WEDNESDAY 28 APRIL 1999

CAPTAIN STEVE KERR, MR PETER MARTIN, MR ROY HUMPHREYSON and MR BILL G SCULL

  820.  What is your view of the suggestion there is something wrong with the rudder of the Boeing 737?
  (Mr Humphreyson)  One of the problems that affects the aviation industry is an accident that has no solution. I think it is the Committee's view that improved flight data recording in the case of the two Boeing rudder incidents that resulted in fatalities may have been better investigated with better flight data recorders, cockpit recorders and the like. Not just better in terms of the technical recording that is done, the number of parameters recorded, but also the length of time that they record and I think our Committee would like to see better and longer recording to enable investigators to get to the root cause of problems such as the 737 rudder problem more easily. That applies not only to the 737 rudders but others. I am delighted to say that the NTSB has recently made a recommendation on modifications to 737 rudders which hopefully will come forward. The two accidents I allude do did not happen in the UK. Another aspect of the investigation of course is the admittance of liability by the manufacturer particularly in the United States where litigation is such a major problem.

  821.  Of course, the fact it happened in America really has no bearing on the facts because there are so many Boeing products in this country and so many of them are flown by British airlines.
  (Mr Humphreyson)  The point I am making is——

  822.  —— is a legal one.
  (Mr Humphreyson)  Is that our system would enable us perhaps to get to the root cause more quickly.

  823.  Faster.
  (Mr Humphreyson)  Because the manufacturer does not face the same litigation problems.

  824.  Can I then finally ask you, particularly to the man carrying a smokehood in his pocket, how important is it we go for survivability of crashes rather than improving the reliability of aircraft?
  (Mr Humphreyson)  I think I am in the hot seat on this one.

  825.  You have drawn the short straw all round this afternoon.
  (Mr Humphreyson)  I am asked this question I usually quote the Kegworth accident where survivability would have been better——British Midland Airways fitted 16 G seats into that aeroplane. They were not mandated at the time but they fitted them because they thought there would be better survivability. Unfortunately, of course, they retro-fitted them into 8 G flooring and therefore the 16 G seats did not improve survivability. Therefore, it is a very complicated problem where you have aeroplanes with grandfather rights evolved where some of the systems do not meet or it is not economical to update them to the safety standards that would be survivable.

  826.  That is the application of a particular set of circumstances. I think what we are asking you for is not that, we are simply saying which do you go for? Do you go for the hope of surviving a crash, in which case you deal with it in one particular way, or do you assume you can deal with it in a completely different manner?
  (Mr Humphreyson)  I think the Flight Safety Committee's position is that it is better not to crash rather than look at survivability.

  827.  So improvements on the aircraft?
  (Mr Humphreyson)  Yes.

Chairman:  Thank you very much. Gentlemen, you have been very helpful. We are very grateful to you all.