Transport: Lessons from the 727

The November crashes of two Boeing 727 jets may result in significant new precautions to make airline travel safer. The Civil Aeronautics Board, which last week issued a preliminary finding on the disasters—one near Cincinnati, the other at Salt Lake City—noted that only 52 passengers in the two tragedies got out alive, while 101 died.

In the Salt Lake City wreck, most of the 43 victims were burned to death. Thus, the CAB recommended that the 727's fuel lines, which run through the craft's belly to the three rear-mounted engines, be relocated to withstand the shock of a crash landing. In, both cases, CAB investigators found evidence that synthetic cabin material such as soundproofing, when exposed to fire and soaked by jet kerosene fuel or hydraulic fluid, may exude deadly gases; survivors of the Salt Lake City crash reported that fumes "seared and burned" their lungs. As a result, the CAB called for laboratory analysis of interior appointments used in all jet airliners.

The board's safety experts are also considering recommending that airline personnel be required to explain before takeoff the operation of emergency exits (window exits swing inward). Another conclusion from the Salt Lake tragedy, in which many passengers were trapped in the aisles, is that airliners should have more and bigger exits. The CAB may even recommend that an entire section of an airliner's fuselage be designed so that it can swing open as an escape hatch.

Aviation experts are already conducting research into a host of other safety innovations. Among them are such devices as an explosive charge to blow fuel tanks clear of a crashed plane; resilient, supertough nylon fuel tanks that would not burst on impact; a jelly-consistency fuel that would smolder instead of explode; and fail-safe instrument systems that would permit entrusting difficult landings to the automatic pilot. In zero-zero visibility, jet pilots crack, their only problem after landing may then be to find their way to the terminal.