Another bumpy ride at China Airlines
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: South of Watford
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another bumpy ride at China Airlines
From the Aviation Herald
Accident: China Airlines B744 near Hong Kong on Oct 2nd 2008, clear air turbulence injures 32 people
By Simon Hradecky, created Thursday, Oct 2nd 2008 11:19Z, last updated Thursday, Oct 2nd 2008 12:25Z
A China Airlines Boeing 747-400, registration B-18202 performing flight CI641 from Hong Kong (China) to Bangkok (Thailand) with 147 passengers and 16 crew, encountered severe clear air turbulence about 30 minutes prior to landing while cruising at FL400, which injured 21 passengers and 11 crew. The landing was safe, the injured were rushed to a hospital. 2 of the injuries are reported serious.
By Simon Hradecky, created Thursday, Oct 2nd 2008 11:19Z, last updated Thursday, Oct 2nd 2008 12:25Z
A China Airlines Boeing 747-400, registration B-18202 performing flight CI641 from Hong Kong (China) to Bangkok (Thailand) with 147 passengers and 16 crew, encountered severe clear air turbulence about 30 minutes prior to landing while cruising at FL400, which injured 21 passengers and 11 crew. The landing was safe, the injured were rushed to a hospital. 2 of the injuries are reported serious.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAT cant be detected on the scope but...is there something the Ci pilots are not paying attention to? Or is it just bad luck?
Good time to remind passengers worldwide about the importance of keeping your belt loosely fastened while seated and that you are in danger during CAT if you are out and about in the cabin I guess.
Good time to remind passengers worldwide about the importance of keeping your belt loosely fastened while seated and that you are in danger during CAT if you are out and about in the cabin I guess.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Over the Pacific
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No Moon Tower, thats not the point.
If you paper the windows to block the sun,like they do at China Airlines, and your flying around in your 747 submarine, with the radar tilted at -2 or so; then you run your submarine er..747 into a big frickn CB and hurt some folks maybe its time for ICAO or FAA or JAR or whoever to start looking at companies like this and "help them" make some changes.
And....while CAL is busy suing there past employees by the hundreds for leaving that ship wreck of an Airline. Hopefully those injured passengers will be taking CAL to court for negligence and moving one step closer to putting this Airline in the ground, like (sadly) the hundreds of people CAL has killed in the last 40 years.
Clear Air Turbulence? Ya right.
If you paper the windows to block the sun,like they do at China Airlines, and your flying around in your 747 submarine, with the radar tilted at -2 or so; then you run your submarine er..747 into a big frickn CB and hurt some folks maybe its time for ICAO or FAA or JAR or whoever to start looking at companies like this and "help them" make some changes.
And....while CAL is busy suing there past employees by the hundreds for leaving that ship wreck of an Airline. Hopefully those injured passengers will be taking CAL to court for negligence and moving one step closer to putting this Airline in the ground, like (sadly) the hundreds of people CAL has killed in the last 40 years.
Clear Air Turbulence? Ya right.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: BNE
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm afraid I must agree with WallyBB.
The instances of Clear Air Turbulence (CAT) in the tropics, which are strong enough to injure so many people, are very rare indeed. Such turbulence is normally restricted to jet-stream activity, which is almost unheard of in the tropics. China Airlines want us to believe that they are the only ones to find such turbulence over these very busy routes flown by many other airlines…. and twice in just one month (see news reports of similar event on a 744 flight to Bali just weeks ago).
These events are what safety managers call “red flags”. They are often indicators of an immature, or completely missing, safety culture. Why would crews with ample experience fly through the top of CB’s? (the only rational explanation for so many injuries). Why so soon after a similar event on the same fleet?
From all reports, management have actively encouraged the departure of expats from this airline over the past couple of years (the only airline to reduce wages and conditions, in real terms, while all other airlines do the opposite). While expats are not the panacea for all the ills of an airline, the bulk at CAL brought with them the traits of a mature safety culture. The loss of these skills can only erode any move towards building such a culture at CAL. CRM training can foster these skills, but it is management processes and policies that allow them to be engineeed into a safety culture.
I can understand the crews of these two flights blaming (highly unlikely) CAT. The lack of a Just Culture at CAL (another reason for the lack of a safety culture) would spell the end of their careers. With management punishing its captains for any decision made in flight which contravenes the way management think, the results become obvious – avoid decisions and/or hide bad ones.
Very sad to see an airline, with the resources and potential to be a "jewel in the crown" of the Asian aviation sector, wallow at the other end of the spectrum and injure 62 passengers (30 on the Bali flight and 32 on the Bangkok flight – according to news reports) who thought they bought a ticket on an airline that has recovered from the days when (as WalyyBB highlights) they were killing pax, not just injuring them.
Very sad indeed.
The instances of Clear Air Turbulence (CAT) in the tropics, which are strong enough to injure so many people, are very rare indeed. Such turbulence is normally restricted to jet-stream activity, which is almost unheard of in the tropics. China Airlines want us to believe that they are the only ones to find such turbulence over these very busy routes flown by many other airlines…. and twice in just one month (see news reports of similar event on a 744 flight to Bali just weeks ago).
These events are what safety managers call “red flags”. They are often indicators of an immature, or completely missing, safety culture. Why would crews with ample experience fly through the top of CB’s? (the only rational explanation for so many injuries). Why so soon after a similar event on the same fleet?
From all reports, management have actively encouraged the departure of expats from this airline over the past couple of years (the only airline to reduce wages and conditions, in real terms, while all other airlines do the opposite). While expats are not the panacea for all the ills of an airline, the bulk at CAL brought with them the traits of a mature safety culture. The loss of these skills can only erode any move towards building such a culture at CAL. CRM training can foster these skills, but it is management processes and policies that allow them to be engineeed into a safety culture.
I can understand the crews of these two flights blaming (highly unlikely) CAT. The lack of a Just Culture at CAL (another reason for the lack of a safety culture) would spell the end of their careers. With management punishing its captains for any decision made in flight which contravenes the way management think, the results become obvious – avoid decisions and/or hide bad ones.
Very sad to see an airline, with the resources and potential to be a "jewel in the crown" of the Asian aviation sector, wallow at the other end of the spectrum and injure 62 passengers (30 on the Bali flight and 32 on the Bangkok flight – according to news reports) who thought they bought a ticket on an airline that has recovered from the days when (as WalyyBB highlights) they were killing pax, not just injuring them.
Very sad indeed.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: BNE
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Armchair pilot,
I'm guessing that the "bay" within your stated home base is Hong Kong Harbour. As a consequence I'm also guessing that you have probably operated in and around the airspace within whivh CAL were operating on these 2 flights.
So in the absence of "solid evidence", how would you personally explain how circa 60 pax are injured on the 2 CAL flights yet no other airline, in this very busy airspace, suffered a similar fate.
I'm sure that all on this forum would be open to other theories.
I'm guessing that the "bay" within your stated home base is Hong Kong Harbour. As a consequence I'm also guessing that you have probably operated in and around the airspace within whivh CAL were operating on these 2 flights.
So in the absence of "solid evidence", how would you personally explain how circa 60 pax are injured on the 2 CAL flights yet no other airline, in this very busy airspace, suffered a similar fate.
I'm sure that all on this forum would be open to other theories.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 59
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I,and many fellow pilots,have been operating in the SE Asian area for the best side of a decade(should be long enough for a rough snapshot of what goes on)and the only serious CAT,at altitude,I've heard of has come from the Jets.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
injure 62 passengers (30 on the Bali flight and 32 on the Bangkok flight – according to news reports)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ci has long been a favorite airline to deride for many and after its series of accidents, one to actively distrust. I am no fan of Ci and actively avoid it.
That being said, its not fair to put Ci on trial by conjecture. Just because we believe them to be an outfit with pilots who "could and would" fly over Cb due to sheer incompetence and/or stupidity, added to whatever else we care to throw in the condemnation pot.
They are certainly not the only ones to have encountered turbulence in this area suffering injuries to passengers. How about these incidents?
Hong Kong-bound Flights Hit Turbulence
Air Mauritius flight hits strong turbulence near Hong Kong, 16 injured - International Herald Tribune
TIMEasia.com | Safety Tip: Listen to Those Boring Demos! | 12/13/99
Passengers slightly injured as Cathay Pacific flight hits turbulence. | Transportation > Air Transportation from AllBusiness.com
Severe Turbulence hits Cathay Pacific Flight CX708 from Bangkok to Hong Kong
EVA Air denies negligence in Japan turbulence injuries - The China Post
IM sure there have been other incidents. It would certainly have helped Ci's case if other planes had reported turbulence just prior or after Ci's incidents of course. Apparently there were no such reports made?
That being said, its not fair to put Ci on trial by conjecture. Just because we believe them to be an outfit with pilots who "could and would" fly over Cb due to sheer incompetence and/or stupidity, added to whatever else we care to throw in the condemnation pot.
They are certainly not the only ones to have encountered turbulence in this area suffering injuries to passengers. How about these incidents?
Hong Kong-bound Flights Hit Turbulence
Air Mauritius flight hits strong turbulence near Hong Kong, 16 injured - International Herald Tribune
TIMEasia.com | Safety Tip: Listen to Those Boring Demos! | 12/13/99
Passengers slightly injured as Cathay Pacific flight hits turbulence. | Transportation > Air Transportation from AllBusiness.com
Severe Turbulence hits Cathay Pacific Flight CX708 from Bangkok to Hong Kong
EVA Air denies negligence in Japan turbulence injuries - The China Post
IM sure there have been other incidents. It would certainly have helped Ci's case if other planes had reported turbulence just prior or after Ci's incidents of course. Apparently there were no such reports made?
Last edited by armchairpilot94116; 5th Oct 2008 at 06:59.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: somewhere in Asia
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SEA CATs
In recent weeks I have experienced in the SEA region several flights when I had to hit seatbelt bottom fast. Present meteorological conditions seem to be conducive to CAT (no idea yet why, maybe somebody can explain). I usually give instructions during the crew briefing that the cabin shall review their procedures for “sever turbulences” and I make it now a point in the cockpit that one of us is wearing at least the 4 point belts even loosely.
PPRuNe supporter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No Moon Tower, thats not the point.
If you paper the windows to block the sun,like they do at China Airlines, and your flying around in your 747 submarine, with the radar tilted at -2 or so; then you run your submarine er..747 into a big frickn CB and hurt some folks maybe its time for ICAO or FAA or JAR or whoever to start looking at companies like this and "help them" make some changes.
And....while CAL is busy suing there past employees by the hundreds By Wally
If you paper the windows to block the sun,like they do at China Airlines, and your flying around in your 747 submarine, with the radar tilted at -2 or so; then you run your submarine er..747 into a big frickn CB and hurt some folks maybe its time for ICAO or FAA or JAR or whoever to start looking at companies like this and "help them" make some changes.
And....while CAL is busy suing there past employees by the hundreds By Wally
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
according to my source, in the second incident the Captain went to the bathroom before TOD and ATC gave them a turn and the FO complied with instructions and flew into some WX , why he did it? I don't know, but that is what CAL gets for having 200hrs FOs in a 744
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/3...landing-3.html
Yup and not a peep about flying over a Cb. Such is the reputation of Qantas vs CAL.
edit: P.S. The Qantas incident appears not to be CAT it seems.
Yup and not a peep about flying over a Cb. Such is the reputation of Qantas vs CAL.
edit: P.S. The Qantas incident appears not to be CAT it seems.
Last edited by armchairpilot94116; 9th Oct 2008 at 17:16.
