Scoot B789 near Guangzhou on Sep 7th 2024, turbulence injures 11

Last Update: October 18, 2025 / 18:31:22 GMT/Zulu time

Bookmark this article

Photo of Scoot Airlines 9V-OJI, Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner — Scoot Airlines 9V-OJI, Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner (Photo modified based on photo from
Bahnfrend
/ Wikimedia Commons / License: CC by-sa 4.0)

Incident Facts

Date of incident
Sep 7, 2024

Classification
Accident

Airline
Scoot Airlines

Flight number
TR-100

Departure
Singapore, Singapore

Destination
Guangzhou, China

Aircraft Registration
9V-OJI

Aircraft Type
Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner

ICAO Type Designator
B789

A Scoot Boeing 787-9, registration 9V-OJI performing flight TR-100 from Singapore (Singapore) to Guangzhou (China) with 339 passengers and 13 crew, was descending through FL200 towards Guangzhou when the aircraft encountered turbulence causing injuries to 11 people on board. The aircraft continued for a safe landing on runway 19.

The airline reported 4 passengers and 3 members of the crew received injuries, one passenger was taken to hospital, the others treated at the airport.

The aircraft departed for the return flight with a delay of about 2 hours.

On Oct 18th 2025 Singapore's TSIB released their final report reporting one cabin crew and one passenger received serious injuries and 9 cabin crew received minor injuries concluding the probable causes of the accident were:

Between 0003hrs when the aircraft entered Sanya FIR and the turbulence encountered at 0044hrs, the flight crew observed no weather on their flight path and needed only to perform minor deviations to the flight path to circumnavigate some isolated small patches of weather. Hence, the PIC opted to leave the fasten-seat-belt signs off. The descent had not reached the 10,000 feet level where the flight crew would be required to turn on the fasten-seat-belt signs.

- The aircraft encountered turbulence when it was descending through 18,700 feet. The investigation team opines that the turbulence encounter was more likely associated with the convective cell that had emerged by 0042hrs about 6.6nm to the south of the aircraft. However, this patch of convective activity was to the rear of the aircraft and was not displayed on the aircraft’s WXR, and the pilot could not see the weather behind the aircraft.

- The occurrence underscores the need for flight crews to be cautious when operating near convective activities and the importance for passengers to fasten their seat belt while seated, even when the flight appears smooth.

The TSIB analysed:

The aircraft encountered turbulence at about 0044hrs when it was descending through 18,700 feet towards 14,800 feet. Before that, the aircraft had been having a relatively smooth flight since entering Sanya FIR at around 0003hrs, with the flight crew observing no weather ahead on their flight path and on the WXR display and needing only minor deviations to the flight path to circumnavigate some small isolated patches of weather. During this period, the fasten-seat-belt signs remained off. This was an understandable decision on the part of the PIC in view of the absence of adverse weather prior to the commencement of descent. After all, the descent had not reached the 10,000 feet level where the flight crew would be required to turn on the fasten-seat-belt signs.

The aircraft encountered turbulence when it was descending through 18,700 feet. Given that, at the time of the turbulence event, Yagi was some 195nm from the incident aircraft (as known from HKO’s Tropical Cyclone Warning Bulletin), the investigation team does not believe that Yagi was a factor in the turbulence encounter. The investigation team opines that the turbulence encounter was more likely associated with the convective cell that had emerged by 0042hrs about 6.6nm to the south of the aircraft, as shown in the series of ground weather radar images. However, it must be noted that, the flight crew did not have the benefit of these ground weather radar images. As mentioned in paragraph 2.1 above, the flight crew observed no significant weather on their flight path.

This occurrence serves as a reminder for the following:

An aircraft’s WXR functions differently from a ground-based weather radar and may not be able to detect every pocket of turbulent air. While WXR green returns suggest areas with light precipitation which are generally considered safe for passage, the possibility, even though small, of an undetected adverse weather condition cannot be ruled out. Areas of convection may initially appear as light returns (green). However, they may have intensified before such changes become apparent on the WXR. An aircraft may have flown past a weather system but may not necessarily be out of range of the effect of the weather system.

Turbulence can occur unexpectedly, even when the WXR does not show any adverse weather. Airlines are already constantly reminding passengers that they should fasten their seat belts while seated and refrain from moving about in the cabin unnecessarily, even when the fasten-seat-belt signs are not turned on. Passengers will do well to heed this advice.