KLM 777 Turbulence Incident?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NSC
I would not regard those actuals as "Moderate" or "Servere" CBs... I personally get edgy when they hit 4000m or below vis...
I can further assure we do not judge CBs / Turbulence / CAT from the TAFs / Actuals of airfields below us
but using High Level charts, Radar etc. However, who are we to doubt the conclusions you have already come to that the crew deliberately flew into a CB depicted on their radar, whilst leaving their Cabin Crew conducting the service 
as you can see there were moderate to sever thundershowers and CU and CB's, so i bet this was no CAT but definitely shown on the WX radar
I can further assure we do not judge CBs / Turbulence / CAT from the TAFs / Actuals of airfields below us
but using High Level charts, Radar etc. However, who are we to doubt the conclusions you have already come to that the crew deliberately flew into a CB depicted on their radar, whilst leaving their Cabin Crew conducting the service
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: washington,dc
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
simply put, internet forums do not allow for the real body language/emotions etc...even with emoticons.
from the wx reports we can gather that there was a dynamic wx event in progress...t storms, clouds of vertical development or whatever...and not CAT.
pilots do fly into cb's. they make a judgement call that it will be bumpy but not extreme...wx radar is an imperfect tool, as are those who interpret it.
if you can praise a crew for a safe , unveventful flight, then you can also be critical of a crew who has the misfortune to have injuries on board.
from the wx reports we can gather that there was a dynamic wx event in progress...t storms, clouds of vertical development or whatever...and not CAT.
pilots do fly into cb's. they make a judgement call that it will be bumpy but not extreme...wx radar is an imperfect tool, as are those who interpret it.
if you can praise a crew for a safe , unveventful flight, then you can also be critical of a crew who has the misfortune to have injuries on board.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
from the wx reports we can gather that there was a dynamic wx event in progress...t storms, clouds of vertical development or whatever
pilots do fly into cb's - they make a judgement call that it will be bumpy but not extreme...
I seriously doubt a crew would intentionally fly into a CB at Cruise level i.e. a v large CB, without securing the cabin. That is not just putting the signs on, but also warning and seating the CC. PS do you know the recommended avoidance distance(s) from CBs? I will happily acknowledge they are often impractical and therefore not adhered to...
wx radar is an imperfect tool, as are those who interpret it.
if you can praise a crew for a safe , unveventful flight, then you can also be critical of a crew who has the misfortune to have injuries on board.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: washington,dc
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes, I do know the distances that are supposed to be used to circumnavigate thunderstorms...and you indicate that it is impractical at times.
we really don't know what happened.
did you know that mountain wave can be detected 700 miles downwind of the mountains creating the wave? I don't know the geography involved here.
whether you like it or not, pilots do make mistakes...sometimes they are not emphatic enough to the flight attendents about sitting down and securing.
we really don't know what happened.
did you know that mountain wave can be detected 700 miles downwind of the mountains creating the wave? I don't know the geography involved here.
whether you like it or not, pilots do make mistakes...sometimes they are not emphatic enough to the flight attendents about sitting down and securing.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
whether you like it or not, pilots do make mistakes...sometimes they are not emphatic enough to the flight attendents about sitting down and securing.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we were coming back from the bahamas on a virgin 747 last jully, 30 mins into the flight we hit medium turbulence, the seat belt signs came on and drinks continued to be serverd, shortly after, the captain ordered the cc to take their seats and put any trollies etc away, before they could we hit cat and the plane droped, cabin crew and many pax injured, some broke through the center consoles!! The air stewdess infront of us was scrambling to her seat, wen we hit the cat she hit the roof!!
many paxs complaining of severe back and neck pain! only 2 doctors on board, one a lady who was a quivering wreck, the other my dad, my point is, wen do u declare an emergancy and request a landing? The captain asked my dad and the other lady what they thought about turning back, their honest answer was that most the paxs were very stable and comfortable but does he really think all the paxs would be happy turning around and then reboard after an inccident like that? What must be taken into account by the captain? is it money that it will cost the airline! We however continued the 9 hours to lhr. there were 30 people who went to hospital, thats 3 times as more than this unfortunate accident and with a similar flight time, wat wud u have done in that situation?
many paxs complaining of severe back and neck pain! only 2 doctors on board, one a lady who was a quivering wreck, the other my dad, my point is, wen do u declare an emergancy and request a landing? The captain asked my dad and the other lady what they thought about turning back, their honest answer was that most the paxs were very stable and comfortable but does he really think all the paxs would be happy turning around and then reboard after an inccident like that? What must be taken into account by the captain? is it money that it will cost the airline! We however continued the 9 hours to lhr. there were 30 people who went to hospital, thats 3 times as more than this unfortunate accident and with a similar flight time, wat wud u have done in that situation?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: washington,dc
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tommyg737:
wow.
if the captain decides to press on and a passenger or crewmember who otherwise might have been helped by a quick landing gets worse...well you can be sure there will be a lawsuit.
honestly, if I were the captain on any flight where turbulence injuries happened, I would land at the nearest field with good hospitals. as I said, then it is only money.
and your dad, God bless him, might have been brought into a legal battle with his statement about passengers/patients being stable. if I were a doctor, I could only say: captain, to continue for 9 hours without proper medical help is a calculated risk.
AND ALWAYS WEAR YOUR SEATBELT...AND TIGHTEN IT UP REALLY TIGHT IF YOU GET A WARNING ABOUT TURBULENCE.
wow.
if the captain decides to press on and a passenger or crewmember who otherwise might have been helped by a quick landing gets worse...well you can be sure there will be a lawsuit.
honestly, if I were the captain on any flight where turbulence injuries happened, I would land at the nearest field with good hospitals. as I said, then it is only money.
and your dad, God bless him, might have been brought into a legal battle with his statement about passengers/patients being stable. if I were a doctor, I could only say: captain, to continue for 9 hours without proper medical help is a calculated risk.
AND ALWAYS WEAR YOUR SEATBELT...AND TIGHTEN IT UP REALLY TIGHT IF YOU GET A WARNING ABOUT TURBULENCE.
Controversial, moi?
if the captain decides to press on and a passenger or crewmember who otherwise might have been helped by a quick landing gets worse...well you can be sure there will be a lawsuit.
Common sense or best judgement is taking a back seat to the avoidance of being sued no matter how costly, disruptive or plain stupid those avoiding actions might be.
In life accidents happen, bad luck happens, people get hurt. If people cannot accept that there is a risk to everything then please stay at home, in bed, wrapped up in cotton wool and allow the rest of us to live a full life without being plagued by Health & Safety police, nannying governments and management and individuals scared witless of being sued by some half-wit out to make a fast buck.
I am very familiar with KLM and its operating standards and given that knowledge I have no doubt the crew acted in the best interests of everybody after this unfortunate event. Whether or not the event could have been avoided will only be known to those involved but I know where I would put my money.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: washington,dc
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
M. Mouse
KLM has made mistakes in the past...as every airline has.
and I do believe someone is to blame for just about everything that happens, just as someone can take credit for a safe flight, someone can be blamed for a turbulence encounter that causes injuries.
On this very forum, I've seen people complain about keeping the seat belt sign on for much of the flight. I know of one case in which the pilots had the seat belt sign on, reminded passengers and f/a's to remain seated with seat belts fastened...a passenger got up to use the lavatory, they hit severe CAT. the passenger is now paralyzed for life.
the passenger disobeyed the expressed orders of the flight crew.
doesn't he share some of the blame? and what if while floating around the cabin he landed on someone and harmed them? who would be blamed?
Our jobs as pilots have now added responsibility...pseudo lawyer.
I always brief the f/a's that the meal service/drink service should be cancelled at the first warning/sign of turbulence...better a letter complaining about NO food rather than a subpoena.
KLM has made mistakes in the past...as every airline has.
and I do believe someone is to blame for just about everything that happens, just as someone can take credit for a safe flight, someone can be blamed for a turbulence encounter that causes injuries.
On this very forum, I've seen people complain about keeping the seat belt sign on for much of the flight. I know of one case in which the pilots had the seat belt sign on, reminded passengers and f/a's to remain seated with seat belts fastened...a passenger got up to use the lavatory, they hit severe CAT. the passenger is now paralyzed for life.
the passenger disobeyed the expressed orders of the flight crew.
doesn't he share some of the blame? and what if while floating around the cabin he landed on someone and harmed them? who would be blamed?
Our jobs as pilots have now added responsibility...pseudo lawyer.
I always brief the f/a's that the meal service/drink service should be cancelled at the first warning/sign of turbulence...better a letter complaining about NO food rather than a subpoena.
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 'Pprune Courts Martial' has already sat and held a hearing, and a judgement has been reached! Time for KLM to be marched back into the room and observe the sword pointing towards the defendant! (Shame the evidence is only patchy hearsay, but then the judgemental audience here doesn't seem to need more these days!).
An appeal will be launched as a major plank of the evidence was airfield ATIS reports extrapolated to 35,000'. The defence will contend they are not related!
An appeal will be launched as a major plank of the evidence was airfield ATIS reports extrapolated to 35,000'. The defence will contend they are not related!
bomarc, I guess your flights never have any in-flight service then!
I havn't done a flight on which "first warning/sign of turbulence" has not occured for the last 35 years. What a load of twaddle if all airlines did that th'd go broke.
I havn't done a flight on which "first warning/sign of turbulence" has not occured for the last 35 years. What a load of twaddle if all airlines did that th'd go broke.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Europe
Age: 64
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have I missed something? According to the IACA Press review
"Above Russia the plane came in heavy turbulent air. The passengers were warned, but the cabin crew was still busy with serving food. A part of that food came onto the passengers. One flight attendant got hot coffee over her body.
The Flight attendant was brought to a hospital after landing with flsh burns. Other injured people were taken care of by KLM in Osaka."
At least one contributor has stated categorically that all those with the injuries said they wished to continue to Japan. That, and the story above, tells us that the injuries were minor. Only the F/A went to a hospital.
Who did anything wrong, to whom? How many times have passengers been told to make sure their belts are fastened, while meal service is allowed to continue? Very occasionally the anticipated turbulence is worse than foreseen, and accidents can occur. No-one is "at fault". No-one was badly hurt, as far as I can see, and sure as hell no-one wanted to get off-loaded in St Pete or Helsinki.
Now, being dumped in either place is something they might have sued the airline about.
"Above Russia the plane came in heavy turbulent air. The passengers were warned, but the cabin crew was still busy with serving food. A part of that food came onto the passengers. One flight attendant got hot coffee over her body.
The Flight attendant was brought to a hospital after landing with flsh burns. Other injured people were taken care of by KLM in Osaka."
At least one contributor has stated categorically that all those with the injuries said they wished to continue to Japan. That, and the story above, tells us that the injuries were minor. Only the F/A went to a hospital.
Who did anything wrong, to whom? How many times have passengers been told to make sure their belts are fastened, while meal service is allowed to continue? Very occasionally the anticipated turbulence is worse than foreseen, and accidents can occur. No-one is "at fault". No-one was badly hurt, as far as I can see, and sure as hell no-one wanted to get off-loaded in St Pete or Helsinki.
Now, being dumped in either place is something they might have sued the airline about.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: washington,dc
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've never had any flight attendants injured on my flights either...by the way, did you know that NWA has the lowest number of flight attendant injuries...they also have the most accurate wx information.
one can simply look in the AIM for definitions of turbulence levels and their effect on meal service.
one can simply look in the AIM for definitions of turbulence levels and their effect on meal service.
NWA has the lowest number of flight attendant injuries...they also have the most accurate wx information.
And I KNOW this is a fact because I fly for KLM.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About five years ago I was the captain of a large twin that hit severe turbulence over Saudi Arabia. Nothing was forecast where the incident occurred, although there was a very strong jetstream above us. We'd encountered light to moderate, I'd put the seat-belt sign on and received the 'cabin secure' check. I didn't tell the crew to sit down because the turbulence wasn't that bad - if we stopped everything for every ripple then nothing would get done and passengers would complain, try to get up etc etc.
Then for the next twelve seconds the aircraft was completely out of control. One C/C member was knocked out, several others were bruised, all were shocked. One passenger had undone her belt just as we hit, and she was badly hurt - a fractured pelvis, although we only found out afterwards. (The area of forecast severe CAT a few hours later was smooth as a baby's bottom, so a SIGMET chart guarantees nothing.)
We did indeed start a diversion, albeit to OSDI directly in front. Doctors on board & radioed medical advice said there was no immediate need to land. The aircraft was behaving perfectly although we thought it had been overstressed ( in fact it hadn't quite: the peaks were +2.08, -0.24). An overweight landing at OSDI was just feasible, but if the runway was wet it became marginal - and if the flaps had been damaged it would be impossible. It would have required heroic efforts from a shocked and frightened cabin crew. There were also big security problems in that area at the time. We therefore carried on, and to cut a long story short made it back to EGKK where there was fully-prepared medical cover awaiting.
I consulted the crew but not the passengers. My decision was that possible aircraft damage made an overweight landing riskier than continuing, and there were a plethora of suitables to land at en route if things changed (and the landing weight would be lower too).
KLM is one of the world's best airlines. If they kept going I'm sure they had their reasons.
Then for the next twelve seconds the aircraft was completely out of control. One C/C member was knocked out, several others were bruised, all were shocked. One passenger had undone her belt just as we hit, and she was badly hurt - a fractured pelvis, although we only found out afterwards. (The area of forecast severe CAT a few hours later was smooth as a baby's bottom, so a SIGMET chart guarantees nothing.)
We did indeed start a diversion, albeit to OSDI directly in front. Doctors on board & radioed medical advice said there was no immediate need to land. The aircraft was behaving perfectly although we thought it had been overstressed ( in fact it hadn't quite: the peaks were +2.08, -0.24). An overweight landing at OSDI was just feasible, but if the runway was wet it became marginal - and if the flaps had been damaged it would be impossible. It would have required heroic efforts from a shocked and frightened cabin crew. There were also big security problems in that area at the time. We therefore carried on, and to cut a long story short made it back to EGKK where there was fully-prepared medical cover awaiting.
I consulted the crew but not the passengers. My decision was that possible aircraft damage made an overweight landing riskier than continuing, and there were a plethora of suitables to land at en route if things changed (and the landing weight would be lower too).
KLM is one of the world's best airlines. If they kept going I'm sure they had their reasons.
Bomarc:
From my experience NWA also has the laziest flight attendants in the world so it's quite unlikely that any of them would be on their feet even on the calmest of flights!
From my experience NWA also has the laziest flight attendants in the world so it's quite unlikely that any of them would be on their feet even on the calmest of flights!
Last edited by JW411; 2nd Jun 2007 at 19:29.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: washington,dc
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fox niner. perhaps you can tell us what really happened aboard the flight.
JW 411. if you wish to complain about any flight attendants, write the company directly.
and to those who really don't know about airline flying in the USA. Virtually every airline employee has taken a huge pay cut, loss of benefits. IF any flight attendant is lazy these days, I DON'T BLAME THEM ONE DAMN BIT...am I allowed to say DAMN?
What seems to be missing in all of this is: if the pilots knew or suspected turbulence of a significant nature, then why weren't the flight attendants warned?
I have a feeling that the pilots thought things would be relatively ok and things just didn't work out.
I've heard all the arguments about never getting any food service done if ...
in america, the pilot in command has the final responsibility and authority over the safe conduct of the flight.
better a thousand letters complaining the flight attendants didn't serve than a dozen people hurt...but the choice is YOURS dear PIC!
JW 411. if you wish to complain about any flight attendants, write the company directly.
and to those who really don't know about airline flying in the USA. Virtually every airline employee has taken a huge pay cut, loss of benefits. IF any flight attendant is lazy these days, I DON'T BLAME THEM ONE DAMN BIT...am I allowed to say DAMN?
What seems to be missing in all of this is: if the pilots knew or suspected turbulence of a significant nature, then why weren't the flight attendants warned?
I have a feeling that the pilots thought things would be relatively ok and things just didn't work out.
I've heard all the arguments about never getting any food service done if ...
in america, the pilot in command has the final responsibility and authority over the safe conduct of the flight.
better a thousand letters complaining the flight attendants didn't serve than a dozen people hurt...but the choice is YOURS dear PIC!
Last edited by bomarc; 2nd Jun 2007 at 21:04.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Throughout the world the commander has the final responsibility for the safe & efficient conduct of the flight - not just America.
In America, the airwaves are full of "ride reports", and "I got light chop here can I change level?" Whether anything different is actually achieved by all this is debatable.
In America, the airwaves are full of "ride reports", and "I got light chop here can I change level?" Whether anything different is actually achieved by all this is debatable.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: washington,dc
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JW411
thanks for catching my spelling error. you must be a good chief pilot. you see, line pilots are good at flying, chief pilots are good at paperwork.
and no, I'm not a f/a.
thanks for catching my spelling error. you must be a good chief pilot. you see, line pilots are good at flying, chief pilots are good at paperwork.
and no, I'm not a f/a.