FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1921
1921 - 0144.PDF
a very serious effort will be made to bring the Govern- ment to see reason and to extend to civil aviation the help that has been promised again and again, only to be withheld altogether or given in so niggardly a manner as to be completely ineffective. Unfortu- nately, the general public does not even yet appreciate to what an extent the future safety of the Empire is bound up with the dominion of the air. If a com- plete understanding did exist, the country would insist upon the Government taking what is, in our view and that of everybody who has given serious thought to air problems, the only possible course leading to safety. As it is, we could almost imagine ourselves back in the days before the War, when the smug spokesmen of the Government of the time spoke -of aviation as something which was a scientific curiosity, perhaps possessing possibilities of usefulness, but of a very problematical character. In any case, said they, it was not the custom of the British Govern- ment to initiate or experiment, and we should pursue our ordinary plan of allowing others to do the experi- menting and of coming in if and when the new thing had been proved of some practical use. As to sub- sidising or otherwise assisting the pioneer firms who were endeavouring, with painfully restricted means, to turn aviation into something concrete and really useful, we had never done anything of the kind. It was our invariable policy to avoid subsidies and allow industry to make good by its own unaided efforts or fall b 7 the wayside. We know only too well what the result of that policy "was and what it cost us in money and effort to make •good the leeway when the War came. We have a shrewd idea that if we should again become involved in war we shall not be allowed the time or oppor- tunity to make good again. It may be that the •Government believe that never again shall we go to "war with a great power, and that, therefore, it does not matter whether we have aircraft and the men to man them or not. If that is their belief, then for Heaven's sake let them say so. That would at least •constitute a policy, whereas now there is none of any kind. We are very much of opinion that a policy which is frankly bad is better than none at all. It has at least the merit of letting the country know where it stands. In which case why not scrap the entire Air Estimates and have done with it. That would anyway save the taxpayer something. «. • «• The truth of the whole matter is that Ed^ we shall never, as we have often said inNeeded' these columns, get anywhere at all until the public as a whole has been •educated up to the same understanding of the real meaning of air power as it has of that of sea power. If we needed a case to prove the point, we had it at Olympia the other day when a meeting was held, under the presidency of Sir John Baird, to discuss air trans- port efficiency. Mr. H. White Smith emphasised the many advantages of air transport, predicting a great increase during the next 20 years. He said very truly that the great difficulty in this country was to get people to take the long view and to finance the operation of services. Not only is it hard to find private individuals and syndicates who have the necessary vision, but the Government, as we know, suffers from the same narrowness of outlook. Mr. White Smith said very truly that it is false economy to neglect the development of a form of national defence which can be run on business lines. Gen. ' r.,.- ••:-v_;i.-'.-«;r;iiBE--»' :!?»- • •• '". •• ;'•.. "• " MARCH 3, 1921 Brancker said the present plight of the industry was the fault of the Government. We now had, he said, a very fine Civil Aviation Department, but no civil aviation. Now, we know that the main argument held out for the Government support of civil aviation is that its encouragement is vital to the defence of the Empire. Were it not so, then we should be content to accept the thesis that, like any other industry, it must stand on its own feet. Yet one Major Hardie entered the discussion, and urged that air transport is a luxurious and uneconomical form of transport, and that, as the Government had not given its support to railways and shipping in their infancy, he protested against any subsidy being granted to civil aviation, which had no economic possibilities for the shareholders. That is, in the circumstances, a narrow and short-sighted view, and although we have no desire to speak too strongly, we cannot refrain from saying that such views are born of complete ignorance of the bearing of civil aviation on future defence. That is really the whole case for the industry and the movement. We do not agree that it has no economic possibilities, but even that is beside the point for the moment. If there were none, we should still say that it is vital that a strong industry should be supported, because without it we cannot have an adequate Air Force available in time of need. Clearly the best, as well as the cheapest, method of preparing for military possibilities is to foster the means of providing the essential material and personnel in time of peace. In so far as the air is concerned, every authority is agreed upon the b^t methods of ensuring this. Obviously, what is required is a better education of the public in the relation of aviation to our future security. Is Air In our last article we have referred to the statement that air transport is uneconomical and luxurious. Before ^ people allege that this is the case, economical ? we submit that they should study all the facts which have a bearing on the question of economy. Even the most preju- diced must admit that there is something -in the adage that time is money. If there is, then it becomes very clear that in certain cases air transport is by far the most economical form of trans- port that has, so far, been evolved. For example, we have before us figures relating to aerial mail services in Australia and in particular to a service operating between Sydney and Adelaide. The distance between these two places is, roughly, 1,060 miles, and so bad are the railway communications that it takes no less than 139 hours 20 minutes to travel from one to the other. By air the journey is accomplished in 10 hours 40 minutes, actual running time—a saving of nearly 5^ days. Surely, the air in this case affords quite the most economical method of transport available. It may be true that no transport is to be judged by the results of any specific example such as this. But it is equally true that its suitability where con- ditions are similar can be very adequately assessed by the standard of such an example. Taking Australia again as the text, distances in that con- tinent are great and means of communication on land generally bad except in urban areas and between a few of the larger towns and cities. It is safe, therefore, to lay it down that aviation can and will play a great part in quickening tip communications 144
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
