Singapore Severe Turbulence

Ah, in your opinion. Call NASA and NOAA and tell them your credentials and that you, personally, have feelings that suggest otherwise.

Please record and share this phone call and make sure it’s clear and in a sharable .MP4 format.

No matter your outrage or mine - nothing - and I mean nothing - is gonna change the outcome and the planet getting warmer. It is a byproduct of continued human expansion.

And we pilots should be the last to complain, considering we are flying planes burning jet A.
 
No matter your outrage or mine - nothing - and I mean nothing - is gonna change the outcome and the planet getting warmer. It is a byproduct of continued human expansion.

And we pilots should be the last to complain, considering we are flying planes burning jet A.

Please, call NASA and tell them your thoughts and discoveries. Please record it in a sharable format. This will be fantastic for the meme page.
 
I think it is important to ensure people are wearing their seatbelts when seated. At the same time, there are definitely some flight crews that leave the seatbelt sign on for an entire flight and I think they’re doing everyone a disservice by making the sign mean nothing. People are going to have to get up at some point, so use your brain and try to get the sign off when appropriate, otherwise it means nothing.
Huge pet peeve is crew’s leaving the sign on when it’s smooth. I’ve been flying around Asia a lot lately and have noticed the sign is usually off from 10k in clb to 10k in descent… unless it’s too bumpy for even the FA’s in which case everyone needs to be seated.

I’m of the opinion that the sign should only be on when it’s too bumpy for FAs to walk around. Instead, we’ve got into this ridiculously cautious mentality that is ignored anyway so why bother even installing seatbelt signs anymore?
 
Huge pet peeve is crew’s leaving the sign on when it’s smooth. I’ve been flying around Asia a lot lately and have noticed the sign is usually off from 10k in clb to 10k in descent… unless it’s too bumpy for even the FA’s in which case everyone needs to be seated.

I’m of the opinion that the sign should only be on when it’s too bumpy for FAs to walk around. Instead, we’ve got into this ridiculously cautious mentality that is ignored anyway so why bother even installing seatbelt signs anymore?
I agree that having it on all the time is a bad thing and people won’t pay attention to it but it’s also an insurance switch. If the sign is off and people get hurt, I’m liable. If the sign is on and people get hurt, well… in an industry that will ALWAYS throw pilots under the bus as a first course of action I’ll take the extra insurance if I think there is a chance of unexpected turbulence. I’m not saying I keep it on all the time but I certainly error on the side of caution.
 
Please, call NASA and tell them your thoughts and discoveries. Please record it in a sharable format. This will be fantastic for the meme page.

Don’t forget NOAA or NWS, they’d be interested in hearing this.
 
I agree that having it on all the time is a bad thing and people won’t pay attention to it but it’s also an insurance switch. If the sign is off and people get hurt, I’m liable. If the sign is on and people get hurt, well… in an industry that will ALWAYS throw pilots under the bus as a first course of action I’ll take the extra insurance if I think there is a chance of unexpected turbulence. I’m not saying I keep it on all the time but I certainly error on the side of caution.
This is a cop out. Do pilot things to figure out where you can expect it to be bumpy and turn the sign on then. If it starts to get bumpy unexpectedly, turn it on then too.
 
I agree that having it on all the time is a bad thing and people won’t pay attention to it but it’s also an insurance switch. If the sign is off and people get hurt, I’m liable. If the sign is on and people get hurt, well… in an industry that will ALWAYS throw pilots under the bus as a first course of action I’ll take the extra insurance if I think there is a chance of unexpected turbulence. I’m not saying I keep it on all the time but I certainly error on the side of caution.
You’re liable regardless of the position switch. If you leave it on for the whole flight and 3 hours into it grandma can’t hold it anymore while you’re flying around some weather, when she gets hurt and sues you she’s going to win because you were so worried about the liability you forgot to take care of your passengers by turning off the sign when it was appropriate to do so. Also, I don’t believe there are any cases that back the “liability” issue regarding this—if there are I’d be genuinely interested in seeing them.
 
Being a dispatcher for 3 decades, I wonder if this incident could have been totally avoided or at least the severity reduced if said company had and used dispatchers the way the US and Canada do?
 
I’m curious what this “liability” entails? Getting personally sued? Fired?

Any real life examples that support this as a real thing?

In some countries it would be considered criminal liability. In the US it probably would more be around the FAA going after your certificates, or your employer disciplining you.

This is an old article by Captain Fenwick, but it's still all true.

 
Don’t forget NOAA or NWS, they’d be interested in hearing this.

“Meteorologists of the world, gather round, gather round. A Jet U grad on an aviation forum has something to tell us!”

“GentleMEN, GentleWOMEN of science, help us welcome @Cherokee_Cruiser who has toppled the halls of scientific method with “I think”, “I feel”, “I heard” and crackpot PPC news blog articles from DailyMail! How about a round of applause!”



IMG_3563.jpeg
 
“Meteorologists of the world, gather round, gather round. A Jet U grad on an aviation forum has something to tell us!”

“GentleMEN, GentleWOMEN of science, help us welcome @Cherokee_Cruiser who has toppled the halls of scientific method with “I think”, “I feel”, “I heard” and crackpot PPC news blog articles from DailyMail! How about a round of applause!”



View attachment 77999

If he doesn’t already have them, I can get him phone numbers for Jim Cantore and Dr. Michael Brennan. I’m sure they’d love to hear his research.
 
Last edited:
Sorry dude - the planet is going to continue to get warmer. And no matter how green you go, there are 3 billion+ people in India, Africa, and 3rd world Asian countries that are going to continue to pollute the skies with the nastiest gases, diesel, fossil fuels, all the nasties - and continue warming the planet. The planet will get warmer - you may be able to ever so slowly reduce that progression towards warmth, but it's gonna happen. The number of 2nd and 3rd would countries and their poor infrastructure, poor people, poor economy, far outweigh the number of first world countries like the United States that are trying to do "something" about warming.

There is one quick solution. It's well known that human beings are the most invasive and destructive species on this planet, for this planet. The natural selection of any such problem is a natural re-balance, almost always in the form of a culling. I distinctly seem to recall the planet unleashing a virus (a self defense mechanism) in order to cull the human herd. But we said no, we have to save lives. Earth gave you a natural solution, you just didn't like it. So here we are. As long as humans exist and continue to multiply, the planet will get warmer. And no amounts of Tesla driving or clean living in the United States is going to change that outcome for the other 3 billion+ people in India, Africa, and Asia. Having a 1/3 of the human population wiped would undoubtedly put a serious dent in global warming. Would you like to volunteer? :)
Hold on. You spent the last few posts telling us that you can’t prove that global warming caused an incident.

Then you spend the next 1000 characters proving that global warming is real and can’t be stopped. Thereby making it a reasonable assumption that global warming may have played into this incident. This is twisted logic even for you.
 
Hold on. You spent the last few posts telling us that you can’t prove that global warming caused an incident.

Then you spend the next 1000 characters proving that global warming is real and can’t be stopped. Thereby making it a reasonable assumption that global warming may have played into this incident. This is twisted logic even for you.

You can't prove this particular storm was because of global warming. Or are you really pretending the ITCZ didn't exist until the last ~15 yrs?


It's a cop out answer because from now on, literally ANY air-involved incident will be attributed to "global warming" without offering any proof.
 
Back
Top