§ 4.46 p.m.
§ Mr. Bowden (Leicester, South)From time to time we discuss aircraft crashes, inquiries into aircraft accidents, and generally the results of accidents to persons who are passengers in aircraft or who are engaged in flying, but this afternoon I intend to raise for a few minutes the question of the policy of the Ministry of Civil Aviation in dealing with the work of rescue and fire fighting. I do this knowing full well that it is a relatively new Ministry which has had just over two years in which to put its house in order and tackle very many problems, but the time has now come when we should have some assurance that this problem is being tackled. It is a matter of supreme importance to the flying public, although perhaps of little importance to the members of the public who do not fly. To the people who fly in aircraft it is of great importance to realise that should they be involved in an accident, there is every possible chance of their getting out alive.
I am raising this matter purely to elicit from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation information as 10 what has been done, and I do so in no critical sense whatever. I could not be critical about the work of the Ministry, as I have no knowledge of what it has done in this matter. We are fast approaching the period when we shall have still larger, and, I hope, better aircraft. We are rapidly approaching the era of the flying airliner which may carry a very great number of passengers. Therefore, the subject we are now discussing is of greater importance as this aspect of the work of civil aviation increases. We shall have not only more passengers but larger crews, and the work of rescuing them when aircraft liners are involved in accidents will become of increasing importance. These aircraft will carry greater fuel loads and, therefore, the risk of fire will be greater than it is with the smaller aircraft. I shudder to think what would be the effect of one of the proposed new airliners crashing with a full complement of passengers and crew and immediately bursting into flames. That is something we must face up to, objectionable as it may seem.
Experience has taught us that most aircraft crashes occur in or near aerodromes. 2522 There is the occasional aircraft that crashes into the sea or hits the side of a mountain, but usually accidents occur when aircraft are taking off, through over-shooting the runway, or for some other reason when landing. Because of the fact that crashes occur, in the main, on or near aerodromes, it is important that on each large airport there should be stationed crews and equipment capable of dealing with any accident that may occur. As a result of Questions which I put in the House in January, regarding the Dakota aircraft that crashed at Croydon, the House was told that when the crash-tender arrived on the scene it was found to be incapable of dealing with the fire because it was not serviceable. One of the valves had frozen up owing to the weather at that time. I know the particular type of tender used, and I say, quite frankly, that it is possible that the valve may have been frozen up, but I say, equally strongly, that ought not to have happened.
It is wrong, again, to assume, as memers of the public often do who have not flown a great deal, that on every occasion when an aircraft accident occurs the passengers or crew are killed outright. Experience has taught us differently. While it is almost impossible to acquire definite information as to how many of the crew who might perhaps have subsequently been killed by fire were only dazed or unconscious when an aircraft crashed—it is impossible to ascertain the percentage—undoubtedly, during the war years in the R.A.F.—and it is not a nice thing to say, perhaps, from the point of view of those people who have relatives who were killed in aircraft accidents—many men were trapped in aircraft crashes and were burned to death by fire before they could be rescued.
One cannot ascertain how many people have been unconscious and how many have become injured and not actually killed outright, but there are figures available which clearly indicate that in the R.A.F., at least in 1945, out of 818 personnel who were either injured or killed in aircraft accidents, 144 were completely incinerated in the tire that followed. It is sometimes assumed that the fire is immediate, but that is not always so. Often some minutes elapse before an aircraft bursts into flames. In those cases where it bursts into flames immediately on crashing, it is very 2523 difficult to effect rescue, but rescue can often be effected at that stage. In the important minutes before the escaping fuel touches the hot portions of the engine, rescue work can be done.
I ask the Parliamentary Secretary, who is I know, interested in this subject, what his Ministry are doing with regard to it: Are they tackling it from the centre as a centralised policy, or is each aerodrome manager permitted to work out some programme and plan of his own? My view is that the subject is so large that it needs centralised policy and ought not to be left to the Corporations and to the individual airport managers, but should be dealt with centrally by the Ministry of Civil Aviation through a special Department. I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will be able to tell us that something of that sort has been done.
On every airport, there should be trained crews standing by, manning the best possible equipment that can be obtained, to carry out this rescue work. The crews must be specialised because it is specialist work. They must know the types of aircraft with which they are likely to deal. They must know something of aircraft construction and know where the passenger carrying parts can be attacked by axe or other means to effect an entry to get out the passengers. It is specialised training not only in the knowledge of fire fighting and the various methods for fire fighting, but of aircraft construction as well. Many times during the war years I feel sure—in fact, I know—a fire was made more severe by a fuel pipe being cut by someone who was most anxious to get on with the work of rescue. Therefore, I would say that the Ministry of Civil Aviation, should at some future date, if it is not possible now, open up an establishment where fire fighters can be trained, and to which they can go from all parts of the country and from all aerodromes periodically, every six or 12 months, for a refresher course, because the technique of dealing with this particular type of accident and fire is ever changing. I go further and say that all members of the ground crews, flight mechanics, in fact everyone assisting on an airfield who is likely to be near at hand when an aircraft accident occurs, should be given an opportunity of attending a course at a fire school, with a view to 2524 becoming at least partially efficient in the important work of rescue.
I have heard a rumour—and I hope that it is only a rumour—that the Ministry of Civil Aviation are considering handing over this work to the National Fire Service. Far be it for me to say anything derogatory about the work of the National Fire Service. It did excellent work during the war on airfields in conjunction with the R.A.F. fire crews, but it would be a complete mistake to hand this particular job over the N.F.S., as I know that at the end of the war years they had neither the equipment nor the trained personnel to do it. If they can acquire and are prepared to provide the equipment and to give the crews the specialised training necessary, then, perhaps, something might be done in the way of liaison with the Ministry of Civil Aviation fire service, but I hope that the whole of the work of fire fighting in the Ministry of Civil Aviation on British airports will not be left to the National Fire Service.
I want to say a word about equipment. The equipment of British aerodromes at the end of the war was largely the fire fighting equipment of the R.A.F. If it has never been said before, I should like to say now in the House that the fire personnel, the trained crews of the R.A.F. during the war years, did an excellent job of work. They were always undermanned, and they were dealing with equipment that was completely out of date, much of it was, at the time, a mock-up of the real thing, in that a vehicle could be obtained and made up into what was supposed to be a fire tender. That was the legacy which my hon. Friend took over in the way of fire fighting equipment. It was important, therefore, for him and his Department to tackle the job and see what could be done to bring up to date the equipment that was being used. I hope that they have done that. I might say a word about the type of equipment used for getting over rough ground outside the general circumference of the airfield and for quickly traversing fields, ditches and hedges. It is quite wrong to assume that the ordinary motor vehicle can do that. I can never understand why someone has not thought of using some of the many thousand tracked vehicles such as brengun carriers which are lying about in this 2525 country, and converting them into fire-fighting tenders for use at civil aerodromes.
The policy which I have advocated of a centralised department dealing with this matter as a big job is expensive, and perhaps this is not the time to advocate anything which will be particularly expensive. However, we cannot afford to do without a completely efficient fire service. It is an expenditure which we shall have to face, and the Department, or section or level of the Department which decides that we cannot go ahead with this plan must take full responsibility if aircraft crashes occur and we are not able to deal with them efficiently. I am not for one moment advocating a fully-manned fire tender or fire section on every air strip and on every field where private aircraft fly where everything is carried out for sport and general amusement. That is not at all necessary. That type of aircraft is smaller. There is a certain amount of risk that it may burst into flames, but it can easily be dealt with on the spot by first-aid appliances. It is not necessary to go to the extent of manning-up that particular type of aerodrome and air strip, but it is essential that the larger ones should be so manned. The British accident record in civil aviation is extremely good. It compares favourably with any in the world. We have had a fairly good run without many bad crashes, but the time may come when our luck, and much of it is luck, runs out. For that reason, I hope that my hon. Friend will tell the House that the problem is being tackled as a major one and that the Ministry of Civil Aviation is to provide an efficient fire service.
§ 5.3 p.m.
§ Captain Marsden (Chertsey)The matter which has been raised is most important, and one which I thoroughly appreciate. I have a little extra fear that we are not being adequately looked after in this respect. I speak as an ordinary passenger who occasionally flies. I suppose like many others, I never get up in the air without some qualms—not that we shall not land, for that is one thing which is certain, but about the condition in which we shall do so. That does rather worry me. I agree about fire-fighting services on the aerodromes, but what I have always in mind is crashing on some 2526 mountain or in some far distant place where there are no fire-fighting services to help My thoughts immediately turn to escape from the aeroplane. Of all forms of death there is none more terrible to contemplate or to experience than being in a plane with the flames slowly advancing on one, as the hon. Member indicated, with no means of escape.
I have never been in a plane yet in which, in my opinion, it has been adequately or clearly pointed out, where the escape doors are or how they are operated. In the Navy, in my experience, we know a great deal about watertight doors which can easily be opened with one turn of a lever against a tremendous pressure of outside water. Modern planes could have doors with a couple of levers so that people inside could easily get out. In that case the plane would be on the ground, and there would be no outside pressure. This matter has been brought up previously. I remember an hon. Lady opposite raising the matter, and saying that she had just been in a plane and on looking round had not been able to imagine how she would get out. In considering fire-fighting appliances from without, I hope that the Minister of Civil Aviation will also consider as most important a method of escape from within.
§ 5.5 p.m.
§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation (Mr. Lindgren)I am very grateful to the hon. Member for South Leicester (Mr. Bowden) for providing this opportunity to discuss this subject. As a nation I think we are prepared to face danger and to take risks, but there is a universal horror of being burnt alive. Generally speaking, there is nothing we fear more than fire. Therefore, the public have the right to be assured of the effectiveness of the provisions made for them in circumstances where there is a real risk of fire. If air transport is to be the success which it is the duty of my Ministry to ensure, the travelling public must have confidence in the safety precautions taken in the case of accidents. During the war I had a certain amount of experience in fire fighting and fire fighting organisation. At the Ministry I have given special attention to this part of our work.
The fire fighting service is a difficult service to organise because it is not glamorous. It is standby service and 2527 the less it is required, the happier everyone is. When, in fact, the various rescue services are never required, then air transport will be the most efficient service in the country; but where there is a risk there should be a standby service ready to cope with the emergency which no one wishes to happen. Fortunately, over long periods, emergencies do not happen. To get this standard of service and to maintain it at the pitch of its efficiency continuously is very difficult. Despite what some people say, most men like to be doing a job. They like to be on the go instead of waiting about for something to happen.
There are three sections of this problem. First, there is the possibility of an aircraft catching fire in flight; second, there is the fire following a crash on take-off or landing at an aerodrome; and third, there is the fire following a crash on a hillside away from an aerodrome. In the case of fires in aircraft in flight, there has been a considerable amount of research, in cooperation with the Ministry of Supply Technical Research Department and the industry. There has been provided in increasing numbers, though not yet in all aircraft, a fire check for engines during flight; also, provision is being made for the impact operation of extinguishers immediately an aircraft crashes. I think that the difficulty about escape hatches is somewhat exaggerated. The matter was mentioned on a previous occasion by the hon. Lady the Member for Epping (Mrs. Manning). She even made a joke of it because of her personal figure. In fact, on all aircraft the escape hatch is plainly marked. It is true that in some cases the means of escape is through a small aperture, and if one is of great bulk then there may be difficulty. This is an important matter and great attention is given to it.
In addition, there is the question of aerodrome organisation. Perhaps this is the section for which my Ministry has the greatest responsibility. As has been said, the Ministry came into existence two years ago. At that time, the equipment and the service on the vast majority of aerodromes was provided by the Royal Air Force. We did not accept responsibility for the provision of crash and fire-tender crews until some time later.
Therefore, immediately, one has to consider which is the most efficient organisation 2528 that one can have, because it is not desirable that everybody should set up their own tin-pot organisation. We went into this very conscientiously and considered whether or not we could get a general service which would cover the Ministry of Civil Aviation, normal civilian fires, Air Ministry fires and R.A.F. fires, and whether it was possible or not for one or other of these organisations to take over the functions of that general service. We finally came down to the view that it was unwise to proceed on that basis, and that, in fact, the most efficient organisation could be provided by our own service within the Ministry itself. The reason for that was that, first of all, an aircraft fire, a crash, or the rescue of persons from aircraft present a very specialised job. Dealing with conflagrations in domestic and industrial hereditaments is a much different thing. It was therefore decided to build this service around our own Ministry, but to have two standby organisations, the N.F.S., who are notified every time there is a possibility of a crash, whenever this is known beforehand and, secondly, to reinforce the N.F.S., which is the first reserve, by people within the aerodrome organisation itself—an auxiliary service made up of various persons doing runway jobs or in the shops and who have some first-aid and fire fighting knowledge.
The organisation of that service is important, because the efficiency of the set-up will depend on the lay-out of the service. First, at the Ministry, we have the Chief Fire Officer, with a deputy and two or three technical officers, and they are the central pivot on which the service will operate. They will be responsible for general policy, supervision of training and the standard of efficiency in the individual units. Then, the service is broken down into four divisions, and Scotland, which is so well represented here, is one of these four divisions. There is a divisional officer in charge of each division under the Ministry, and, at each airport, the commandant or manager is the administrative person responsible, because we must have only one chief at an aerodrome. He has a fire officer or section leader, dependent upon the size and importance of the aerodrome, who is responsible to the airport manager for the general condition and organisation of the aerodrome itself, and then, of course, to 2529 the area officer and the divisional officer for the general efficiency of the service.
The recruitment of the men for this service is from the Royal Air Force, the Fleet Air Arm, ex-members of the N.F.S., and other persons who make themselves available for it. The service will have proper rates of pay and conditions of service, and it will be a uniformed, disciplined service, a nation-wide service, in which there will be opportunity of promotion right throughout the country. I am glad to say that the Treasury, with whom we carried out our discussions about the provision of the money concerning the rates of pay and conditions of service have, in fact, given full authority for that aspect of the matter. It is equally true that we must have, and we have already established at Cardiff, a training school, at which the whole of the personnel in the service will, at one time or another, go for a refresher course.
That training school will be the basis upon which the service will be built up. There is not only the question of the fire-fighting and crash service. There is the medical side. Accidents happen, and medical and nursing attention is required. That is an expensive service to provide. One cannot have doctors and nurses standing by at every airport waiting for a crash which may not happen. But at the larger airports there will be, generally speaking, that medical and nursing service. At the smaller airports, we are having the assistance of St. John's Ambulance and British Red Cross.
Finally, there is the question of equipment. Some time ago, I made a speech in this House in which I stated that sufficient thought had not been given in the past in regard to the provision of aerodrome equipment for fire fighting, and the rest. That statement seems to have touched the industry itself, although I do not blame the industry, because, I do not think it was given the necessary encouragement. One cannot expect manufacturers to make certain equipment unless those who require it say exactly what they want. The industry has reacted magnificently, and we are now getting the active co-operation of the various manufacturers of fire-fighting equipment to meet the demands of the Ministry of Civil Aviation services. There is an inter-departmental committee upon which the Ministry of Civil Aviation, 2530 the Ministry of Supply, the Air Ministry and the Home Office are represented. The Home Office are represented on that Committee because of the supervision they exercise over the local authority service when it is transferred back from the N.F.S.
We are seeing to it that we get the most up-to-date equipment that it is possible to obtain. It takes a certain amount of getting, because of the difficulties of manufacture. In the meantime, as has been said, we have taken over R.A.F. equipment and certain American equipment, and, in that respect, the disposals branch of the Ministry of Supply and of the Ministry of Works have been most helpful in seeing that we get the best available equipment. We are satisfied that, generally speaking, the standard is good.
I am glad to have had this opportunity of assuring the House and the public at large that the service is being organised on a thoroughly efficient basis. It will be my duty, on the direction of my noble friend to see that this service which might sometimes be termed "a sleeping partner," is kept efficient, and is given the opportunity of encouragement and competition, so that we may make it the service which we ought to have. My hon. and gallant Friend had great experience of this matter in the Royal Air Force. May I say that we have no peacock's feathers in the Ministry of Civil Aviation. We shall be glad to have the assistance, the criticism and the investigation of any hon. Member, of this House, and, if any hon. Members would like to sec what is being done, we shall be delighted to grant them the facilities for doing so.