Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Singapore flight turbulence tragedy

216 replies

Freespirit44 · 21/05/2024 17:59

Posting for traffic.

Since I have heard the news I am absolutely terrified.

I am a VERY anxious flyer. For this reason I haven't flown in over seven years.

The news of this tragedy has triggered me as i have a short haul flight next week from the UK.

Anyone else feel the same?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
focacciamuffin · 22/05/2024 08:18

SummerFeverVenice · 22/05/2024 01:13

I think that particular flight is 14hrs? You’d be really dehydrated if you went that long with no loo trip.

I have done once it with no ill effects. The same flight.

Not the norm though.

notimagain · 22/05/2024 07:54

EasternStandard · 22/05/2024 07:41

Tbf to a Times Radio journalist they did explain some of this about the drop and indicated it had been somewhat misreported

Thanks…

and I think TBF just once to the journalists in this case they were not helped by some slightly irresponsible flight tracking site watchers with a social media presence who spotted the descent and promptly went on line to post nonsense. You’re then into the “a lie is half way around the world……” scenario.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen the folks at Flightradar come out with a clarification/extra data of an incident so quickly - I wonder if they felt there was a chance their credibility would suffer.

focacciamuffin · 22/05/2024 07:51

PineappleTime · 21/05/2024 18:02

No, it's extremely rare. However I started keeping the seatbelt on all through flights some time ago because there's no reason not to and it could keep you safe in an emergency.

I used to fly a lot due to my work and I have only experienced this once. Oddly enough it was on a relatively short flight. It wasn’t as extreme as the Singapore air incident sounds but still caused chaos in the cabin. Worse because a meal had just been served. Everything flies up the air. I didn’t because I always keep my seatbelt loosely fastened, but my meal did. So did the meal carts and they are heavy. I don’t know how nobody was badly hurt or scalded. Not that I remember anyway.

VestibuleVirgin · 22/05/2024 07:44

albertoross · 21/05/2024 18:04

And? Do you really think he wouldn't have had a heart attack if he wasn't in this incident?

Probably. Timimg is all. You may well go to the gp for a flu jab and have your first fit just before it is administered. If it happened 2 mins after having the jab, you'd imjediately think the jab was to blame.
People die of natural causes on a plane. People are sick, faint and have breakdowns on a plane, with or without turbulence

EasternStandard · 22/05/2024 07:41

notimagain · 22/05/2024 07:37

Morning…

Since some seem to be giving the plunge numbers credibility again..

It’s very clear journalists and a lot of others didn’t understand what was seen on flight radar and other tracking sites.

They mistook a fairly standard 6000 foot descent at a rate about 2000 feet per minute that happened shortly after the turbulence as a “plunge”. That to my and many other peoples eyes looks deliberate steady descent might have been to get below turbulence or part of the start of the diversion

Flight radar released more detailed data of the actual turbulence encounter later yesterday and it was essentially the result of what might be described as a very erratic 400 foot climb from the assigned level.

Now a 400 foot altitude excursion forced by turbulence might not sound like enough to cause the damage we’ve heard about but it is a very big deal.

I flew for many years and rarely saw more than plus/minus 100 feet from the assigned altitude on the flight deck instruments.

Flight radar has its limitations, but the detailed data it published last night won’t be far off the reality. The actual authoritative numbers will be extracted from the flight data recorders on the aircraft and will end up in any published report.

Most journalists don’t have the expertise to do accurate reporting on the nuts and bolts of things, they don’t have the technical knowledge, they can’t sort from the wheat from the chaff and then of course there’s the rush to publish… I suspect that might apply to a lot of topics.

Edited

Tbf to a Times Radio journalist they did explain some of this about the drop and indicated it had been somewhat misreported

Takoneko · 22/05/2024 07:40

Calliopespa · 22/05/2024 07:15

It said that in the news and I guess the plane instruments probably provide the evidence.

Altitude is monitored by all those little clock-like instruments in the cock-pit. I should think it’s a key coordinate when flying.

Edited

The news reports yesterday were caused by journalists misreading the data. The 6,000 ft drop was a normal descent by the pilot. The severe turbulence event involved the plane moving up and down within a window of a few hundred feet over a period of a minute and a half. It’s not the “drop” that causes people to be flung out of their seats it’s the change from ascending to descending. It’s just like if you go over the crest of a hill at speed in a car. Things get flung upwards. You experience the same thing on roller coasters that go over a dip at speed. There are even “zero gravity” flights that do this deliberately so that people can experience the feeling of weightlessness.

notimagain · 22/05/2024 07:37

Calliopespa · 22/05/2024 07:15

It said that in the news and I guess the plane instruments probably provide the evidence.

Altitude is monitored by all those little clock-like instruments in the cock-pit. I should think it’s a key coordinate when flying.

Edited

Morning…

Since some seem to be giving the plunge numbers credibility again..

It’s very clear journalists and a lot of others didn’t understand what was seen on flight radar and other tracking sites.

They mistook a fairly standard 6000 foot descent at a rate about 2000 feet per minute that happened shortly after the turbulence as a “plunge”. That to my and many other peoples eyes looks deliberate steady descent might have been to get below turbulence or part of the start of the diversion

Flight radar released more detailed data of the actual turbulence encounter later yesterday and it was essentially the result of what might be described as a very erratic 400 foot climb from the assigned level.

Now a 400 foot altitude excursion forced by turbulence might not sound like enough to cause the damage we’ve heard about but it is a very big deal.

I flew for many years and rarely saw more than plus/minus 100 feet from the assigned altitude on the flight deck instruments.

Flight radar has its limitations, but the detailed data it published last night won’t be far off the reality. The actual authoritative numbers will be extracted from the flight data recorders on the aircraft and will end up in any published report.

Most journalists don’t have the expertise to do accurate reporting on the nuts and bolts of things, they don’t have the technical knowledge, they can’t sort from the wheat from the chaff and then of course there’s the rush to publish… I suspect that might apply to a lot of topics.

Maddy70 · 22/05/2024 07:18

The man died of a heart attack...he already had a heart condition. This story has had the daily mail treatment

You should always wear your seatbelt when seated in case of unexpected turbulance anyway

The plane didn't crash it would have been perfectly safe if passengers followed the safety advice

Camt help someone with a heart condition actually having a heart condition ....

Calliopespa · 22/05/2024 07:15

SheepBeepBeep · 22/05/2024 07:11

So people keep saying, but funnily enough I think the sudden 6000ft drop might have had something to do with the heart attack.

Where is the evidence that the plane lost 6000 feet? This seems very unlikely. In reality it was possibly only a few feet of lift that was lost, as it only needed to be far enough for the passengers to move from their seat to the top of the plane which is about 7 feet. Without a point of reference turbulence can feel you are moving about much more than you actually are. So as frightening as this must have felt, and as awful as it is that a person died and others injured, claims like this are not helpful to anyone.

OP and others who have a fear of flying, try not to listen to what is being reported on the news and here as there just isn’t the evidence to back up these claims. Yes, there was severe turbulence, but claims like the plane having a 6000ft drop are just so off that it will fuel your fear, and is probably not even close to the truth.

It said that in the news and I guess the plane instruments probably provide the evidence.

Altitude is monitored by all those little clock-like instruments in the cock-pit. I should think it’s a key coordinate when flying.

Fluffycloudsfloatinginthesky · 22/05/2024 07:14

@SheepBeepBeep

Pretty sure that's the figure the news was giving out yesterday.

RemarkablyBrightCreature · 22/05/2024 07:11

SpringBunnies · 21/05/2024 19:29

I think it must have been a very very bad turbulence to have that many injured. I wouldn’t minimise it with just wear a seat belt. But it is a very rare occurrence.

It’s not minimising it - it’s offering advice that keeps you safe.

SheepBeepBeep · 22/05/2024 07:11

So people keep saying, but funnily enough I think the sudden 6000ft drop might have had something to do with the heart attack.

Where is the evidence that the plane lost 6000 feet? This seems very unlikely. In reality it was possibly only a few feet of lift that was lost, as it only needed to be far enough for the passengers to move from their seat to the top of the plane which is about 7 feet. Without a point of reference turbulence can feel you are moving about much more than you actually are. So as frightening as this must have felt, and as awful as it is that a person died and others injured, claims like this are not helpful to anyone.

OP and others who have a fear of flying, try not to listen to what is being reported on the news and here as there just isn’t the evidence to back up these claims. Yes, there was severe turbulence, but claims like the plane having a 6000ft drop are just so off that it will fuel your fear, and is probably not even close to the truth.

ThereAreNoSloesOnThere · 22/05/2024 06:02

@Freespirit44 It's very exciting you are going away next week! How old are your DCs and have they flown before? Where are you going?

I fly alot and have been a nervous flyer as I said upthread. But i love going places and concentrate on that. I'll also just pop a recommendation here for possible ear pain for the DCs on the descent, My older DS has sensory issues and the ear pain for him was quite extreme. We did the usual stuff - chewing gum etc and using a vicks nasal inhaler to clear his airways but the real difference came via these little things linked below- I buy mine from Amazon but they can be bought at some pharmacies I believe. You pop them in about 30 minutes before landing (or when starting the descent) and they filter the air and lessen the air pressure. I thought they were a bit of a placebo but they work a treat for my DS and I bought adult ones for myself for the last 2 flights I went on (including to Australia) and they are wonderful IMO. I first heard about them on MN and I really recommend them.

  • re turbulence- it will happen at some point but as others have noted it is so incredibly rare for anything major like this. I'd get your Dcs settled, have a glass of wine and read. DS1 is quite scared of flying and he now does word searches as he needs to concentrate.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/EarPlanes-Original-Earplugs-Filtering-Protection/dp/B0849562BY/ref=sr_1_4?crid=2YNN947E0ERHD&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.8G14SFvuHG91SJeuCAD-joh8wXjuY5anp0GZlZaOheoqxPWPEuYS5Du0fBbFJz9_kAEMUZvqr_WnfVDaV6fe4rkzLOPRc01cGB0kLUkR_tCfn7dJDKumxcdsqcFpqaFnR1E5dQAg6KYqHKuyoP6nZSoSamIolVTAjyUcWZnztzUhhVYD3_AsjsvdScRv2qBUG-GPtx1ta4aMaruyw3r7sKnHb5q7N2YLTXjVMgf2QF-CWz4npuaReq08MmxynP8k8uQ_4CtH4mWvlTyel9jQz65PrE81hQ2gPbDgzlc8GkU.a58fc5XA_YuL5y-_OUDf2ejR1oUsHV0pMK-KaJfy-BY&dib_tag=se&keywords=earplanes+kids&qid=1716353897&s=drugstore&sprefix=earplanes+kids%2Cdrugstore%2C175&sr=1-4

PumpkinsAndCoconuts · 22/05/2024 05:59

Haggisfish3 · 21/05/2024 18:01

Oddly, no. News suggests he died of a heart attack, not from injuries sustained. I make a point of wearing my seat belt all the time anyway. These events hit the news because they are so rare. I feel it is incredibly unlikely to happen again

This doesn’t seem to cause me (additional) anxiety either. Rather the opposite, tbh.

The vast majority of passengers apparently survived without permanent and or grievous injuries. People had been walking around, weren’t wearing a seat belt and most of them still did not receive severe injuries despite the severity of the turbulence.

I hope I don’t sound callous (I am aware that this must have been terrible for the people involved and I am not disregarding the gentleman’s death). But looking at this with the bigger picture in mind? I find the outcomes quite comforting!

BeagleMumOfTwo · 22/05/2024 03:20

I wear my seatbelt at all times now after hearing about that poor American woman who got sucked out of the window because some fusilage hit and broke the window.
Absolutely horrendous and sad.
I can't even sit near the window now.

SummerFeverVenice · 22/05/2024 01:29

They think the turbulence was caused by a tropical storm forming over Myanamar. So not likely to still be there tomorrow.

Calliopespa · 22/05/2024 01:20

Freespirit44 · 21/05/2024 22:46

@TokyoSushi good luck for tomorrow! I feel your pain.

As a pp said, to see the world, we have to fly. I was actually in a positive mindset prior to today's news. I guess it bought out my fears which iv kept buried for the sake of my kids.

We travel as a family around the UK but iv put off air travel for 8 years. I'm going to put my big girl pants on and get through it, but I know it won't be easy!

You’ll be fine OP. We all take risks walking out our door ( and actually it’s still not risk -free staying home ). I wouldn’t be surprised if your risk in the air is, if anything, lower than on the ground. I do understand your concern though.

Calliopespa · 22/05/2024 01:16

SummerFeverVenice · 22/05/2024 01:13

I think that particular flight is 14hrs? You’d be really dehydrated if you went that long with no loo trip.

Or you’d get a uti!

Even if you wore a nappy, you’d probably need a nappy change.

Calliopespa · 22/05/2024 01:14

PassingStranger · 22/05/2024 01:09

Your meant to get up on a flight and stretch your legs.

Yes. There are also helpful exercises you can do in your seat if taking a seatbelt off is concerning. They mostly involve moving the feet to keep blood from pooling/ not moving on.

SummerFeverVenice · 22/05/2024 01:13

mydogisthebest · 21/05/2024 18:56

I don't fly very often but when I do I always keep my seatbelt on. I never use the loo so no need to undo the belt

I think that particular flight is 14hrs? You’d be really dehydrated if you went that long with no loo trip.

Calliopespa · 22/05/2024 01:12

PrincessTeaSet · 21/05/2024 23:12

Far more people will die of thrombosis caused by sitting still too long on a plane than will ever die due to turbulence.

I’m sure that’s true.

Calliopespa · 22/05/2024 01:10

Cityandmakeup · 21/05/2024 19:45

He had a heart attack. News it’s hyping it up.

I’m not really sure that’s accurate: 31 were injured, 6 critically. That wasn’t fallout from his heart attack: it was because of the turbulence.

PassingStranger · 22/05/2024 01:09

mydogisthebest · 21/05/2024 18:56

I don't fly very often but when I do I always keep my seatbelt on. I never use the loo so no need to undo the belt

Your meant to get up on a flight and stretch your legs.

TheBirdintheCave · 22/05/2024 00:17

Fintoo · 21/05/2024 18:59

A little question for people who are flight crew, if they wouldn’t mind answering. Do the pilots keep their seat belts on throughout the flight, so that they wouldn’t be affected if this happens?

According to a pilot I watch on YouTube yes they do. Though not always the shoulder harness bit.

IcySpritz · 21/05/2024 23:30

Aeroplane car seats?! You learn something new every day...