FlarePath
Cases › WPR11LA203 · Part 121 airline

BOEING 777-223AMERICAN AIRLINES INC

Pacific Ocean, USA · 2011-04-11·N766AN

0
fatal
2
serious
Serious injury
highest injury
—
damage

What happened

NTSB summary, verbatim

As the airplane was climbing, the flight crew observed a small weather buildup in front of them. They requested a deviation around the weather, but the air traffic controller requested that they stand by. After entering the weather, they received clearance to turn; however, about 24,000 feet, the airplane encountered about 11 seconds of moderate, and then severe, turbulence. During the encounter, two flight attendants received broken ankles while conducting work in the aft cabin area. The digital flight data recorder revealed that during the encounter vertical acceleration forces went from 2.2G to 0.6913G within 1 second, to a minimum of 0.496G about 5 seconds after the 2.2G maximum. A weather study conducted by a National Transportation Safety Board meteorologist revealed a frontal wave over the Japanese coast with a warm front extending eastward in the vicinity of the turbulence encounter. A gale force wind was expected. The region of the turbulence encounter also contained low to mid-level clouds with cloud tops near 14,000 feet; cumulonimbus cloud development, with tops up to 26,000 feet, was slightly upstream from the turbulence encounter. Review of the weather package given to the flight crew found no forecasts for turbulence and no Significant Meteorological Information advisories (SIGMETS) were in effect for the route of flight. At the time of the occurrence, there were no reports of turbulence from pilots ahead of the accident flight and the flight crew saw no indication of turbulence on their weather radar.

Photographs

1the aircraft, and what the investigators found
The aircraft before the accident
American Airlines, N766AN, Boeing 777-223 ER (49596885228)
Anna Zvereva from Tallinn, Estonia · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons

Probable cause

the Board's determination
An inadvertent encounter with convective-induced turbulence upon entering cumulonimbus clouds.

Occurrence sequence

1 stepsNTSB coding · CICTT taxonomy
  1. 1 · Enroute-climb to cruise
    Turbulence encounter
    defining event

Findings

1 causal · 0 contributing
  • CAUSE
    Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena › Turbulence › Convective turbulence — Effect on personnel

Sequence of events

3 timed eventsfrom the FDR factual report · claude-sonnet-5
  1. 0630 UTC (approximately)Departurep.4
    Accident flight departed
  2. 0658:38 UTC (approximately)Climbp.4
    Upset event occurred during climb
  3. 0700 UTCClimbp.1
    American Airlines Flight 170 experienced severe turbulence during climb over international waters about 194 nautical miles east of Narita, Japan

NTSB analysis

from the final report

As the airplane was climbing, the flight crew observed a small weather buildup in front of them. They requested a deviation around the weather, but the air traffic controller requested that they stand by. After entering the weather, they received clearance to turn; however, about 24,000 feet, the airplane encountered about 11 seconds of moderate, and then severe, turbulence. During the encounter, two flight attendants received broken ankles while conducting work in the aft cabin area. The digital flight data recorder revealed that during the encounter vertical acceleration forces went from 2.2G to 0.6913G within 1 second, to a minimum of 0.496G about 5 seconds after the 2.2G maximum. A weather study conducted by a National Transportation Safety Board meteorologist revealed a frontal wave over the Japanese coast with a warm front extending eastward in the vicinity of the turbulence encounter. A gale force wind was expected. The region of the turbulence encounter also contained low to mid-level clouds with cloud tops near 14,000 feet; cumulonimbus cloud development, with tops up to 26,000 feet, was slightly upstream from the turbulence encounter. Review of the weather package given to the flight crew found no forecasts for turbulence and no Significant Meteorological Information advisories (SIGMETS) were in effect for the route of flight. At the time of the occurrence, there were no reports of turbulence from pilots ahead of the accident flight and the flight crew saw no indication of turbulence on their weather radar.