Accident Vickers 610 Viking 1B F-BJER, Thursday 12 September 1963

Date:	Thursday 12 September 1963
Time:
Type:	Vickers 610 Viking 1B
Owner/operator:	Airnautic
Registration:	F-BJER
MSN:	216
Year of manufacture:	1947
Total airframe hrs:	20547 hours
Engine model:	Bristol Hercules 634
Fatalities:	Fatalities: 40 / Occupants: 40
Other fatalities:	0
Aircraft damage:	Destroyed, written off
Category:	Accident
Location:	Pic de la Roquette - France
Phase:	En route
Nature:	Passenger - Non-Scheduled/charter/Air Taxi
Departure airport:	London-Gatwick Airport (LGW/EGKK)
Destination airport:	Perpignan Airport (PGF/LFMP)
Investigating agency:	BEA
Confidence Rating:	Accident investigation report completed and information captured

Narrative:
The Viking crashed into the north face of the Pic de la Roquette in the Pyrenees.

PROBABLE CAUSE:
The cause of the F-BJER accident was a navigation error stemming from a series of judgment mistakes:
- Choosing a direct route from Limoges to Perpignan without precise position reporting, despite poor arrival conditions reported by meteorology and the limited terminal equipment;
- Failure to use the Toulouse and Istres VORs, the only precise navigation aids available in the Perpignan area under stormy conditions. At the very least, these aids were used far from optimally;
- Maintaining a southbound heading at an altitude of 6,000 feet three minutes after the estimated arrival time in Perpignan, while the crew was clearly uncertain of their position (turn over Villefranche-de-Conflent, request for QDM).

These navigation and judgment errors are not surprising from a captain whose lack of aptitude in both areas is evident upon reviewing the case file.
The co-pilot was also not in a position to provide substantial support to Mr. Dunoyer.

Although the Dunoyer-Marold crew held the necessary and valid licenses and qualifications, they did not possess the competency that those titles implied.
They did not have the actual quality required for operation on a public transport aircraft.

Airnautic was aware of this fact, based on the biannual checks required by regulations and which the company was obliged to conduct for its crews. Despite a reminder from the administration—also well aware of the crew's level of competence—the company took none of the necessary and required measures under such circumstances.

Furthermore, it was unable to prove that it had actually provided its crews with precise operational instructions that could have prevented the accident.

Lastly, the exemptions granted to this company regarding flight time limitations could have contributed to a state of fatigue in the crew, potentially impairing their performance.

Accident investigation: