FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1961
1961 - 1071.PDF
NO 2735 VOLU ME SO THUR8DAY 10 AUGUST 1961 Editor-in-Chiej MAURICE A. SMITH OFC Editor H. F. KING MBE Technical Editoi W. T. GUNSTON Air Transport Editor J. M. RAMSDEN Production Editor ROY CASEY Managing Director H. N. PRIAULX MBE N THIS ISSUE From All Quarters 174 This is the Trident 176 Missiles and Space-Flight 178 BAC One-Eleven 182 Flight Systems 187 Russia's Helicopter Airliners 188 Filling Those Seats 190 The Pen and the Air 191 Sport and Business 193 "Local" Flying 194 Correspondence 196 Straight and Level 197 Air Commerce 198 Service Aviation 204 Iliffe Transport Publications Ltd, DorsetHouse. Stamford Stivet, London. SE1: telephone Waterloo ;)33:i. TelegramsFlightpres London SKI. Annual sub- scriptions: Home £4 15s. Overseas £5.Canada and VSA $15.00. Second Class Mail privileges authorized at NewYork, NY. Branch Offices Coventry: 8-10 Corpora- tion Street: telephone Coventry 25210. Birmingham: King Edward House, New Street, 2; telephone Midland 7191. Man- chester: 260 Deanstjate 3; telephoneBlackfriars 4412 or Deansgate 359.V Glasgow: 02 Buchanan Street Cl: tele- phone Central 12C5-6. New York, NY: Thomas Skinner <v Co (Publishers) Ltd. Ill Broadway «;telephone Digby 9-1197. © lllffe Transport Publications ltd, 1961. Permission to reproduce illustra- tions and letterpress can be granted only under written agreement. Brief extracts or comments may be made with dueacknowledgement. AIRCRAFT, SPACECRAFT, MISSILES Official Organ of the Royal Aero Club First Aeronautical Weekly in the World Founded in 1909 Prudent Enthusiasm MINOR seasonal ailment suffered annually by every aeronautical journalist is the rash of questions from well-meaning acquaintances about what's going to be new at Farnborough. It is always difficult to temper one's professional enthusiasm for the occasion with the right amount of prudence, for disappointed and disgruntled visitors to the greatest national air show on earth are not the sort required. The same considerations may have underlain a recent pre-Farnborough announcement by the Society of British Aircraft Constructors, which fails to include a list of aircraft. What it does include is some highly gratifying information about the extent of this year's static show—a record number of 397 stands in the exhibition building, outside equipment display and radar and guided weapons parks, and yet another increase in the extent of the equipment park. (There is, too, some incidental intelligence of interest to the connoisseur, e.g., that more than a thousand tons of tubes and fittings are used in the construction of the windbreak and enclo- sures.) But the list of aircraft has yet to appear. We shall not, even so. be embarrassing our friends at the SBAC if we suggest that in terms of novelty Farnborough '61 promises to be one of the best for years. Meanwhile, it is exciting to conjure with various as yet embargoed designations of Beagle executive aeroplanes and with other stirring appellations such as Bristol 188, Hawker P.I 127. . . . But we must remember to temper our enthusiasm with prudence. A New Tax on the Airlines FOR the air transport industry, an ominous passage in the White Paper onairports published last week (see page 202) reads: "The Government consider that it would he right to levy charges for the use of their technical services, both en route and at aerodromes." This is the first time that the Government has publicly proposed to charge the airlines for so-called en route services. In handing the management of Britain's "big four" international airports (Heathrow. Gatwick, Stansted and Prestwick) to an independent authority, and the others to local authorities or an "agent,'" the Government will quite rightly retain control of technical services. So why, it may be asked, is it ominous that a charge should be levied for en route facilities ? En route services can be defined as those provided mainly by installations sited elsewhere than at aerodromes. These cost £3m last year and £2.7m in the previous year. They are used by aircraft overflying the UK as well as by those being routed into UK airports, and include weather forecasting, search and rescue, aeronautical information, and of course radio, radar and ATC. The Chicago Convention recognized that charges might be imposed for such facilities, and some countries have cashed in—Canada for example. But hither- to the UK has not done so, en route costs being cross-subsidized by higher and higher landing fees. Why, the airlines' argument will run, should we pay for a club Tiger Moth pilot to be fished out of the sea, or to be given a weather forecast, or helped with a flight plan? But why should the hapless taxpayer continue to pay for such services to airlines? The answer is that en route services are paid for out of landing fees. So it is reasonable to expect that when the Ministry does impose en route charges, it will ensure that landing fees are proportionately reduced.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
