FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1959
1959 - 1180.PDF
24 April 1959 573 still engaged in the full-scale development of its previous major civil type. (4) Every new British transport aeroplane should be developed inclose association with a United Kingdom airline, which should also be the first operator of the type. Under present conditions, it is mostunlikely that a successful airliner can be developed without a whole- hearted manufacturer/operator association. This joint effort must extendfrom the initial framing of the new design to meet an agreed specific requirement right through the subsequent development, and must con-tinue during the aircraft's service life. (5) Arrangements are required for Government support of thedevelopment of certain important types of transport aeroplane in cate- gories which can be expected to have good export prospects, althoughthey are unlikely to be of interest to either of the British Airline Cor- porations as major requirements. B.E.A. and B.O.A.C. might ordersmall numbers of such aircraft "off the shelf" to meet secondary require- ments, if they are first developed and initially brought into service atthe Government's or some other airline's expense. There should be Government sponsorship of the development of such types, togetherwith financial assistance to a selected United Kingdom airline—be it Corporation or independent—which undertakes the role of first operator.(6) For the next decade, we should concentrate primarily on the "bread-and-butter" types which will carry the great bulk of the world'sair traffic for a considerable period ahead. In current circumstances, the subsonic jet is becoming the "bread-and-butter" type for trunk-routeservices, while the turboprop is falling into place as the powerplant for smaller second-line aircraft and possibly, in the larger sizes, forcertain low-fare and freight services. (7) The development of longer-term projects (supersonics, verticaltake-off and landing, boundary layer suction, etc.) should not, of course, be neglected if we intend to continue in the aircraft manufacturingbusiness. The next major step in transport aircraft development will be to supersonic designs, but this step will not be taken for some years.Because of the enormous technical problems to be solved, development of supersonic transport aircraft will have to be started soon if we are tocompete in the next era of aircraft manufacture, but the airlines will not be able to introduce these new types into general service until afterthey have obtained an adequate return on their current very large sub- sonic jet investment. For the time being, supersonic aircraft and otheradvanced projects must take second place to the primary objective of completing development and then selling the "bread-and-butter" typesto which the United Kingdom is already committed. Failure to do this would be disastrous, but is an easy mistake to make in a business which isas spectacular and swift-moving as aircraft development. There is always a strong temptation to go for something better. We should remember,however, that the airlines are naturally cautious about radical develop- ments. They prefer something which, while being competitive, theycan be reasonably sure will work satisfactorily. The airline industry is now committed—probably for a period of between 10 and 20 years—to the subsonic jets which are just beginning to come into service. After discussing the operator's part in transport aircraft developmentLord Douglas went on to survey airline costs of sponsoring new aircraft. In this connection he said that it appeared that the short-term adverse THE INDUSTRY'S POINT OF VIEW By Peter G. Masefield 'T'HE industry's need, said Mr. Masefield, was the creation of stableX employment to provide a steady contribution to the national income and a foundation for national security. The particular objec-tive was to produce, and to sell at a profit, competitive types of aircraft designed to meet and develop demands in both the home and worldmarkets. Ranged against this was the problem that the cost today of producing anything in the way of advanced aircraft had reached financialproportions which few firms could contemplate on their own. The trouble was that this business was bedevilled by aspects of nationalprestige, by domestic politics and by the effects of the vast defence budgets of the U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R., which had brought an accelera-tion in the rate of advancement of the frontiers of technical knowledge. Since the war the level of employment in the industry had averaged220,000 men and women, 50,000 of them designers, draughtsman and technicians and 70,000 skilled tradesmen of one sort or another. Thesewere the people, said Mr. Masefield, we must endeavour to keep in the industry. In the past few years substantial numbers had crossed theAtlantic, whilst those in the industry as a whole had fallen off from 267,000 in January 1957 to 246,000 in March 1959. Skilled manpowerwould be attracted to remain in the industry and in the country only if it could be shown more clearly than is apparent at present the path aheadfor British aviation. There were, he continued, five present markets: (1) transport air-craft; (2) general aviation aircraft; (3) manned military aircraft; (4) guided missiles and (5) helicopters. The field was wide but the marketshighly competitive. The rate of expenditure in the U.S.A. and U.S.S.R. had unbalanced the financial background to development and produc-tion; aircraft were bang produced today which couJd nor be justified either in terms of cost of fabrication or cost of operation. These facts effect on B.E.A.'s financial results today of introducing one new majortype every four years was of the order of £1,600,000 spread over the four years, or, say, £400,000 per annum. Later he said, "B.E.A. would havepreferred to have introduced its own jet, the Airco D.H.121, into service in 1964 at a proper interval after the introduction of the turbopropVanguard in 1960. However, the competitive situation which is clearly going to develop in Europe following the 'jet buying spree' by airlinesall over the world in 1956-58 forced B.E.A. to order a small number of Comets for service from 1960 as 'interim jets' to supplement theVanguards. It appears that the addition of a further new type to the basic aircraft programme (which is working on its normal four-yearcycle) adversely affects B.E.A.'s financial results by a further £500,000 spread over the life of the aircraft—with the Comet equivalent to£100,000 per annum ... In present circumstances, with B.E.A.'s plan- ning and organization geared to the introduction of the Vanguard andComet almost simultaneously and of the D.H.121 four years later, the Corporations' financial results are probably being adversely affectedby these new type introduction activities to the extent of about half a million pounds a year. The adverse effect will be rather greater than thisamount during the first two years of service of the new types (1960 and 1964) and will fall away to a rather lower figure in the years between." Lord Douglas introduced his conclusions with this remark, "ThisPaper has stressed the contribution which 'sponsoring airlines' make to transport aircraft development. This is because, from the operator'spoint of view, the importance of this contribution is the outstanding lesson of the post-war years." He added that the financial burden on anairline was substantial and amounted at the present time to an average adverse effect on B.E.A.'s financial results of perhaps £500,000 perannum. In addition, the airline bore the risk of the new aircraft being unsuccessful. However, this contribution—and a parallel one by B.O.A.C.—was absolutely essential if the United Kingdom was to continue to manufacturing transport aircraft. Having set out his conclusions, Lord Douglas said, "In practical terms,the above conclusions add up to a need for this country to pursue with determination and without loss of confidence its established transportaircraft programme. The 'bread-and-butter' types already in service or under development cover almost all the important categories in whichthe world's operating industry is interested. It may be that some redistribution of effort is desirable in one or two directions to reduceduplication and plug potentially serious gaps, but there is nothing in the existing programme which realistic thinking and sensible policy-makingcannot put right. In the light of development during the past two or three years, it is perhaps unfortunate that the British programme hasplaced so much emphasis on large turboprop types and that we are so late in the field in some of the jet categories. However, overall, theUnited Kingdom's position is not unsatisfactory provided the Govern- ment, and the manufacturing and operating industries, press forwardtogether in the task to which they have jointly set their hands." The lecturer concluded by saying that it might be advisable to under-take from scratch the development of one further major type: a rela- tively small "Viscount replacement" jet. "If these steps are not taken,"Lord Douglas concluded, "we will very likely squander our chances of further worthwhile returns on a prodigious 13-year investment." had resulted in a situation which was placing the British aircraft industryin jeopardy, and the basic issue was whether it could remain much longer in the Big League of military and civil aeronautics. Epitomizingthe problem was the urge to develop a supersonic transport. To do the job properly and it was not worth doing otherwise—there was a needfor a national outlay of not less than £150m, with more to follow. The injection of the jet transport aeroplane into the pattern of air-line progress towards self-sufficiency had certainly been halted for a time. Most serious for the manufacturing industries on both sides ofthe Atlantic was the check on the ability of the major airlines to order new airliners at a sedate but continuous pace, sufficient to keep designteams and production staffs in steady employment. With the change in military requirements brought about by the progress of guided flightthis posed a basic problem for the future of aeronautics in Great Britain. Examining the trends of production since the war, Mr. Masefieldcommented that whereas civil construction accounted for a very small percentage of the output in 1945, it represented some 40 per cent ofthe value of the output in 1958. The steadily declining percentage of military orders—as a result of abandoning any attempt at the develop-ment of supersonic heavy bombers—was of enormous consequence to the industry, the more so because it came at a time when the civil air-lines were uncertain of their economic future. In 1958 the turnover of the U.S. aircraft industry was nearly tentimes that of the British, and the value of U.S. military orders—ten times the equivalent of the British figure—accounted for some 88.6 percent of the whole. What these American statistics meant was that the U.S. manufacturers were able to compete in the civil markets primarilyas a result of vast defence budgets. Quite obviously the U.K. could not hope to compete on this ground. Nevertheless, since 1945 the British aircraft industry had achievedexports to the value of £800m, £220m of this being for civil aircraft and equipment. Last year British aeronautical exports amounted tosome £160m—more than 11 per cent of the country's total engineering exports. About 50 per cent of 1958 exports were civil orders. As far as it could be stated, at the beginning of 1959 we had 28 majortypes of aircraft and missiles in production. There were also some 12 major types in the design, prototype or pre-production stages. Of thetotal of 40 types, 23 were military and 17 civil, and there were unfulfilled civil orders for some 150 aircraft, amounting in value to approximately£230m. Comparing production costs between the U.S. and British industries,Mr. Masefield made the interesting point that the value of the major U.S. civil types on order amounted to £13.7 per lb of empty weightagainst £14 per lb of empty weight for British ones. The similarity
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
