Sir - All airlines would profess to seek at least the preservation, if not the improvement, of flight safety. There appears to exist, a dalliance however, over the fitting of improved flight-data recorders (FDRs), however - vital data is not being captured.
The frustration of the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), unable to pinpoint the cause of the USAir and other Boeing 737 accidents, could be twofold.
Firstly, sufficient clues to the cause of the crashes have not emerged. The FDRs on many of these aircraft record only 11 parameters - none of them for primary flight controls - an archaic situation.
Secondly, the NTSB is frustrated by US airlines, which are strongly opposed to the prompt fitting of an improved type of FDR.
Can aviation technology really be claimed to be progressing? More than 20 years ago, British Airways used a 64-channel FDR on its BAC Trident fleet, with a 7h quick-access recorder (QAR). The airline was thus able to investigate flight incidents reliably and obtain information on systems malfunction. There was a potential cost saving and a handle on safety.
Although the non-safety-related engine-noise nuisance at airports has been addressed, it is still the case that some airlines are flying outdated recording equipment around the skies.
The NTSB is to evaluate the QAR on BA 737-400s. This indicates a willingness to learn - let's hope it is contagious.
ALAN MASON
Auckland, New Zealand
Source: Flight International
