Now there was an Aviator
 

The following is taken from yesterdays (July 27) Daily Telegraph Obituaries:-
The full text is as follows...

Captain Ian Harvey, who has died aged 83, was awarded a George Medal for saving the lives of 27 passengers when he made a masterly landing after a bomb had exploded in the rear of his airliner.



Harvey was the pilot of a British European Airways (BEA) Vickers Viking airliner which took off from Northolt for a flight to Paris on April 13 1950. Over the English Channel, there was a loud explosion in the rear of the aircraft, which the flight crew initially thought had been caused by a lightning strike. On investigation, the second pilot, Frank Miller, found the stewardess seriously injured; large holes had been torn in the rear fuselage of the aircraft.

The explosion had distorted the aircraft's fin and tailplane assembly, rendering the rudder useless and damaging the elevators. As a result, Harvey had only marginal control of the aeroplane, and he decided to return to Northolt to attempt a landing.

By this time night had fallen. Despite his efforts, and the assistance of his second pilot, he was unable to land the aircraft at the first attempt and was forced to overshoot. For his second attempt, Harvey decided to make a very long, low, flat approach, using the power of the engines to adjust his rate of descent; on this occasion he was successful.

Examination of the Viking revealed that an explosion had occurred in the rear lavatory; two large holes had been blown on either side of the fuselage, one measuring five feet by eight feet and the other only slightly smaller. The flying controls had also been severely damaged. Harvey's fellow pilots were full of admiration for the outstanding skill and airmanship that had undoubtedly saved the lives of his passengers and crew. It was also a testimony to the sturdy airframe of the Viking, which was a descendant of the Wellington bomber.

Five weeks after the incident, it was announced that Harvey had been awarded the George Medal. The citation referred to his "extreme coolness" as he regained control of the aircraft. "It required all the strength of the pilot, coupled with superb skill, before the Viking was landed successfully without injury to any of the passengers.

"In the face of this very grave emergency, the action of Captain Harvey is worthy of the highest praise. The complete loss of the aircraft and all its company was avoided only as a result of his courage, high skill and presence of mind." The Flight Safety Foundation of the United States later presented Harvey and his crew with a prestigious award.

The report of the official inquiry confirmed that a bomb had exploded in the lavatory, but no evidence of detonators or bomb fragments was found. The police investigation apparently failed to disclose either the motives for the attack or the person responsible. The material relating to the incident in the Public Records Office is not due for release for some years.

End of quote.

What a story, what a pilot!

Amazing, not bold, but OLD!

I dropped this one in quite deliberately. And what happened? Not a lot.

The story was about a man who really was a Captain in every sense of the word.

I hoped that present day Captains would look at the story and then examine their own credentials and (perhaps) have the courage to say whether they thought that they could have done what this man did.

Blow two, 8 foot by 5 foot holes in one of todays airliners and then ask yourself whether you really believe that the man in the left hand seat up front really has the experience to handle the situation.

I would venture to suggest that my chances of survival as a passenger in that 1950's Viking were a whole lot better that they might be in one of today's "bo-buses" with the equivalent of a systems operator in command.

And why?

Todays fly-by-wire and automated aircraft are wonderful until the main fuse blows or the "Windows fatal error" message comes up on screen or something REALLY goes wrong, like a couple of big holes in the fuselage and most of the tail damaged.

But that's where (provided you have it) the experience, the know-how, the "forget the checklist - let's work out how we are going to land this sucker!" comes in.

I'm not knocking pilots 'per see' but guys, come on, in todays world when having a PhD, a BA or an MBA is more important than knowing your craft, how many of you simply do not have the hard won, hands greasy experience that people like Captain Harvey had.

Ask yourselves, could you have flown an initial approach, then a go-round, then a second low, slow and flat approach using only engine power to hold it all together because you had no rudder and very little elevator control? Could you have put that crippled aircraft safely on the ground and saved the lives of all your passengers?

It's a sobering thought isn't it. Perhaps you should forget the gripes about the airline you work for, the size of the salary package, whether you think you are being hard done by etc etc etc. and go back to basics - examine the real reasons why you wanted to become an airline Captain?

You are the Captain of the ship. Your primary consideration is to bring your ship and everyone aboard safely into harbour.

Now have a go at me.

Xeque:

I have said this on this forum before but I will say it again. It is not the well-rehearsed engine fire on take-off that kills people but the unrehearsed, bizarre happening that is NOT in the checklist that really tests our mettle.

I am quite sure that a lot of us out here have survived such events by using common sense and very basic skills. I really don't think that young pilots today are any less skilled than we were in the "old days".

After all, the young men who fought in the last two Gulf Wars and the Falklands campaign did every bit as well as their predecessors did.

In my own particular case, I didn't have an explosion in the back end but the whole arse end froze-up and I had to fly on the elevator trim wheel which could only control to 700 fpm up or down at best. This saga went on for 13 hours and 30 minutes. Any other problem such as an engine failure would have made the situation even more interesting.

However, a successful outcome resulted (half way through the next day) so it was no big deal and it would certainly never have been discussed as ever having been a big deal in those days.

So, rest assured that there are loads of pilots out there who could tell similar horror stories and be confident in the fact that the young guys nowadays are just as inventive now than they ever were.

I am going to break a personal rule here and argue the toss. Too good to miss!
Granted a very able and cool pilot. However, faced with certain death or trying to land the aircraft I hope we would all opt for the latter.
Strategies for dealing with un scripted situations outside the checklist are part of airline command training.
These are not, and never have been, prerequisites for any airline job I know of.
I have certainly (as a co-pilot) seen some pretty amazing airmanship from my Skippers. Remember, aviators do learn from their forbears. The accumulated wisdom is passed on and we can practice dire situations in the SIM.. E.g. all engines failure followed by a glide approach and landing.
Well, I still have to make a living old chum.
Thanks. As if I needed reminding. If you want some more ripping yarns then read:

'Out of the Blue - The Role of Luck in Air Warfare 1917 - 1966' by Laddie Lucas.

Oh, and don't forget the Sioux City DC10, or the BAC 1-11 with the Captain hanging out of the window, or the B737 which lost its roof in the Pacific . . .

Have a look at the actions of the DHL crew in Baghdad who had to cope with total hyd failure following a missile hit - the skills and knowledge are still in evidence.

Sioux City DC10???! They did pretty well too.

As for Phd's, MBA's, BSc's, MSc's etc etc.....I've only got 6 'O' Levels, but they made me a Captain. Maybe it was out of pity for not having a degree.

Dear Xeque,



There really is no need for you as passenger to be afraid of flying.

Nor was there in the early 50 's.

Standards are even better now, as very realistic simulators train us to coop with all possible failures, including you're mentioned 50's failure as advertised. and being made worse and worse ....

As a matter of fact , because of this ....

The opposite of what you are saying is the real thruth ....

Don't assume too much,


Cheers !

How very odd that the records on this one have been retained by the PRO for so long. One would have thought 30 or even 50 years would have seen them released. I wonder what the bigger story behind the explosion might be?

Whilst the captain was no doubt a hero, the idea that modern aircraft couldn't cope is just silly. The Aloha 737 that lost its roof, the 747 that did some aerobatics off California and eventually returned to LAX minus several bits of control surface, the United Airlines 747 that lost a cargo door and quite a bit of fuselage skin over the Pacific, the Sioux City DC10, all suffered damage at least as serious, but managed to get back. Pity those pilots didn't get medals...

Yeah, nowadays they'd give the CSD a medal and give the pilots a bollocking...(Or is that just BA)

All true, but this story is out of the 50' and they didn't have the knowledge you all have now. Because of what all happend in the past it's these days so much easier AND saver to fly!!! a Small example; the DC-10 of Turkish near Paris could have been saved, but it took I don't know how many times in the sim to get it back to the airport... Sometimes you also need a bit of luck...

With the Sioux City DC10, I don't think they ever got it back to the airport "in the sims" (recreating the incident). Sometimes you need luck, and skill, and teamwork...

Hat's off to all safe landings.

But that's the whole point, isn't it? A lot of the time it is just luck. Maybe if the Alaska Airlines crew had not had their elevator screwjack completely fail - just mostly fail, as it had done - they would have got back and been heroes. Same goes for the Concorde crew - if they had rotated a little later - and so on.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I have been in spots where I really should have died, and to this day I can't be sure whether it was my "skill", or luck, that delivered me safely to a nice, friendly runway. I like to think the former, but suspect it was the latter...

I quite agree, MOR. I have had a few close shaves. There by the Grace of God etc.

Lucas's book is a stunning read by the way.

What about the BCAL 707 which had an explosion in the wheel bay 2 hours after take off from Rio. The captain was on his first unmonitored flight on the type after conversion training. The entire wheel bay was destroyed by the explosion (caused by a metal fragment penetrating the tyre) There were no hydraulics and seriously degraded electrics. It was just his skill and experience that enabled the aircraft to land safely back at Rio. It took six weeks to repair the aircraft.

What about the BCALVC10 that hit turbulence over the Andes and dropped 19,000 feet. The captain was injured and the first officer had to recover the aircraft when it eventually hit air again.

What about the Air Europe 737 which went through a hailstorm betwen Skiathos and Salonika and had a double engine failure? There was nothing in the Boeing manual about whatt to do in such circumstances. Fortunately the Captain had been an RAF test pilot. He applied exactly the same drills that applied on the Canberra. The aircraft landed safely at Salonika but it was badly damaged by the hail. The wing leading edges had to be replaced, so did the leading edge of the tail and the radome.

Will these very skillful people have an obituary in the Telegraph? They certainly deserve one for saving the lives of hundreds of people.

What they all had was very good basic flying skills. Nothing to do with computers. They just knew how to fly safely.

If you can find a copy of "From Croyden to Concorde" you will be able to observe the damage to the Viking that Ian Harvey was flying. Not a nice sight!

Wingview says:

"All true, but this story is out of the 50' and they didn't have the knowledge you all have now."

I would imagine that in 1950 the average Captain had rather more experience of flying aircraft with bits missing and or broken than today's pilots! (think about it; where would they have received their training and experience?)

@212
Maybe I misunderstand you, but I really hope you are wrong with this. In the sim you should have every 6 months (at least) your check with all what they have been teaching you. Also with a-symatric flaps, rudder/gear problems etc etc. Wheater you missing or having a not working a part is an element of training. Look at the DHL, they where missing a LOT!!! but managed to get back!!!:ok:

Well, what I was trying to imply was that the average airline captain in 1950 (and later) would have had his training and experience in WW2 and therefore would probably have had at least some experience of having holes and bits missing from his aircraft. In some cases minor damage, in many cases substantial airfram and engine damage.

Combined with this, lots of crew room talk with mates who had similar experiences. Probably more relevant than a 6 monthly sim ride which probably doesn't include this sort of scenario anyway.

Not a dig, just thinking it through logically.