rattled and screaming at the same time, then the turbulance is at it's worse. Also it dosen't take much to launch an unrestrained and unsuspecting human into space ( or the overhead bins ) so that's why we all should wear our seatbelt's all of the time !!! :ugh:

Please don't flame me if you think I,m making lite of this particular incident cause I,m not.:= Just making a point.:}

"and said they were flying manually and that the computer had been knocked out,"

Much more familiar with the NG than A319, but is it likely that the 'severe' turbulence caused the AutoPilot to disconnect, requiring manual intervention from the PF?

If so, the Cap't could have easily come on the PA in a semi joking tone, saying something like "that was a big one, it even knocked off the autopilot". PAX translation equals "computer had been knocked out". While re-directing to Calgary, passengers have time to discuss what just happened.....and thus story twists alittle...."and said they were flying manually and that the computer had been knocked out,"

Just a thought....