Sir - The letters from Capt John Lewis and D R MacDonald (Flight International, 21 December-3 January, P46) include some emotive comments and inaccuracies.
Safety is Airbus Industrie's top priority - as I am sure that it is with other manufacturers - and we welcome objective discussion on it, provided that it is rational and based on facts.
Comparing the safety records of the Airbus A320 and Boeing 737 is appropriate - both aircraft are short- to medium-haul twins and are flown on similar routes and frequencies.
The 737 entered service in February 1968. At the end of July 1994, more than 2,500 were in operation. By the end of July 1994, accidents had written off 57 Boeing 737s (excluding terrorism, sabotage, training and hangar incidents). The McDonnell Douglas DC 9/MD-80 family entered service in December 1965, some 2,000 are in service and 79 have been involved in accidents. The A320 entered service in April 1988, more than 450 are in service, and four have had accidents.
Airbus is not complacent about this - the goal of all manufacturers will always be zero-accidents - but it is important to view things in perspective.
It is inappropriate to generalise about aircraft accidents. Each incident is different, and merits individual consideration. Aircraft crash for many different reasons and, often, the cause is a chain of events rather than a single fault.
The priority is always to learn from the accident, whoever manufactured the aircraft, to act on the knowledge gained, and to communicate to the aviation community the lessons learned to avoid repetition of the accident.
David Velupillai
Press Relations Manager, Trade and Technical Press
Airbus Industrie
Blagnac, France
Sir - I completely agree with John Lewis about Jean Pierson's ludicrous and absurd comparisons of the Boeing 737 and Airbus A320 safety records. It is a bit like comparing apples and bananas, with a strong hint of the latter.
David Connolly
Brussels, Belgium
Sir - Jean Pierson has every right to compare his Airbus product to the Boeing 737. In terms of range and capacity, the A320 is a direct competitor of the 737-400.
To group the fly-by-wire aircraft with those conventionally controlled indicates either inadequate research or deliberate confusion. The systems are worlds apart, so I do not understand the statement that A300 and A310 aircraft were saved when the pilots cut out the aircraft computers. Neither type is fitted with a full fly-by-wire flight-control system. Was Mr MacDonald referring to autopilots, flight-management computers, or both? Surely such equipment is standard on almost all passenger aircraft.
To list every Airbus accident suggests an ulterior motive. It would be merely time consuming to list, for example, all the Boeing accidents which have occurred during the same period.
Excessive credence has been given to arguments which have no foundation. Nothing can replace basic airmanship and it must be logically integrated with the new technology. Those who blindly refuse to do so will become the pterodactyls of the new age.
P J Leonard
Farnham, Surrey, UK
Source: Flight International
