Singapore Airlines incident caused ‘life-changing’ injuries – turbulence and cabin risks could change flying

From Emily Clark for ABC

As details emerge of the devastating injuries aboard Flight SQ321, attention turns to what is happening now to the passengers and crew and what can be done to make the many hours they spend in an aircraft cabin safer.

Aviation experts believe this incident is a glimpse into a future where there is an increased risk of deadly turbulence, but the cabin experience will be completely different.

Aircraft safety is constantly evolving and plane crashes around the world are no longer as common as they once were.

But this week’s Singapore Airlines incident suggests the next challenge is to avoid cabin injuries and the unfortunate loss of life that can occur when an aircraft encounters unexpected turbulence at 37,000 feet.

A few days ago, the director of the Samitivej Srinakarin Hospital in Bangkok read out details of the injuries of the 41 passengers and crew members who were treated there.

22 people suffered injuries to the spine and spinal cord.

Six suffered skull and brain injuries.

Thirteen have injuries to bones, muscles and other organs.

Patients were grouped according to their most severe injuries, but some fell into multiple categories.

These are injuries that may affect them for the rest of their lives.

Among them are Australian Keith Davis and his wife Kerry Jordan.

“Kerry is not well at all. She has suffered severe spinal cord trauma,” he told the ABC.

“She underwent emergency surgery immediately after being admitted and still has no feeling from the hips down.

“It’s pretty life-changing.”

The likelihood of injuries in the cabin

The Singapore Airlines incident is said to have occurred in an “absolute moment” and was of an extreme nature.

Whether a sudden movement of an aircraft is caused by turbulence or something else, it is the level of unpredictability combined with the severity of injuries that is most concerning for an industry founded on understanding and reducing risk.

Professor Doug Drury, head of the aviation department at Central Queensland University and a pilot for 40 years, told ABC News that the future of aviation must take into account the likely increase in turbulence.

“The good news is that we do not often experience major events that cause such damage and regrettable loss of life,” he said.

“But we can assume that as a result of global climate change, there will be more and more such events in the future.”

Turbulence is another natural phenomenon affected by rising global temperatures.

A 2017 study predicted that severe turbulence would become two to three times more frequent over the North Atlantic by 2050–2080 due to climate change.

At the same time, there are bold predictions for the development of the aviation industry.

Before Covid-19, airlines carried four billion people around the world each year, and the industry predicts that number will double by 2036.

This means significantly more aircraft in the sky and at the same time the number of cargo and private flights is expected to increase.

It might be a bit crowded and it might be even more difficult to find a quiet route without turbulence.

“If all this hot air rises and we fly through other people’s hurricanes, then this may continue,” Dr. Drury said.

This look into the future forces the aviation industry to address the problem of cabin injuries.

Better prediction of turbulence is an essential factor. But even if the cause is other than the cause, measures to protect passengers and crew are helpful.

In the past, there have been repeated equipment failures and technical malfunctions that have resulted in passengers and crew members who were not wearing seat belts having to be hospitalized.

And the airlines were forced to compensate them for their suffering.

The Montreal Convention

Just in March, 50 people had to be treated on the tarmac of Auckland Airport after a LATAM Airlines flight from Sydney suffered a “sudden crash”.

There were reports that passengers and crew were “thrown into the roof of the aircraft.”

The cause of the incident was not turbulence, but a “technical defect” which, according to investigators, was probably related to a cockpit seat moving forward unexpectedly.

Some of the injured passengers have now hired legal counsel to seek compensation from LATAM.

And there is an interesting treaty called the Montreal Convention that sets out liability in cases like this.

Former president of the Aviation Law Association and aviation lawyer Peter Carter told ABC that “most countries are signatories” and the agreement would probably apply to some extent to Flight SQ321.

“It applies to all flights between countries if one of the countries has signed the Montreal Convention, and that is Singapore and the United Kingdom, so there are no problems in that regard,” he said.

The Montreal Convention provides for two levels: The amount of compensation for passengers where the airline is not at fault is limited to 260,000 Australian dollars.

If the airline is at some level of fault, passengers may be able to claim second-tier compensation, for which there is no upper limit.

Carter said “legally there is not much difference” between injuries caused by a technical defect or by turbulence.

“Passengers will continue to be entitled to compensation for their proven injuries, subject to the first tier cap of A$260,000,” he said.

This means that the type of turbulence that hit Flight SQ321 becomes very important.

“If the airline can prove that it had nothing to do with the incident, then the restriction applies. They have to prove that they had nothing to do with it,” Carter said.

“If there’s turbulence in clear air, they might have a chance, but I think … if it’s to do with the formation of thunderstorm turbulence, that’s a whole different matter.”

It should be noted that the specific terms and conditions of the ticket may also play a role, as some airlines do not impose liability limits.

And if a manufacturer defect is to blame, they too can be sued.

Of course, airlines are insured against such incidents, but such cases of injuries in the cabin are not uncommon.

“Lufthansa, Air Canada and Hawaiian Airlines have experienced unexpected turbulence on their aircraft in recent years. In total, well over 100 passengers and crew members were injured,” said Carter.

In the past, incidents have led to changes to reduce the risk to passengers and crew and the potential liability of airlines and manufacturers for injuries and deaths.

The Singapore Airlines incident is expected to be fully investigated.

Sensors on seat belts, padding on the ceiling

Singapore’s Transport Safety Investigative Bureau has sent its people to Bangkok to find out more about the circumstances of this incident.

The investigation could shed light on the type of turbulence that Flight SQ321 encountered while breakfast was being served to passengers and why it was not detected.

Drury said the risk of cabin injuries from sudden falls or turbulence “will not go away.”

“Something has to change, and it has to change on the part of the regulators,” he said.

“Can we put padding or flexible floors in the luggage racks? They hit the luggage racks so hard that they opened… and the luggage fell out. Should we lock the racks to prevent that from happening?

“There will have to be some modifications.”

But no matter what type of turbulence it was or whether, in the case of the LATAM incident in March, a technical defect caused the sudden movement of the plane, Drury said, “there was a common denominator” in terms of the risk to passengers and crew.

“They weren’t wearing seat belts,” he said.

“I understand how people feel sometimes, but it’s for our own protection. I never take my seatbelt off. If I have to, I loosen it a little, but I never take it off.”

He believes this incident will likely force regulators to examine whether the seatbelt sign should be on more often or by default.

“Can it be as simple as a sensor in the seat belt buckle itself? That says, ‘Seat 32B is red,’ so the cabin crew has to go there and say, ‘Excuse me, sir, you need to fasten your seat belt,'” he said.

“I think all regulators will start to look at these types of events a little differently and decide what kind of rule changes are necessary.”

“So if there are regulations that require the seatbelt sign to remain on at all times, then airlines will have to adapt their business practices accordingly.

“It will bring some really interesting challenges.”

– ABC