Safety of N.Z. airliner questioned in London

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33775, 22 February 1975, Page 18

Safety of N.Z. airliner questioned in London

(N.Z.P.A. Staff Correspondent) LONDON, February 19. A British member of Parliament has asked for assurances about the safety of an Air New Zealand DCIO aircraft which will be flown by British Airways crews between London and Los Angeles as part of a new service between Britain and New Zealand.

Mr Norman Tebbit, a former airline pilot and now the Conservative member for Chingford, has asked three questions in a letter to the chairman of the British Civil Aviation Authority (Lord Boyd-Carpenter).

One asks whether the authority accepts the view recently expressed by a (United States Congessional that the floor of! ,1a DCIO aircraft should be strengthened urgently. Mr Tebbit has been at the (forefront of a British campaign, spearheaded by the “Sunday Times,” questioning the safety of the DCIO and triggered by the Turkish Airlines disaster near Paris a year ago. Problems with the locking system of the rear cargo door have been blamed for the crash, in

which 346 people were killed.

His letter also asks if the Air New Zealand aircarft will be under British or New Zealand regulations, and whether the rear cargo door will be sealed and not used at all, as was the case with the only DCIO owned by a British airline, Laker Air- : ways, which specialises in ipassenger charter flights. I However, a spokesman for (the Civil Aviation Authority | said today that the cargo door on the Laker Airways DCIO was no longer sealed. The authority was satisifed that the Air New Zealand DC 10s would meet internationally accepted airworthiness requirements. “There is nothing new about DClOs being used in Britain,” the spokesman said. “Laker Airways have been running two for some time, and it not a new problem. The important

e thing with these aircraft is the cargo door, and we made ; sure that the Laker ones had t the necessary modifications 7 when they were delivered.” i Mr Tebbit said that he r wanted to be sure in his I own mind that the door on t the Air New Zealand aircraft i was “absolutely safe” before - the new service began. i “Either you make sure the jdoor is safe or you don’t, fly r the aircraft.” ■’ It appeared to be the 3 established view of Ameris can, British and New Zealand authorities that all was - well with the DCIO. ' “Somebody should make it 1 very clear what has been ■ done since incidents involving the cargo door. r There are some people who i maintain that these air craft i will not be safe unless the i floor is strengthened.” i The passenger cabin floor rof the Turkish DCIO col- : lapsed when the cargo door flew open. N.Z. LICENCES He understood that British pilots would require New Zealand aviation licences to fly the DClOs on the new service, and he wanted to 'know who would be the ap- ! propriate authority in the lease of a breach of regu- ; lations. Mr Tebbit emphaJsised that he was not suggesting New Zealand stan-j Idards were inferior to Brit-' Jish ones. i A sopkesman for British I Airways said: “If we; thought the aircraft wasn’t! ■safe we wouldn’t fly it.” ■ All necessary modi-' fications had been carried :out on the Air New Zealand !DClOs, and if there was to ibe any question of sealing the rear cargo door it was a (matter for Air New Zealand, land not British Airways, he I said. The reputation of the aircraft could suffer a further! setback tomorrow. Television documentary on the' Paris crash will be shown! on the Independent Tele-; vision network at the peak-; viewing time of 8.30 p.m. The film, partly financed by the “Sunday Times,” places particular emphasis on the cargo door, and asks why the risks of the serious safety fault, discovered in 1972, were not outlined to airlines clearly enough to avoid a serious crash.