SINGAPORE: An aviation lawyer is questioning whether Singapore Airlines might be at fault following a turbulence incident on Flight SQ321 from London to Singapore that led to one passenger’s death and left many others critically injured.
The flight, which encountered severe turbulence on May 21, was diverted to Bangkok. Out of the 211 passengers and 18 crew members onboard, 79 passengers and six crew members required hospitalization.
Peter Carter, Director of Carter Capner Law and legal representative for some of the injured passengers, has pointed to preliminary findings by the Transport Safety Investigation Bureau (TSIB) of Singapore, which allegedly suggest potential lapses in the airline’s handling of the situation.
According to Carter, issues under scrutiny include the airline’s possible failure to avoid an evident area of thunderstorms and a lack of timely warning for passengers to fasten their seat belts.
“It’s looking likely that this is not a simple case of unexpected turbulence,” Carter said. He emphasized that if the airline’s actions contributed to the incident, it could significantly impact compensation claims. The 1999 Montréal Convention limits claims to $175,000 if the airline is not at fault, but if negligence is proven, compensation could be unlimited.
The TSIB’s initial report, based on the flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder, indicated that the aircraft was likely flying over an area with developing convective activity. Carter is investigating whether thunderstorms near the flight path were detected and appropriately monitored by the crew.
“The cockpit voice recorder will answer questions about the attention the air crew was paying to developing thunderstorms,” Carter noted, adding that despite claims of a fasten seat belt announcement, passengers reported no such warning.
The TSIB reported that a pilot called out that the fasten seat belt sign had been switched on moments before passengers were thrown from their seats. However, Carter urged Singapore Airlines to clarify several points: why the aircraft did not divert to avoid thunderstorms, how frequently the weather radar was checked, and the experience level of the flight crew.
In response to growing turbulence-related injuries, including the recent SQ321 incident, airlines are under increased scrutiny.
A Jetstar flight from Auckland to Dunedin recently faced significant turbulence but reported no injuries. Turbulence remains a leading cause of in-flight injuries, with over a third of U.S. airline incidents from 2009-2018 attributed to it, according to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
Research indicates that clear-air turbulence has increased significantly over recent decades, contributing to numerous injuries. A Qatar Airways flight also encountered severe turbulence, injuring 12 passengers, just days after the Singapore Airlines incident.
Carter suggested that these turbulence events could lead to higher compensation payouts if it can be shown that aircrews should have diverted their flight paths away from developing thunderstorms. NIWA research meteorologist Richard Turner highlighted that while some turbulence, like clear-air turbulence, is challenging to predict, thunderstorms typically offer visual or radar warnings.
Emirates is addressing the issue by installing advanced turbulence detection tools on its fleet, sharing data through the International Air Transport Association’s platform. The TSIB’s investigation continues, with Singapore Airlines declining comment.
TISG/