Travel News - LH, B6 planes into BOS after Atlantic turbulence - "11 injured" on LH flight

Just on the 11:00 news tonight. LH was CLT-MUC (LH 429?), diverted over Atlantic, "11 injuries", but the plane's not in yet. B6 (#860?) was scheduled SJU-BOS, minor injuries, all refused treatment, per the news reporters, interviewed passengers, and airline. But they definitely looked shaken up. Cause may have been trailing effects of Hurricane Ophelia?

Yeah, because it was Hurricane Ophelia is heading this way. Must be very experienced the turbulence. Due to heavy experienced turbulence. You must remain in the seated.

Please followed the website at www.stormpulse.com to check on Ophelia. Looking like she heading out of Canada coast now.

Yeah, because it was Hurricane Ophelia is heading this way. Must be very experienced the turbulence. Due to heavy experienced turbulence. You must remain in the seated.

Please followed the website at www.stormpulse.com to check on Ophelia. Looking like she heading out of Canada coast now.

Hi, Scotty. No surprise that you're the first to respond. I just knew you'd already be on this! :)

Given the scheduled 5-something dep. time of that CLT-MUC flight, and the Boston reporter saying she wasn't in at BOS yet at ~11:10pm, she must have been well into the flight before turning around.

...You must remain in the seated...

I'll bet a lot of those people were already fast asleep. Reminds me of the old, "Please fasten your seatbelt over the outside of your blanket" instruction.

Also reminds me of the Air France flight that went down. Wonder if there were parallels that we'll hear about. Except that this was, on balance, a success story.

I'll bet a lot of those people were already fast asleep. Reminds me of the old, "Please fasten your seatbelt over the outside of your blanket" instruction.

Also reminds me of the Air France flight that went down. Wonder if there were parallels that we'll hear about. Except that this was, on balance, a success story.

Yeah, that's one of AF447 went down over Atlantic Ocean. Because it was stuck by lightning. The plane is went under the water. It was missing for 2 years. No one who responsible for the survivors on those 300 passengers.

Yeah, that's one of AF447 went down over Atlantic Ocean. Because it was stuck by lightning. The plane is went under the water. It was missing for 2 years. No one who responsible for the survivors on those 300 passengers.

Or the possible pitot tube icing problem.

I'll bet a lot of those people were already fast asleep. Reminds me of the old, "Please fasten your seatbelt over the outside of your blanket" instruction.

So they don't have to wake you up to check, I guess.

I always leave mine fastened. It's not uncomfortable, and I learnt the lesson when on a particularly bumpy KLM Fokker 50 flight I flew up and banged my head on the overhead.

Neil

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/ i prefer this site, and this one http://www.boatus.com/hurricanes/tracking.asp

Moving thread to the FT Newsstand
Obscure2k
TravelBuzz Moderator

Or the possible pitot tube icing problem.

No, actually, it was problem the power went out due to lightning strike during on 30,000 feet. Which is why the plane splashed down in bottom the Atlantic Ocean.

No, actually, it was problem the power went out due to lightning strike during on 30,000 feet. Which is why the plane splashed down in bottom the Atlantic Ocean.

I missed that. Thank you again, N830MH. I stopped paying attention and lost track when the controversy heated up about the French authority possibly compromising its investigation due to the power of Airbus. But I thought I remember hearing that someone (Airbus or the FAA) issued a directive saying that their pitot tubes should be altered. I may be mistaken on this, as well.

Also, I wonder if there has been any more to this story. I haven't found more.

No, actually, it was problem the power went out due to lightning strike during on 30,000 feet. Which is why the plane splashed down in bottom the Atlantic Ocean.

Not according to the most recent reports from the investigators. What's your source for the lightning claim? Seems quite clear that it was caused by pilot error in response to erroneous airspeed information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447#Third_interim_report

Not according to the most recent reports from the investigators. What's your source for the lightning claim? Seems quite clear that it was caused by pilot error in response to erroneous airspeed information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447#Third_interim_report

Oh, indeed... That's why I peeled off from the whole sordid affair. To blame the pilots in any way when the instrument was erroneous is absolute confirmation that the investigation was compromised. Of course, the pilots are always ultimately to blame, even for not foreseeing something like this -- if only because they sign on the line that they are solely responsible for everything on the flight. (The latter sentence is my sarcasm.) Too.clever.by.whole.

:td::td::td::td::td:

Come to think of it, I'll bet the pilots on the LH flight that this thread is about performed at least some minor miracles that will never be widely known.

If you are willing to scan through the interim report issued by BEA, then you will see that there is indeed quite some reason for blaming the pilots. You might also have a look at a short version (http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol.af.447/note29juillet2011.en.pdf) which is only 4 pages long:


The approach to stall was characterised by the triggering of the warning, then the appearance of buffet
A short time after the triggering of the stall warning, the PF applied TO/GA thrust and made a nose-up input
In less than one minute after the disconnection of the autopilot, the airplane was outside its flight envelope following the manual inputs that were mainly nose-up
Until the airplane was outside its flight envelope, the airplane’s longitudinal movements were consistent with the position of the flight control surfaces
Neither of the pilots made any reference to the stall warning
Neither of the pilots formally identified the stall situation

If you are willing to scan through the interim report issued by BEA, then you will see that there is indeed quite some reason for blaming the pilots.

And for those who missed it, BBC-TV did a documentary last May which seemed to preview the interim report; very thorough and well researched. It's now on YouTube in 4 parts. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecX1wxWjpgs

So far as we know the AF447 disaster had nothing to do with lightning.

Planes are hit by lightning all the time. They are built with strikes in mind. The last crash directly attributable to a strike was about 45 years ago.

As for the turbulence incident, bear in mind that the majority of turbulence-related injuries result from passengers not being belted in when they're supposed to -- i.e. tripping or falling because they were out of their seat when they should have been sitting. I believe the number is about 25 people per year in the US. Not bad, considering that nearly a BILLION people actually fly.

Patrick Smith

And for those who missed it, BBC-TV did a documentary last May which seemed to preview the interim report; very thorough and well researched. It's now on YouTube in 4 parts. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecX1wxWjpgs

Wow! Very interested video. Thanks for sharing. I didn't see it before. Which is why the plane is totally out of control. What is happening the plane went down in bottom the Atlantic Ocean. It wasn't sure why the lightning is strikes the plane.

Very informative videos...watched all four and was amazed.

It does make me wonder about the training program...do the pilots have to go in the simulator every year...or even more often?

Not to push this off topic, but the videos brought up lots of questions in my mind, such as the differences between the Boeing and Airbus fly-by-wire setups.

And my really big question, how is it that the Airbus 330 that crashed didn't have a better weather radar system? If a guy in Colorado can see what the weather was like, how is it that the pilots could only see (it is surmised) the smaller storm ahead of the 250-mile-wide storm behind it?