Nervous flyers are often scared of turbulence, an anxiety not likely to be eased by the widely reported findings of a British professor’s study linking increased turbulence to global warming.

According to Mark Prosser, a doctoral researcher at the University of Reading in the UK, severe turbulence increased by 55% between 1979 and 2020 over the North Atlantic, considered to be one of the most turbulent areas. The total annual duration of severe turbulence rose from 17.7 hours in 1979 to 27.4 hours in 2020.

The increase is less pronounced for moderate turbulence (+37%) and light turbulence (+17%), according to this analysis.

As a result, nervous passengers might like to know on which routes they run the greatest risk of experiencing turbulence. That’s where the data provided by specialist website Turbli comes into its own: the platform has ranked some 10,000 routes linking the world’s 550 biggest airports, based on its turbulence forecast archive.

The calculation is based on a specific measurement: the eddy dissipation rate (EDR). This allows turbulence levels to be measured and classified as strong, moderate, severe, and so on.

In Europe, routes crossing the Alps are clearly likely to be affected. The route between Nice and Geneva is considered to be the bumpiest of all, as are those between Nice-Zürich and Milan-Zürich.

Logically, flights between Nice and Lyon are also subject to turbulence. Overall, it appears that routes to Switzerland, Geneva and Zürich are likely to be quite turbulent.

But on a global scale, turbulence in Europe is far from what passengers on a Mendoza-Santiago flight might experience in terms of intensity. To give you an idea, the average turbulence (EDR) on this route is 24.684, compared to 16.065 for the Nice-Geneva route.

The most turbulent itinerary in Asia is Kathmandu -Lhasa, with average turbulence of 18.817; and in North America the Albuquerque-Denver route, with average turbulence of 17.751.

Read the full report here.