Viewing page 29 of 49

C. A. B. Stiffens Safety Rules for Airliners; Court Upholds Cut in Load Limit for C-46

WASHINGTON, Feb. 4 (AP) - New safety standards for commercial airplanes, effective March 5, were issued today by the Civil Aeronautics Board following an annual review of air safety by its experts and interested parties.

Among the changes made in the regulations is a requirement for stronger seats and safety belts to protect passengers in the event of crash landings.  Others call for more hand fire extinguishers in transport planes, increased fire-proofing of cargo compartments and certain design changes in the engine installations.

Other technical design changes call for modifications in the planes' electrical, hydraulic and ventilating systems and in instruments.  Standards were set up also for turbine-type engines.

The new regulations were issued in the wake of a number of recent commercial plane crashes, but there was no evidence that there was any direct connection.

For non-transport planes, such as stunt planes, the regulations fix new standards for the structural strength of propellers and other equipment.

The C. A. B., which regulates the operations of commercial air-lines, said the aim of the revised regulations was to improve the "airworthiness" of planes.

In a related development, United States District Judge James W. Morris refused to grant an injunction that would have barred the C. A. B. from cutting weight limits for C-46 transport planes.  A number of C-46's have been involved recently in major accidents.

Judge Morris, after listening to a day of arguments, ruled that the agency had acted within its rights when it cut maximum weight limits from 48,000 to 45,000 pounds.  The change was effective at midnight yesterday.  The board said the reduction was temporary, pending further investigation.

Attorneys for C-48 Engineering, which represents about forty non-scheduled air carriers, and the Air Transport Associates of Seattle had sought to block the board's action. They argued the weight reduction would force them to reduce loads to a point where they would lose money. They said they would appeal Judge Morris' decision.
Please note that the language and terminology used in this collection reflects the context and culture of the time of its creation, and may include culturally sensitive information. As an historical document, its contents may be at odds with contemporary views and terminology. The information within this collection does not reflect the views of the Smithsonian Institution, but is available in its original form to facilitate research. For questions or comments regarding sensitive content, access, and use related to this collection, please contact