16 injured from turbulence - UAL 747-400

[Myndee]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,587029,00.html?test=latestnews

Sixteen people aboard a U.S. passenger aircraft were injured Saturday morning after it ran into turbulence over Anchorage, Ala., while it was traveling from Washington D.C. to Narita, police and air transport authorities said, according to Kyodo news.
Turbulence hit the Boeing 747-400 United Airlines flight 897 at 10:55 a.m. local time, when the aircraft, carrying 264 people, was trying to descend to an altitude of 30,200 feet from 31,800 feet, according to the airport office of the Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Ministry.
The plane ran into turbulence at an altitude of 31,500 feet.
Later, the aircraft landed safely at Narita at around 3:45 p.m., according to the airport office.
Although the airline initially alerted fire crew members that 17 people were injured, it was later found that the number was 16, the authorities said.
The 16 people were rushed to hospitals by helicopters and other transportation means, police said.

[EconomyClass]

Were any of them belted in I wonder?

[saupatel]

What confuses me is if the injuries were serious enough to airlift people to hospitals then why did they wait till Narita ? Should they have taken an emergency landing in Anchorage ?

[AJ]

Reports indicate the Fasten Seat Belt signs were illuminated 10 minutes before the encounter.

[Evan]

Were any of them belted in I wonder?

248 of them seem to have been. Maybe people are learning.

[Evan]

What confuses me is if the injuries were serious enough to airlift people to hospitals then why did they wait till Narita ? Should they have taken an emergency landing in Anchorage ?

That was a bit of an exaggeration.

Japanese Police reported, that one passenger received serious injuries (fractured leg), 17 occupants received minor injuries.

[EconomyClass]

Everybody hears about deaths from crashes. No real effort to quantify the injured of flights that land. I guess if you're injured but alive, you count your blessings. But I wouldn't count a flight that lands me in the hospital as a good flight. Though I guess that would be when I would be glad I always buy the travel insurance.

[BoeingBobby]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,...est=latestnews


Sixteen people aboard a U.S. passenger aircraft were injured Saturday morning after it ran into turbulence over Anchorage, Ala., while it was traveling from Washington D.C. to Narita, police and air transport authorities said, according to Kyodo news.
Turbulence hit the Boeing 747-400 United Airlines flight 897 at 10:55 a.m. local time, when the aircraft, carrying 264 people, was trying to descend to an altitude of 30,200 feet from 31,800 feet, according to the airport office of the Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Ministry.
The plane ran into turbulence at an altitude of 31,500 feet.
Later, the aircraft landed safely at Narita at around 3:45 p.m., according to the airport office.
Although the airline initially alerted fire crew members that 17 people were injured, it was later found that the number was 16, the authorities said.
The 16 people were rushed to hospitals by helicopters and other transportation means, police said.

I find it interesting that the report reads, "Over Anchorage Ala. (Should be AK) but they were at a metric altitude 9700 meters descending to 9200 meters (Read China or Russia) and landed in Narita, Japan approximately 12 hours later. Something is very wrong about the time line or the location of the encountered turbulence. There is no way the Captain of this flight would fly for another 12 hours with injured passengers on board.

Oh wait second, I just re-read the post and it came from FOX news! No wonder!!!

[P3_Super_Bee]

I find it interesting that the report reads, "Over Anchorage Ala. (Should be AK) but they were at a metric altitude 9700 meters descending to 9200 meters (Read China or Russia) and landed in Narita, Japan approximately 12 hours later. Something is very wrong about the time line or the location of the encountered turbulence. There is no way the Captain of this flight would fly for another 12 hours with injured passengers on board.

Oh wait second, I just re-read the post and it came from FOX news! No wonder!!!

Let's see....

Are you reading one article and blaming another source? I am lost with your post...

1. Unless you fly B377's the flight time from Anchorage to Toyko is around 7 hours. not 12 as you state. 12 hours is not the time frame stated in the article either. Article states plane took off from Dulles at 2:40PM Toyko Time, and landed in Narita at 3:45PM.


2. The article states descending 31,200 FT to 30,800 FT, with the inflight at 31,500 FTnothing about meters you claim...

[BoeingBobby]

Let's see....

Are you reading one article and blaming another source? I am lost with your post...

1. Unless you fly B377's the flight time from Anchorage to Toyko is around 7 hours. not 12 as you state. 12 hours is not the time frame stated in the article either. Article states plane took off from Dulles at 2:40PM Toyko Time, and landed in Narita at 3:45PM.


2. The article states descending 31,200 FT to 30,800 FT, with the inflight at 31,500 FTnothing about meters you claim...

#1 This time of the year, @ .84 you do not do ANC - NRT in 7 hours
#2 The posted article states the odd FL numbers, they equate to metric
FL's, I fly them all the time in the 74.
#3 If the cabin crew were aware that they had passengers in possible
need of medical attention I am quite sure the flight crew knew as well.
And I really don't care if it was 12 hours, 7 hours or 30 minutes.
If I were PIC of an aircraft with injured pax that needed emergent
care, I would be making an emergency landing @ ANC if in fact that
is where the turbulence was encountered.

[EconomyClass]

BoeingBobby. I know this is slightly OT, but I like your avatar picture. Where does it come from?

[BoeingBobby]

BoeingBobby. I know this is slightly OT, but I like your avatar picture. Where does it come from?

One of our (Atlas Air) 400's over the Pacific. I think I got it off of our Company website. PM me and I will be glad to send you the jpg

BB

[SYDCBRWOD]

I can see why the pilot continued. I have known three people who had fractures of the tib or fib and either were incorrectly diagnosed (either missed on an x-ray) or an x-ray was not taken, or simply thought that their leg was badly bruised. It took a few days before they went to a doctor and got x-rays before a fracture was found. At the time, the FA's were probably more worried about the few passengers with minor wounds leaking tomato sauce than the bloke with no loss of conciousness and probably what appeared to be one hell of a bruise on his shin. They probably moved him to a vacant row, elevated his leg, whacked an icepack on it and discussed his upcoming Japanese holiday with him.

Yes, a fracture can be serious (fatal if you get an embolism), but you first need to know that the person has sustained a fracture to realise the seriousness of the situation. Not all fractures involve a compound break with bone through the skin, or obvious deformity of the limb.

[BoeingBobby]

I find it interesting that BoeingBobby tries to hold Fox accountable for figures that the airport office of the Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Ministry gave FoxNews. Seems to indicate that BoeingBobby is bigoted against Fox news. That seems to correlate with his history of biased against Fox news; and giving biased preferential treatment toward the biased mainstream media; which is typically even more inaccurate and more biased than Fox news.

I find it interesting that for someone that is talking about flying that claims to be an airline pilot is using meters for altitude. Now I've never been an airline pilot, and I'm pretty much a has-been as a pilot; however I seem to recollect that for flying that feet is the standard for altitude. Many people have been skeptical of BoeingBobby's claims of being an airline pilot because of things he has said in previous posts, this is just one more reason to add to that pile.

I find it somewhat telling that BoeingBobby is making TimeZone assumptions based on times that are giving without zone reference by non-pilots. I would think anyone that is used to traveling would know not to take time zones for credit and that non-pilots are typically very incomplete and unreliable about giving times.

I find it somewhat telling an ironic that BoeingBobby is making very similar errors and assumptions that he is accusing Fox news of. Granted the article is vague, confusing and has questionable accuracy; but isn't that the status quo for all non-technical media outlets? Granted the article is about as clear as mud, isn't that the industry standard?

BobbyBoeing say the transit is about 12 hours this time of year but flight aware shows that the flight was about 10 hours.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL897/history/20100219/1746Z/KIAD/RJAA

I suspect that the source that gave the altitude numbers to Fox gave them in approximate/rounded meter units; so I suspect the altitude figures were inaccurate in the first place, so when Fox converted it back into feet it was still inaccurate. Cross referencing other sources seems to support my hypothesis. So it seems not to be the fault of Fox. The aviation Herald is the only source so far that I found that seems to have corrected the inaccuracy. I think BobbyBoeing has shown his bias by trying to make a mountain out of a molehill in singling out Fox, when nearly all the other media outlets made the same mistake, because apparently they were given rounded figures in the first place from the airport office of the Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Ministry gave FoxNews. The aviation Herald seems to be the only one so far that either deduce the air or cross checked it with flight aware.

Now I remember why I have not been here in a while! ATFS P.M. me and I will be glad to send you a copy of my credentials. The comment about FOX News was supposed to be a joke. And if you do a little research and read my original post, both Mainland China and The Federated Russian States, (Russia and most of the former USSR) ALL OPERATE IN METERS NOT FEET! When I fly from Dubai to Hong Kong we go across India and then into China, when we reach the border between Myanmar and China we must change to a metric Flight Level. When we leave Mainland China and transition into Hong Kong airspace we go back to a standard flight level. This is why I was surprised at the altitudes given in the report. One would NOT be at a METRIC FL over Alaska.

[BoeingBobby]

I’m well aware that in some countries that they operate in meters; but I thought the international standard for flight was in feet. ( perhaps things have changed). I thought it was kind of strange that you were using meters.

If my suspicions were unfounded, I apologize.

The flight levels that the article were in feet and do not convert to standard metric flight levels. So it would be hard to believe that the original error was at Fox news. It also makes it hard to understand why you would think it was a metric flight levels (unless that was also a joke). Perhaps you are making some silly joke, but it’s hard for me to derive how you came to your conclusions.

If you're making jokes they are going over my head. haha

I don't want to beat this thing up, but I will try to explain my original comments to you.

This is the quote that was posted by the former A&P wannabe girl.
"Sixteen people aboard a U.S. passenger aircraft were injured Saturday morning after it ran into turbulence over Anchorage, Ala., while it was traveling from Washington D.C. to Narita, police and air transport authorities said, according to Kyodo news.
Turbulence hit the Boeing 747-400 United Airlines flight 897 at 10:55 a.m. local time, when the aircraft, carrying 264 people, was trying to descend to an altitude of 30,200 feet from 31,800 feet, according to the airport office of the Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Ministry".

See where I am confused? These are not standard altitudes to be flying at in U.S. airspace.

BB