Problems with BEA Pilots in 1960s / early 1970s

Some of this is true but Staines was the result of an entirely different issue – about Union action, and anger against those seen as not supporting proposed industrial action, not primarily a clash of generations, although that helped to raise the temperature of events leading to it.

There’s been a number of well publicised incidents where crew issues have been the attributable factor and not just BEA/BOAC. Seniority, arrogance etc. have played their part. Examples have included where the junior pilot has been too afraid to speak up even when a potential issue had been identified, or where the senior pilot has ignored the junior pilot. Thankfully today we have CRM (crew resource management) and better training and culture that has reduced these issues considerably.

Ah, the dreaded seniority issue ! Always with us, and if you’ve read Ernest K Gann’s books he described it well !

Length of service versus ability, never a good thing but it was the only way then.

In a way the same is in the warbird fraternity, people assume a pilot that flies a spitfire or similar are excellent highly skilled pilots, when often it is the depth of their wallet that enables them to purchase and fly such things, the two do not neccessarily go hand in hand.

Many years ago when I was a sprog engineer there was a cautionary poster on the entrance to the drawing office which stated “Old age and treachery will overcome youth and enthusiasm”. At the time I though what’s all that about, now in my fifties I understand what they were getting at.

It is easy to get stuck in ways and procedures that you know work well, especially with the way time speeds up as we get older. It’s a shock when you realise the “new tech” is now 10 years old and is archaic to the youngsters. It’s was always interesting to see the different years intakes of apprentices make the same errors with the group projects we gave them. The usual one was assuming everything was going to work perfectly first time and not allowing any time for testing, despite us old foggies telling them to leave a few weeks at the end for troubleshooting. They knew best.

I made the experience, that nearly every collegue learned to fly within some years, even the weakest. Also the experience came more or less automatically after several years. Seniority is for free, if you just stay long enough in the same company. Most of us were moving to the left seat after somy years. But there are many examples of pilots, who never learned CRM in all those years….. The most dramatically example was the dutch guy in Tenerife.

Fresh ideas are important, but so is hard-earned experience.
Yes, there is place for CRM on flightdecks, but you need some experience and “stick and rudder” skills as well. “System managers” and computer savvy types often lack in piloting skills, and sometimes those skills are needed, even today.

Do you really want two youngsters with only sim work on the flightdeck? 🙂

I think that there’s one very good example, who’s been seen in the UK recently, who proves that having business experience does not mean that one can run a country well! 😀

The youth-is-better attitude is prevalent, and damaging, today. Every young person, in an effort to keep them off the dole figures, is encouraged to set up as an entrpreneurial one-person business owner of one sort or another. Most go to the wall taking their parents’, the bank’s or the government’s money with them. While the young might be faster learners – that’s how so many were taught to fly (after selection, unlike ‘entrepreneurs’) the ability to run a business is an acquired skillset and the more experience you have the better you will be at doing it if only (and here’s the rub) in the way that you learned. Robert, this business experience does not qualify you to govern, it qualifies you to run a business, a very specific skillset which should be valued for what it is (and isn’t) as much as flying an airliner is.

That attitude isn’t confined to pilots, Robert, it’s normal and enthusiasm is, or should be, tempered by experience.

Many pilots came out of the Second World War and joined the airlines. A fair proportion of these felt that the younger non-WW2 background intake were inferior and with a RAF service background behind them thought themselves superior. They behaved like they were “still in” and ruled with an iron rod and expected unconditional obedience from the “lower ranks”.

This was bound to lead to problems which persisted well into the 1970’s, when there were still many ex-WW2 guys around in very senior positions. Faster, more complex and technically superior equipment would have meant that many an old hand was lagging behind technology and would be very reluctant to admit it, whereas the younger guys could cope.

It’s not surprising there were accidents due to the contrast in circumstance and attitudes. Time and recognition of the facts has seen to it that it is now largely a symptom of the past.

Anon.

It is also possible for “youngsters” to think that they know it all and to disregard the old fogies. Or people with no business experience thinking they can run the country!

It was definitely a big, institutionalised problem in days gone by. It’s one of the main reasons why they brought in CRM – Cockpit (later re-named Crew) Resource Management, to level the seniority gradient in the cockpit.

The idea was that even a lowly (and generally very junior|) co-pilot could legitimately point out where and when he thought things were going wrong and (theoretically at least) suffer no adverse personal setback. Some captains were major factors in a few serious accidents and incidents in which the co-pilot was found to have been fully aware but too afraid to challenge his “superior” whilst they both flew into the ground with a planeload of passengers.

I’m sure it still exists today, as it does in all professions, but certainly not to the degree as in the past – thank goodness.

Anon.

Ah, the dreaded seniority issue ! Always with us, and if you’ve read Ernest K Gann’s books he described it well !

Length of service versus ability, never a good thing but it was the only way then.

It still exists in a lot of outfits, including the one I work for. One thing which may have changed is that although seniority allows you to apply for an upgrade to a command and do the appropriate type rating and command course, what it doesn’t guarantee is a pass at the end of the course.

I’ve read a few biographies from ex-BOAC pilots, and several mention that when the first newly-minted pilots from Hamble turned up, the older generation didn’t think much of them. They had only a couple hundred hours experience, no wartime experience, not even a military background, and they were young. It took a while before they were convinced of the usefullness of these young ones, perhaps that played a role as well.

Ah, the dreaded seniority issue ! Always with us, and if you’ve read Ernest K Gann’s books he described it well !

Length of service versus ability, never a good thing but it was the only way then.

It wasn’t just BEA, seniority issues were rife in the industry and there were only a few small independents who didn’t follow ‘the scheme’.

In most British airlines of the time there was no direct correlation between ability and seniority; it was based purely on length of service, and if the pilot dared leave then he had to start again at the bottom of the ladder elsewhere. So few dared. Which led to a lot of deadwood blocking the upper echelons; this came clear when BEA started simulator conversion training for Trident captains and had a horrendous ‘chop’ rate amongst the seniors.

Little wonder that the juniors were discontented, they felt they could fly the new jets ‘better’ than the old guard but their career progression was stunted by the system.

I don’t think it was a particular issue then, however it’s still around today with the current generations

I well remember a senior Captain in British Eagle, an ex bomber pilot who had been flying Viscounts and was converted onto the first BAC 1-11 we had.

He arrived at Liverpool with a great smile on his face, and when asked said ” I’ve cracked it and caught up at last – I had time for a cigarette in the cruise”

Chock to chock time was 45 minutes for that sector

Happy days !