FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1961
1961 - 1458.PDF
A link with bygone days of internal air transport in Britain is provided by the BEA Herons which serve the Scottish Islands. Best known is the service to the Isle ofBarra, where Herons land and take off from the hard white sands of Cockle Bay. Timings, reads the famous note in BEA's timetable, "are subject to alteration due to weather and tide" AIR COMMERCE... TOWARDS HAPPIER LANDINGS IRONICALLY, the Boeing 707 which overran the runway atBoston on September 24, finishing up in the waters of WinthropBay, was operated by American Airlines. This company, it transpired at a recent FAA-sponsored conference on the revisionof turbine transport performance rules, is the one which has developed a landing-distance formula, based on its own jet experi-ence, which is stricter than the regulations prescribe. American's formula includes assumptions more stringent than are made inthe FAA's present SR-422B performance regulations, which the FAA itself is now proposing to tighten up. American's formula assumes a higher approach speed for themeasurement of landing distance; assumes that one thrust reverser is inoperative; and assumes that braking effectiveness must bebased on a wet runway and a given tyre condition. The FAA itself is proposing revised runway performance regula-tions, among them "wet runway accountability." Such new rules could result in substantial increases in jet landing distances—from5,600ft to about 6,700ft in the case of the Comet, for example. But it is the landing and aborted take-off behaviour of the biggerjets that is causing particular concern; scarcely a month has gone by in the last three years without at least one jet take-off or landingincident being reported. American Airlines, United, Air France, BOAC and JAL are among the operators whose DC-8s or 707shave been badly damaged—or in three cases actually written off—in the landing phase. Meanwhile, in addition to making proposals for new rules, the FAA is seriously examining the possibilities of permitting the use of arrester gear to stop big jets in an emergency. The Agency recently completed successful tests at the Lakehurst Naval Air Test Facility in New Jersey with an FAA Boeing 720 fitted with an arrester hook developed, together with the runway cable gear, by All-Amerian Engineering. The hook, known as the Sheaffer Spring Hook, is designed to be light, easily installed and simple to main- tain and operate. It would normally be latched snugly against the fuselage, but in an emergency the pilot would release it to drag along the runway and catch the arresting cable, bringing the air- craft to what the FAA describe as "a relatively gentle, controlled stop." United Air Lines, it is believed, have already specified structural provision for arrester gear on the Boeing 727s that the airline has on order. Another aid to happier landings is to be introduced soon at Ministry airports in this country. Described on page 489 of Flight for September 21, this is the painting on runways of figures to indicate distance-to-go to the pilot. Another Ministry preoccupa- tion in this field of safety is research into the true nature of "aqua- planing," the puzzling phenomenon (which could well have aggravated many landing or aborted take-off incidents) caused by the hydraulic pressure of even a thin film of water reducing tyre grip and hence the braking-power of moving aircraft. HAS BRITAIN ANY "NATIONAL AVIATION GOALS"? IT is nearly two years now since the Ministry of Aviation came intobeing, yet the appearance of the Project Horizon report com-missioned by President Kennedy through the FAA (see page 521 of last week's issue) "as a statement of national aviation goals forthe period between now and 1970" reminds us once again that this country is still waiting for a similar statement of national policyfor British air transport. We are still ignorant of what, if any, "national aviation goals" this country is supposed to be shootingfor. Nationalism is the keynote of Project Horizon, and although one may deplore an intensely national approach to the problemsof an international industry, there is no denying that it has brought to US and French aviation policy-making a sense of purpose, ofpace, of urgency—above all, of unity—that is totally lacking in British aviation policies. It is the major misfortune of post-war British air transport thatit has had imposed upon it the ideological division between the two great political parties. Government policies have had the unfortu-nate effect of dividing and weakening British aviation by creating—• indeed reinforcing—divisions rather than building up unity andstrength. Independents versus corporations; the rationalized industry versus the non-rationalized segment—in both these casesMinisterial instinct has been to create "have and have not" segments without regard to the overall national need. And although the AirTransport Licensing Board can play a strong part in influencing things for the better, it cannot create a national air transportpolicy. In the past, what we have tended to get is not a policy but rather a bee in the Ministerial bonnet; a concept imperfectly under-stood and improperly digested, applied—sometimes ruthlessly—to British aviation regardless of its commercial suitability. Rationaliza-tion was the prime example of this; but another, less persistent bee in the Ministerial bonnet is the idea that quality competition, withall that it implies in expensive re-equipment, is really the only form of competition admissible for British air transport; that pricecompetition as exemplified by any Very Low Fare proposals would be ruinous. This is in part a natural consequence of what has been describedas the "fathers in God" relationship of the Ministry to the Corpora- tions. But it is surely high time that this relationship was modifiedto enable the Minister to take an objective view of the destinies of the whole of British air transport, and not only part of it—admit-tedly a very important part. The time is overdue for a fundamental reappraisal of the "fathers in God" relationship and particularly ofthe way in which it has biased successive Ministers in favour of quality competition and against price competition. "ProjectHorizon" is in no doubt about the need to tap the mass travel markets and to broaden the appeal of air travel; the need is just as greatfor this country. The province of charter and inclusive tour opera- tions has always been traditionally that of the independents, butin recent years BEA and BOAC have started to play a much larger part in this sphere, just as the independents in future may beoperating many more scheduled services. This is just one reason why an objective Ministerial view of the whole of British air trans-port is so necessary: present-day economic factors are increasingly tending to blur the once-clear line of demarcation between inde-pendent and corporation activities. Are we to go flat out for low fares? Or are we to tag alongbehind the Americans with a "me too," Mach 2 airliner? There is no British equivalent of "Project Horizon" to give a guide onsuch an important issue, to suggest how vigorous development of the mass travel markets is so important, not only because these
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
