FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1955
1955 - 0505.PDF
FLIGHT, 15 April 1955 505 an exaggeration to say that Great Britain's leadership in the air,then, was accepted as readily as once had been her supremacy on the seas. Much of this favourable attitude in U.S. opinion was acarry-over from 1940, when the American dailies headlined, as only American dailies can headline, the achievements of "the few."Partly, it was attributable to the widely held, if erroneous, belief that the jet aircraft was invented in Britain. A great deal of Britain's air prestige in America could be tracedto the fact that the first jet transport to get off the ground bore British markings. Yet again, the turboprop developments werehailed with enthusiastic good wishes and when it became known that NATO was to equip with British fighters, American headsnodded in satisfied approval. But then, what happened? Firstly, the Comets crashed. No one, of course, has the slightest ground for criticizing theway in which the investigations of those tragic disasters were con- ducted. In the circumstances, grounding and exhaustive research,with all the cards on the table regardless of outcome, was the only possible path of action. That, in the process, the news agencies ofthe world should feature the Comet failure, rather than the scrupu- lous honesty and sacrifice inherent in the inquiry, was not the leastof the misfortunes that British aviation suffered. But as a direct consequence of the Farnborough findings, British aviation as awhole endured a long—and, from a factual standpoint, an almost slanderous—attack in a vast section of the American Press. I have intimated that, if this were the price of investigation afterElba and Naples, then it was a price that had to be paid. My main contention, however, is that now Britain has paid she should notbe content to let her air reputation dwindle without doing some- thing quickly and positively to restore her prestige, at least to acompetitive level. It is indeed encouraging to learn that Comet 4s may be flyingpassenger routes again by 1958. But can Britain afford to wait that long before attending to her "good name"? It seems unlikely. Thedevelopment of the Boeing 707 is being pushed ahead with all speed. Quite obviously, the American company gave thoroughconsideration to the Farnborough findings. Many imponderables of jet aviation are now understood and answers have been foundfor them. It is, perhaps, not unfair to state that, because of Farn- borough, Boeing will be able to put the 707 in the air ahead ofschedule and decidedly with a less troubled conscience. By the time the Comet 4 is flying, and, moreover, has flown itself backinto the confidence of the paying passenger, the Americans may well be on the road to as great a domination of the jet routes asthat which they now enjoy in piston flight. The bright spots on the present dark canvas of British aviation in America are the advent of the Vickers Viscount and BristolBritannia. It becomes increasingly clear, from this long view, that these aircraft must carry the flag back to the WesternHemisphere. The announcement of substantial orders for the Viscount byboth Canadian and American airlines does a great deal to offset such glaring criticism of British aviation as the following, whichappeared in an influential news weekly. This publication, taking what has become an all too familiar attitude towards the Britishindustry, said:".... whereas Britain's flashy prototypes dazzle the airshow crowd at Farnborough, the production models rarelycome up to expectations." The Viscount's story can be told, but only by intensified publi-city and advertising campaigns. But should Trans-Canada Airlines and Capital Airlines (the lone North American companies, thusfar, with the confidence to order these machines) be expected to bear alone the cost of campaigns that eventually must benefitthe British aircraft industry as a whole? [T.C.A. publicity material is illustrated on p. 503.—Ed.]To begin with, it is doubtful whether any one commercial com- pany can, by itself, do the public relations job that British aviationnow needs to have done in the U.S. Instead of single and un- connected attempts at public relations, such as the HawkerSiddeley Group advertisements and the Trans-Canada and Capital advertisements, the British industry and the purchasers in NorthAmerica should combine forces behind one cogent fact. And that fact is the sale and success of the Viscount (and, no doubt, lateron, of the Britannia too) in the Western Hemisphere. This "success story" should be the nucleus around which thereputation of British aircraft is rebuilt. It should not, of course, stop with two airliners nor, for that matter, with the Americanmarket. With an eye to the rapidly approaching future, the story of British jet development, from its inception to the present, shouldbe fully publicized. The Comet and its contributions to man's knowledge of jet flight, tragic as the details surrounding some ofthose contributions were, should be fully described in a series of well-placed messages that stress the facts of Farnborough. Itshould be made clear that, in a very real sense, the Comet affair was to the ultimate benefit of all. No opportunity should be castaside in which Comet 4s can be promoted as the answer to the Mediterranean debacle. Britain's air reputation can be regained, indeed, must be re-gained. But it is unlikely to show the much-needed quick improve- ment unless the British aircraft industry as a whole is willing totackle the problem of prestige with the courage and the confidence that its past, present, and future products justify. A.B.T. CORRESPONDENCE The Editor of "Flight" does not hold himself responsible for the views expressed by correspondents in these columns;the names and addresses of the writers, not necessarily for publication, must in all cases accompany letters. Deck-landing FloatplanesI N his letter published with photographs in your issue ofFebruary 11th, 1955, J. W. R. Taylor asked if any reader could supply details of the deck-landing of a Swordfish floatplane.He may be correct in saying this happened before the Dakar opera- tion, though I never heard of it. However, it certainly happened tome, and readers might be interested in the circumstances. During the action against the French Fleet at Oran, I wascatapulted from the battleship H.M.S. Valiant to spot for the fleet's gunnery.During the fight the French battleship Strasbourg escaped and Valiant was sent to intercept her and bring her to action. Valiant,therefore, had no time to stop and pick me up, and instructed me to try my luck with the Ark Royal. The latter ship decided toaccept me, cleared her flight deck, and I landed-on. Beyond a few holes in the undersides of the floats the aircraftwas undamaged. I remained in the ship until she subsequently returned to Gibraltar. The Captain of Ark Royal was not with me. He had earliergone ashore in a motor boat to parley with the French and to persuade them to come over to our side. An alternative was forthem to steam their ships to the West Indies and agree to being neutralized there for the remainder of the war.As is well known, his mission was unsuccessful and the ensuing slaughter and useless blood-letting was unfortunately necessary. R.N. Air Station, Donibristle. H. S. M. DAVENPORT, Lieutenant-Commander, R.N.The Channel Wing AS you know, the 2^-ton CCW-5 (Custer "Channel Wing")recently made several flights of unusual performance and I am eager to obtain the British viewpoints on this remarkableinnovation for economical power application with utilitarian per- formance. Although our American magazines noted the flights, we as a people are slow to appreciate the unusual until we tripover it or it is forced upon us; and I believe that knowledge of the capabilities of a channel wing, when tempered with con-servatism, will be an eye-opener to those who base any design improvements on "available subsidy." The most memorable of my personal pilot experiences—noteven excepting my first solo—was the first flight I made in a Westland Lysander; and this pleasant awakening to a slow-flying,fixed-wing aircraft with true utility value has greatly influenced my outlook on the developments of the aviation industry. Ibelieve that if one per cent of airfield development costs in the last 20 years had been spent on improvements to this type ofaircraft it is possible that the industry today might be completely self-sustaining on its relative merits, and that the need for run-ways would be past. Since England, to use the airplane to best advantage of all herpeople, must limit the size of her runways and budget her aviation development to practical achievement, there is an excellentpossibility that the channel wing provides the asset necessary to ensure her leadership in design of economical, high-perform-ance transport aircraft. Certainly the use of by-pass airflows, in which England leads the world, is a natural supplement to achannel-wing installation. Today we are letting military needs divorce the airplane fromthe people as steadily as we are replacing the wing with power, and we are also contemplating complete prostitution of the heli-copter's excellent virtues by altering it to approach performance available two decades ago in fixed-wing aircraft. Unfortunately,few American aircraft approached the Lizzie's performance and its long range value may have been overlooked, due to imminentneeds restricting the foresight of the design planners. The consensus of opinion seems to be that with the application ofenough power we can hold ourselves up by our bootstraps, and if
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
