Chinook ZD576 (Hansard, 7 June 1999)

§ The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Gilbert)
My Lords, I am not aware of there being any developments since this tragic accident was last debated in the House on 2nd June 1998.

§ Lord Chalfont
My Lords, I think that the Minister means 1994. But let us assume that he means the accident to which I am referring, which was in June 1994. Has the Minister had an opportunity to study a well-researched report by Computer Weekly which has thrown considerable doubt and uncertainty upon the possible causes of the accident? In the light of the doubts and uncertainties put forward in the report, is he willing to stand up in your Lordships' House today and reiterate, without reservation or equivocation, that the Government's view is that the accident was "without any doubt whatever"—those are the words used in the appropriate regulations—the fault of the two pilots concerned to the extent of gross negligence? If he is not prepared to do that, is he prepared to have the board of inquiry reopened in order to study the Computer Weekly report, revise its opinions and report again?

§ Lord Gilbert
My Lords, as to the noble Lord's first point, perhaps I did not enunciate the answer clearly enough. Nineteen ninety-eight, the date in my Answer, was the last occasion when the accident was debated in the House. Secondly, I have not had time to study the document; it reached me only on Saturday. It is very thick and I have had one or two other things to do since Saturday. I am informed by those who have looked through it that there is nothing new in the report whatever. I have no difficulty in standing once again at the Dispatch Box and reaffirming that it is the view of the present Government, as it was the view of the previous government, that, tragic as it is, the accident was due to pilot negligence.

§ Lord Burnham
My Lords, whatever the alleged failings of the software, which are recorded at length in Computer Weekly, is it not the case that the direct course the pilots should have taken from Belfast to Inverness goes to the island of Pladda, where they turn left; that they had no reason whatever to be in line with the Mull of Kintyre; that if they hit fog and icing conditions and 1143 the computer software was in some way faulty, the instructions were quite clear that they should have turned 180 degrees and reversed their course?

§ Lord Gilbert
My Lords, not for the first time I am much obliged to the noble Lord for his contribution on this subject. Even if one assumes that there had been a catastrophic failure in the FADEC software, that does not alter the fact that the plane should not have been where it was, flying at that height, in that weather and on that heading. We have seen the flight plan that was filed and I understand that something like 90 seconds before the aircraft hit the Mull of Kintyre there was a way point where it was due to make a turn of about 15 degrees to port. I regret to tell your Lordships that that turn was never executed.

§ Lord Whaddon
My Lords, whatever the cause of this accident, will my noble friend bear in mind that fixed wing aircraft are safer, quicker and cheaper where suitable airfields can be used at either end of a journey, as was the case on this occasion? Will he reassure your Lordships' House that we shall always avoid putting so many security assets in a single aircraft?

§ Lord Gilbert
My Lords, as one who has had the pleasure of enjoying the privileges of both a PPLA and a PPLH, I do not necessarily agree with what the noble Lord said about fixed wing aircraft being safer than rotary wing. If an engine fails on a rotary aircraft one can go into auto-rotation and, if one is skilled enough and lucky enough, one can land in a smaller space than one can with a fixed wing aircraft. However, I certainly take his point about the number of people of high sensitivity in that plane at that time.

§ Lord Fitt
My Lords, irrespective of statements emanating from anonymous spokesmen in the Ministry of Defence, is the Minister aware that throughout these islands there is great unease about the blame apportioned to the two young pilots? Is he further aware that I live in Northern Ireland and that I have a direct vision to the Mull of Kintyre and the lighthouse where the tragic accident took place? For the past nine days I have noticed the frequency with which fog can drop, lift and drop again. Together with a number of people, I have been able to see how it would be possible for such a fog to be generated that the young pilots and the computers in their aircraft would not have time to deal with it. Does the Minister also accept that over a number of years there have been many miscarriages of justice in these islands? Time and time again such cases have been brought to the Court of Appeal, where it has been finally decided that those who were against the original decisions were found to be right.

§ Lord Gilbert
My Lords, I take the point that there is concern about the matter. That is why I have been on my feet so many times in your Lordships' House during the past couple of years. I, other Ministers in the Government and Ministers in the previous government have all crawled over the evidence with very great care. To a man, the conclusion we have reached is that the 1144 Royal Air Force findings were inevitable and totally justified. I should point out to my noble friend that, whether or not there was fog, the aircraft should not have been in that place, at that height, at that speed, at that time.

§ Viscount Slim
My Lords, was the helicopter maintained completely by RAF groundcrew or by contractors? I think the noble Lord will agree that there was some disquiet about certain airframes at the time the Ministry decided to bring in outside contractors for maintenance. Was this helicopter entirely maintained by the RAF, the contractors or a mixture of both? Was it an RAF officer or a civilian who confirmed that ZD576 was fit to fly? Is the Minister satisfied with the overall maintenance of the helicopter fleet within the Royal Air Force?

§ Lord Gilbert
My Lords, as to the noble Lord's specific point, I cannot be certain. My impression is that it was wholly maintained by the Royal Air Force. I shall check the point, write to the noble Viscount and have the Answer put on the record. As to his general point, I am perfectly satisfied with the maintenance requirements for Royal Air Force helicopters and that those requirements are met. It is always the pilot's responsibility whether or not he flies.