FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1964
1964 - 0205.PDF
138 FUGHT International, 23 January 1964 Letters Letters for these columns are welcomed, though "Flight Inter- national" does not necessarily endorse the views expressed. Name and address should be given, not necessarily for publication in full. Brief letters will have a better chance of early publication. organized parties to visit their premises. This Association has been set up to arrange these parties and have found that on many occasions we have been refused permission. Com- panies who adopt this unwise policy are probably the ones that suffer most from vandalism. Finally, we appeal to all air enthusiasts to behave them- selves when on other people's property, because if they do not they will spoil it for everyone else. Hounslow, Middx M. J. PETTTT, Secretary, London Divn, Aviation Enthusiasts (Touring) Association Accident Statistics SIR,—Can I persuade Flight International to attempt a more meaningful analysis of aircraft accidents? If a passenger is fated to be killed at the end of a flight, it is of no concern to him whether this is at the end of a 5,000-mile flight in company with 100 others (haif-a-million passenger miles) or after a 50-mile hop in a ten-seat feeder-liner. If he weighs up the dangers at all, he will want to know his chances on any one flight—how many nights per fatal accident with this airline or by that aircraft ? Even this only answers pan of his question, for he will want to know his chances of surviving that one fatal accident; in other words, the proportion of passengers surviving an accident. Thus the information needed becomes: C, percentage of passengers surviving accidents involving aircraft damage; and S, safe flights occurring per accident involving aircraft damage, with this airline or by that aircraft. Another factor of concern to passengers is the reliability of the flight—what are the chances of landing at the expected terminal within, say, an hour of the expected time? This leads to R. flights completed according to plan for every one not so completed. Comparative study of the values of C, S and R (Crash- worthiness, Safety and Reliability) over a sufficiently long period, particularly on the basis of airline and aircraft (e.g., BOAC 707 distinguished from PAA 707 and BOAC Comet), might well be informative. A high value of C indicates a rugged aircraft, or one subject only to minor incidents. A high value of R indicates an aircraft less affected by minor defects and bad weather (provided the comparison is on routes affected by similar weather). Specialists studying these figures might well be helped further if S were subdivided into take-off, en route and landing (e.g.. safe take-offs per take-off accident involving aircraft damage) and if R were subdivided into external factors safely encountered, minor unscrviceabiliiy, and acci- dents (i.e., R flights completed according to plan for every one upset by weather but resulting in no aircraft damage). I would hope that an analysis on these lines might show up a number of markedly safer airline and aircraft combina- tions, whose training, handling and design characteristics could then be studied closely to reveal the most important common factors. Camberley, Surrey c. N. HALL Airfield Vandalism StR,—Further to Mr O'Hara's letter (Flight International, January 9), we, the Aviation Enthusiasts (Touring) Associa- tion, would like to say how much we deplore the case of vandalism to which Mr O'Hara referred. There is no doubt that BEAS took the only course of action open to them in stopping individual enthusiasts visiting their airfield, but we were particularly relieved to read that they still intend to allow organized parties. We feel that we would be doing the correct thing in apologizing, most sincerely, to BEAS on behalf of all sensible air enthusiasts for the damage and expense that they have been put to through the thoughtlessness of one stupid person. We would like to stress that this damage was obviously done by a "lunatic fringe" enthusiast and certainly does not reflect, or rather should not, on 95 per cent of enthusiasts in this country. At the same time we feel that there is room for far more co-operation from some aviation companies in allowing BOAC's New General Manager SIR,—I am not with you at all in criticizing the principle of transferring executives between BOAC and BEA (December 26 issue, page 1018). In fact, I would go much further and interchange executives with the outside world, not only within the airlines. A possible cause of the present malaise in both corporations is the lack of new blood due to inbreed- ing. Unfortunately, it is clear that it is not enough to replace the chairmen and managing directors. The corporations are of such a size that "grafts" are needed lower down as welL Dr Beeching's £25,000 enabled him to bring in men in the £7,5OO-£l 5,000 salary bracket in considerable numbers, and it really looks as if it is working. If you pay £2,500-£5.000 a year for executives you get people who by and large are worth that, apart from the special incentive of interest in aviation. The big men earn bigger money. So I am hopeful that we shall see at the very least a large- scale switching of executives between the two corporations. We may acquire some advantage from the fact that the two have barely been on speaking terms for 15 years! London SW15 A. J. LUCKING [Our comment was that in the interests of BOAC staff loyalty Sir Giles Guthrie might have been expected to seek his new senior general manager within BOAC rather than appoint an outside man even before taking office. We did not criticize the principle of interchanging BEA and BOAC executives which, like Mr Lucking, we endorse.—Ed] Independent Airline Pilots' Pay SIR,—Under the article "Car-Ferry Fares Up" (Flight Inter- national, December 12, 1963), Mr Laker of BUA is quoted as saying Bristol Freighter pilots were earning 30 per cent more now than they were six years ago, and a further claim for 10 per cent had been put in. In December 1957, a Bristol Freighter captain, under a flat-rate salary structure, received a commencing salary of £1,825; in December 1963, under the existing differential salary structure, he receives a commencing salary of £2,050, an increase of just over 12 per cent, not 30 per cent as sug- gested by Mr Laker. Under a current claim for a revision of salaries covering all aircraft types in use by the independents, the Bristol Freighter captain would receive a commencing salary of £2,375, an increase of 16 per cent. To forestall further misleading statements by representa- tives of independent operators, this Association would in- form you that it is claiming increases of 12-35 per cent in salaries for captains, depending on the type of aircraft flown. All the Association is doing, in fact, is to claim for inde- pendent companies' pilots salaries that are comparable with those paid in the corporations. Your report "Voice of the Independent Worker" (October 31, 1963) certainly gives a misleading picture as far as pilots are concerned, for a captain in British Eagle operating Britatinias would receive a commencing salary of only 81 per cent of that of his BOAC counterpart. The fact that independent pilots are paid up to 35 per cent less than their corporation colleagues, whereas most, if not all, other grades of independent staff apparently are paid equal or higher rates of pay than their corporation counter- parts, could be interpreted as an involuntary subsidy by independent pilots to most other interested parties, such as other grades of staff, directors and shareholders.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
