Narrative:

Experienced severe turbulence during descent at about FL195. After the occurrence I was advised that a flight attendant had been knocked down in the aisleway and may be injured. She was subsequently sent to a doctor and found to be uninjured. My after thoughts of the incident brought me to making this report. They are as follows: while preparing for our flight (kahului, maui to lihue, kauai) we received a WX report with a severe turbulence report by a DC9 near kauai -- it was an hour old. I briefed the cabin crew as a precaution and gave the normal turbulence warning prior to entering oncoming WX. We were on a 270 degree heading assigned by ATC, and descending from FL260 expecting light to moderate turbulence from what we were seeing on our radar, as well as reported. We experienced much more. My thoughts are, why were we not given an update of the previous report as to its relevancy to our position and offered alternative routing? Was it because only 1 aircraft made a turbulence report? Was it because the report was old? For whatever reason it may be, why can't ATC keep these reported severe locations in mind when vectoring aircraft -- even if it may not seem significant to them?

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR MLG FLC EXPERIENCES SEVERE TURB AND QUESTIONS WHY TURB PREDICTABILITY AND INTENSITY RPTS ARE NOT MORE ACCURATE.

Narrative: EXPERIENCED SEVERE TURB DURING DSCNT AT ABOUT FL195. AFTER THE OCCURRENCE I WAS ADVISED THAT A FLT ATTENDANT HAD BEEN KNOCKED DOWN IN THE AISLEWAY AND MAY BE INJURED. SHE WAS SUBSEQUENTLY SENT TO A DOCTOR AND FOUND TO BE UNINJURED. MY AFTER THOUGHTS OF THE INCIDENT BROUGHT ME TO MAKING THIS RPT. THEY ARE AS FOLLOWS: WHILE PREPARING FOR OUR FLT (KAHULUI, MAUI TO LIHUE, KAUAI) WE RECEIVED A WX RPT WITH A SEVERE TURB RPT BY A DC9 NEAR KAUAI -- IT WAS AN HR OLD. I BRIEFED THE CABIN CREW AS A PRECAUTION AND GAVE THE NORMAL TURB WARNING PRIOR TO ENTERING ONCOMING WX. WE WERE ON A 270 DEG HDG ASSIGNED BY ATC, AND DSNDING FROM FL260 EXPECTING LIGHT TO MODERATE TURB FROM WHAT WE WERE SEEING ON OUR RADAR, AS WELL AS RPTED. WE EXPERIENCED MUCH MORE. MY THOUGHTS ARE, WHY WERE WE NOT GIVEN AN UPDATE OF THE PREVIOUS RPT AS TO ITS RELEVANCY TO OUR POS AND OFFERED ALTERNATIVE ROUTING? WAS IT BECAUSE ONLY 1 ACFT MADE A TURB RPT? WAS IT BECAUSE THE RPT WAS OLD? FOR WHATEVER REASON IT MAY BE, WHY CAN'T ATC KEEP THESE RPTED SEVERE LOCATIONS IN MIND WHEN VECTORING ACFT -- EVEN IF IT MAY NOT SEEM SIGNIFICANT TO THEM?

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.