FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1961
1961 - 0409.PDF
FLIGHT, 30 Ma/r/r 1961 417 AIR COMMERCE Thriving air travel centre though it is, with 50,000 passengers expected in 1961, Derby Airport Burnaston is reaching the end of its useful life. Concrete runways and space for expansion are needed; and in its search for a successor Derby Town Council is making a bid for ex-RAF Castle Donington. The Air Ministry has agreed, but local protests have called for a public inquiry which began on March 22 BEA versus British Railways TO have to ask the Air Transport Licensing Board to approve anew commodity rate for domestic air freight is rather likeasking for the proverbial sledgehammer to crack a nut. At the Board's third public hearing on March 22 more than a whole hourwas inconclusively devoted to hearings on BEA's application to introduce special rates for motor car parts on their regular servicesbetween Birmingham and Manchester and Edinburgh. In the end the hearing had to be adjourned because the objector, BritishRailways, wanted more evidence on the need for the new rate. Clearly the procedure will have to be streamlined; commodityrates are the mainspring of the air freight business and hitherto the airlines have had a free hand in introducing them when and wherethey judged the domestic market would bear them. This was the first licensing clash between BEA and BritishRailways, and the difference between the two forms of transport was manifest in the different approaches of the opposing advocates Mr Henry Marking, secretary of BEA, and Mr G. H. P. Beames, solicitor acting for British Railways.Mr Marking made his case, producing figures to show that there was no undercutting of surface rates and noting that objections onthe score of wasteful competition would be groundless because the commodities concerned would be flying as fill-up loads on flightsthat were running anyway. "We are certainly out to compete with British Railways in the carriage of freight," he said, "and wemake no secret of that." Mr Beames, evidently a little taken aback by the informality olthe proceedings (he insisted on standing to speak), adopted the mannered judicial approach. "It is an old principle of law," hedeclared, "that he who asserts must prove." There were, he said, "certain matters on which m'friend has spoken on which he shouldprovide evidence." He deplored this "apparent clash" betweeri BEA and British Railways; it had been said [in that morning'sDaily Mail] that this was a test of strength between rail and air. But it was nothing of the kind. British Railways were not sayingthat BEA should never carry anything, but here there was "a very appreciable cut in fares," and it was up to Mr Marking to callevidence. "I do say this and I say it with all sincerity that we are very seriously concerned about this application." BEA's secretary said respectfully: "It is up to the Board to decidewhether it wishes to formalize the proceedings." If he could be allowed to make a personal observation, he had always hoped that "the informality coupled with the impartiality of the old AT AC would be preserved at these hearings." For the next ten minutes the Board (at full strength except for Mr Harvey) appeared to be at rather a loss. Mr Wilson said he certainly didn't want the Board to become like "certain top-heavy bodies in some other countries," but "rather a novel question had been raised." Sir Friston How had doubts about the usefulness of further evidence; Mr W. P. James remarked that British Railways were ready to answer a case when a case was made—and would BEA object to an opportunity to produce evidence? It was Mr C. Bagnall who brought relief by voicing the thought in everyone's mind: "I am not quite clear what evidence." Mr Marking said he could produce someone from Rover [the motor car firm primarily concerned], but he thought that Mr Beames might regret it. This drew the good-humoured retort: "You wait and see." Mr Marking asked the chairman what sort of evidence the Board wanted, and Mr Wilson thought that perhaps Mr Beames could help the Board on this point. Mr Beames was obviously a little shocked by this "rather novel suggestion," though of course he was only too glad to help. His clients wanted an opportunity to contest evidence on points such as why there was dissatisfaction with existing services; how the new rate was arrived at; that the service would not be wasteful competition; and so on. The hearing was adjourned. The next case, which we hope to review later, provided the first clash between BEA and the independents (BUA and Cunard Eagle). One wondered whether British Railways, in winning this particu- lar procedural victory, had not actually done their air competitors a service by unwittingly highlighting the sledgehammer-to-crack-a- nut absurdity of the commodity-rates approval procedure itself. Commodity rates apart, it is obvious that the Board will hear many a clash between the two State transport corporations. Quietly and without fuss, BEA is carrying more and more of British Rail- ways' passenger and freight trunk-route traffic. As the recent Select Committee report on British Railways showed, BR seem but dimly aware of the inexorable trend—a trend which no amount of £24,000 executives can reverse. And though no one doubts the impartiality of the Board, one wonders how impartial it can be towards surface-transport objectors like British Railways when its statutory duty is "to further the development of British civil aviation." j. M. R. BUSY BRITISH AIRPORTS IN contrast with airports in the USA, where in 12 months aircraftmovements have declined by 4 per cent, traffic at British airports isbooming. There were 12 per cent more movements at UK airports in 1960 than there were in 1959, and numbers of passengers handledincreased by 28 per cent to more than 10m. Freight also in- creased by nearly a quarter. London-area airport movements, which declined between 1^58and 1959, last year slightly increased. This was due almost entirely to another 16,000 aircraft handled at Heathrow and 13,000 atGatwick, increases at these airports offsetting the loss of traffic at Croydon and Blackbushe. Traffic at Gatwick is now picking up.Last year it increased by over 50 per cent, to make it the third busiest airport in the United Kingdom. Very heavy traffic continues to be carried by the vehicle-ferryairports of Ferryfield and Southend, although in 1960 Manchester overtook Ferryfield for fourth place in total aircraft handled. Movements at other major airports remained virtually the same as in 1959. Aircraft movements are, of course, only one measure of airport workload, and may bear little relationship to passengers handled. Nowhere was this better demonstrated last year than at Stansted, where aircraft movements increased by less than 100 but passenger traffic was up by 42,000. In terms of passengers handled this was the greatest increase at any airport in the British Isles. Others which had large increases of passenger throughput were Southend, at which passengers handled rose by 76 per cent to 381,000; Hum, which, in absorbing passengers formerly handled by Eastleigh, showed an increase of 79 per cent; and Leeds/Bradford, where passengers handled were 78 per cent higher than in the previous year. This was the result of Yorkshire's airport more than doubling its air-transport movements. Total movements, however, actually declined.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
