FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1959
1959 - 0770.PDF
20 March 1959 375 Straight nd vel ASSUMING that our aircraftindustry's destiny-shapers havek read the recent American I.A.S. supersonic-transport lectures, can there be any who still think that Britain's initial project should have a design- speed of less than Mach 2? If there are, they might well consider three things. The plain facts on which we must base our decision to build or not to build a supersonic airliner are as follows: (1) The Americans—probably Lock- heed, who were noticeably absent from the I.A.S. lectures—will go straight for Mach 3 and they will have an airliner ready for service by 1975. (2) The pro- ject, or two, will be largely U.S. govern- ment-financed and U.S.A.F.-developed, and its progress will receive an unbeat- able sputnik-impetus when the Russians fly their supersonic airliner in two or three years' time. (3) The American fund of knowledge about high-speed aerodynamics, structures, kinetic heat- ing, systems-engineering, etc., infinitely exceeds British experience. Only if these facts are faced shall we avoid a ghastly repetition of past mis- takes. We can do a supersonic airliner, but it must be Mach 3, it will cost us at least £200 millions, and if it is to be ready for B.O.A.C. service by 1975 we must start to develop it now. There must be no toying with Mach less-than- two ideas, because such supersonics will be money thrown away. The only alternative is to spend ourmoney developing those types of aircraft which we can sell in the largest numbers. • Britain's independent airline opera- tors are always complaining about re- strictions. Yet their woes appear trivial when compared with those of indepen- dent road-haulage operators. Imagine what the air charter market would be like if the following son of thing happened. An enterprising private road haulier, it is reported, quoted £22 per 44-hour week for operating his six-ton tipping lorry on behalf of the Somerset County Council. This tender, which worked out at 10s per hour (others varied between 11s 6d and 13s per hour), was eagerly accepted by the Council. The Road Haulage Association—the equivalent of B.I.A.T.A.—has since taken the trouble to produce figures showing that the haulier's quotation will lose him 13s 8d a week! The fact that the sperator himself is confident of making a profit appears to be of second- ary importance. Why are such obstacles put in the way of enterprise? One reason, it seems, is that "There is a grave danger that the careful balance of facilities in each area, which the authorities have been at pains to build up, will be destroyed." The same sort of enterprise-stifling "explanation" is given for the rejection of independent-airline applications to operate very-low-fare services. You know the sort of mumbo-jumbo: "These services will undermine the carefully built up international fare structure " • There is good advertising and bad advertising, and still too much of the latter. But more commercial concerns seem to be realizing that the pulling power of the space they buy does not depend upon capital letters, crafty typo- graphy, shriek marks, and so on. Here is the opening of a recent ad. for an optical projector by Eastman Kodak, which illustrates the kind of writing I welcome: — "This is a blade from a jet engine. Manymathematical minds, mighty mathematical machines and much aerodynamic experi-mentation have created its shape. Viola- tion of the plan to the extent of a few thou-sandths of an inch in a single cross-section of a single blade sucks at efficiency like alittle leech. And there are so many blades in a single compressor or turbine that thetotal number of them made in the brief span of air-breathing, non-reciprocatinghistory must compare with all the wooden spokes in all the wagon wheels of all thesupply trains in all armies since Alexander the Great.. ." • By a curious twist of fate the swing-tail CL-44 will, I imagine, be a com- petitor of the Short Britannic—eventhough both aircraft spring from the same Bristol Britannia root (indeed bothhave the same wing). Does it not strike you as curious that two builders of theBristol Britannia should now be market- ing Britannia developments which arecompetitive? And that the parent, Bristol, has virtually no stake—except,I suppose, for royalties—in either? Of course there will be one basic dif-ference between the Canadair CL-44 freighter and the Short Britannic—air-dropping from the swing-tailer will be rather inadvisable. • With what unseemly indignationdid the airlines remonstrate at the recent increases in British airport charges!"Savage!" protested the Foreign Air- lines Association in London. Savage is a pretty strong word. Butit is justifiable if some of the airlines which chose it had consulted with theairport authorities before buying air- liners which required, at one techno-logical stroke, twice the amount of concrete, twice the Customs and healthand immigration and baggage-handling capacity, and twice as speedy A.T.C.clearances as are needed by the airliners which they are to replace. Did theydo this? • A most embarrassing thing hap-pened during the 50th anniversary celebrations of Scruggs Aircraft at theAir Power Club last week. The chairman, Sir John Blackout-Jones, was just coming to the end of a three-hour reminiscence about what hecalled "the good old days" (including 23 anecdotes about the flying exploitsof the founder, old Henry "Scruggsey" Scruggs himself) when in burst thefirm's sales director, Mr. Julian Wash- brain, in a state of great agitation. Blackie, who was in the middle ofthe famous wing-walking story, looked furious. "What the devil is it, man?"he snapped. There followed a whispered exchangeduring which Blackie's face assumed an expression of excited incredulity. Swal-lowing hard, he spluttered: "I am sorry, but Washbrain here tells me we havejust received an order. I must get back at once." • Inaugural flights to the Continentusually have their moments. The other day, at one of those admirable luncheonswhich syndicats d'Initiative are liable to organize at the drop of an undercarriage,a hurrying waiter let fall an un- opened bottle of vin rose squarely onthe head of a charming young woman executive of the airline company.Instantly and gallantly, in excellent English, he said: "So sorry, mam'selle—but eet ees only a light wine." A colleague of mine who was there isstill wondering if that waiter does it every day, once having found that theresultant laugh fulfils his ego. ROGER BACON A lecturer at the American supersonic-transport symposium said that, because there could be no windows at Mach 3, passengers would have to be provided with television. I suppose they will get used to it, just as those of us on the ground will get used to walking about like this
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
