FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1921
1921 - 0090.PDF
***- but knowing as we do that Germany is only awaiting the right moment to begin, we cannot but regard the future with profound misgiving. We agree that, speaking generally, the need is all for economy, but there are other services, other departments, which can be better done without than the Air Service, civil or military, and if the pruning-knife is to be applied-—as we agree it must—then it should be laid to such superfluous departments as the Ministry of Transport, which nobody wants, and which is nothing but a refuge for Geddesian protege's, before it is used upon essential services. • • • The first part of the question we have ~ .A «. asked now falls to be answered. WhatConstructive ... . ... ,, • •.• » TPlan 1S t° be done with the airships ? In all, we possess five rigids completed, now that " R.34 " has had to be written off as a complete loss, while there are two—" R.36" and " R.37 "—building and nearing completion. This total includes the two surrendered Zeppelins, " L.67 " and " L.71." On an average, these ships have cost considerably more than a quarter of a million each. If we estimate that the seven represent more than two millions sterling in value we shall be under rather than over the mark. Obviously, it would be the antipodes of economy to allow these vessels to rot in their sheds, or to break them up for the sake of the scrap material. Nor do we desire to see them disposed of to a foreign Power to enable a rival to get ahead of us in the realm of airship services. Unless we can find some way out, one of the three alternatives suggested must be taken. It is common knowledge that negotiations were at one time proceeding between the Air Ministry and certain commercial interests for the disposal of the airships and their use on passenger services. Why these negotiations broke down does not particularly matter now. On the one hand, we are told that the attitude of the Government was one of non possumus, while, on the other, it is said that the commercial group was too exacting in its demands upon the Government. However all this may be, it must be allowed to become past history and a sin- cere effort made to come to some arrangement whereby these seven ships—or at any rate the six more modern vessels—can be put into commercial service and this country given a lead in the domain of the lighter- than-air craft. A distinguished airship officer, now retired from the Service, outlined to us the other day his own scheme for doing this and a very admirable one it seemed. Briefly, he suggests that the six modern craft should be turned over to a commercial group without initial payment, the condition being that they should be actually put into service. This group should consist partly at least of shipping interests, because it is obvious that for the first few years at any rate airships will have to be run on the long-distance -overseas routes in conjunction with, and not in competition against, the mail steamships. The reasons for this are sufficiently plain. Another condition would be that, as the ships became obsolete, or beyond further useful service, they should be replaced by up-to-date craft at the expense of the groups running the services. At all times the ships should be at the practically instant call of the Government for conversion to War vessels in case of emergency. The Government should provide aerodromes, FEBRUARY 10, 1921 sheds and mooring facilities and would supply fuel, gas and other supplies at a fair margin over actual cost, so that there would be no charge upon the taxpayer on this account. Under this outlined scheme services could be started from this country to Egypt, India and across the Atlantic almost at once. Later on, as the airship proved its reliability and success as a means of transport, the Dominions would.be asked to provide the same facilities as the Home Government, i.e., landing grounds, mooring facilities and supplies ; and thus there would gradu- ally be built op a world-wide network of services— always, of course, assuming that our faith in the airship is not misplaced. We are strongly of opinion that here is at least the nucleus of a really workable, practical scheme of services—one that merits the very closest examina- tion and full consideration. The alternative to the adoption of some such plan is to see Germany going ahead by leaps and bounds, until in ten, or it may be fifteen, years' time we shall be faced with the problem of trying to overtake all the leeway we have made in • the interval. What that means in trouble and expense we learnt too well in the War to have any desire to undergo a similar experience again. The French Government is rearranging Subsidies the basis of the subsidies granted to Civil firms engaged in operating aerial trans- Aviation Port services, so that these firms are already talking Paris-London fares to £5. Hitherto, these subsidies have been given for actual mileage flown, a method which is obviously open to abuse in that it enables firms to fly empty machines for the dual purpose of advertising their services and of drawing the subsidy. The British method is better, based as it is on a grant of 25 per cent, of the gross takings, and it is some such plan that France now proposes to substitute for the old system. It is a matter of very serious concern, however, to see exactly what it is that France is proposing to do in the air. The Budget recently presented to Parliament provides for Air Estimates of no less than 527,354,645 francs, approximately £21,000,000 at normal rate of exchange. Of this no less a sum than a normal £7,000,000 is to be devoted to the civil side of the movement, and of ihis over £1,250,000 figures under the heading of " Prizes and Subventions for Aerial Navigation." Our own Air Estimates for the current financial year provided for the spending on civil aviation of roughly £900,000, of which about a third has been " saved ! " We are not going to advocate that an Air Budget of similar proportions should be adopted for this country. How much money we should spend and in what manner it should be spent are matters which require considerable thought and a close knowledge of all the factors governing the aerial situation now and also the probabilities of the im- mediate future. But we can at least extract this argument from these very significant figures of the French Air Estimates: that either France wildly over-estimates the importance of air power and the possibilities of civil aviation, or that we in this country have gone absolutely to the other extreme and are hopelessly under-valuing the whole business. Nor is there any need to ask for a precise answer to the question involved. We may be content for the moment to assume that the truth of the matter 90
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
