FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1962
1962 - 0317.PDF
FLIGHT International, 1 March 1962 319 BRITISH RAILWAYS v BEA • PLEASE advise the Minister of Aviation that it is his function to protect our interests." This, in so many words, was the burden of last week's British Railways appeal against BEA's three-guinea night fares to Scotland and Northern Ireland. These fares were cranted last autumn by the ATLB and were introduced on Novem ber 1 on night Vanguard services from London to Glasgow, Edin burgh and Belfast. The appeals commissioner who heard the appeal, which lasted one day, was Sir Arthur Hutchinson. British Railways, through their eminent counsel Mr E. S. Fay, QC, put their arguments succinctly. The essence of their case was that they are not opposed to progress, but that the public interest demands protection of their services. Mr Fay, noting that the Air Transport Licensing Board was enjoined by the Act "to further the the protection to which they feel entitled? As Mr E. S. Fay said, conflict between the airlines and British Railways appeared to be increasingly likely in the future. It would therefore seem probable that, if this test case appeal goes against them, British Railways will go to a higher court for a ruling. And if, they lose there, they will probably press for new legislation to give them the right to be protected against air competition. It is intriguing to speculate whether British Railways would find themselves in their present dilemma if the Civil Aviation Licensing Act had required the Board to take care of the "public interest." British Railways could then have argued, on much less flimsy grounds than they can now, that it is the Air Transport Licensing Board's job—and that of the Minister of Aviation on appeal—to protect their interests. Inspecting the systems mock-up (right) of the Boeing 727 at Boeing Renton are seen cabin and flight crews from United Air Lines, who have ordered 40 of these aircraft. Left, one of the structural mock-ups showing the recently revised triple jet layout development of British civil aviation," suggested that there was a bias in favour of aviation. The Railways felt that it was the Minister of Aviation's job as a public servant, forgetting that he was Minister of Aviation, to hold the scales between these two nationalized corporations, between whom there would inevitably be conflicts. His role in this conflict was custodian of the public interest—and if the Minister did not fulfil this role then there was no one else. It was, Mr Fay said, of particular importance for British Railways to know where they stood—especially at this time, when the new chairman, Dr Beeching, was re-examining the whole future of British Railways. No new evidence was submitted by either British Railways or by BEA, so it therefore appears that the duty of the appeal commis sioner (though Sir Arthur is not a lawyer) is to decide whether the law has been correctly interpreted by the Air Transport Licensing Board. The Board has said, in its decision on another case involving the railways, that "The further development of civil aviation on domestic routes is almost certain to divert material quantities of traffic from the roads and railways, but we see no reason why the prospect of such diversion should deter us in the exercise of our primary function [to further the development of British civil aviation]." A previous appeals commissioner, in yet another case, has also, expressed the view that the Board is "neither empowered nor required to take into consideration the question of wasteful com petition with the rail facilities." It would be extraordinary indeed if a different appeals commissioner were now to dissent from this interpretation of the Act, even though the Minister has disagreed with this interpretation. Can the law, as it stands at present, provide British Railways with WALK-ON TO GLASGOW THERE was a report in a Sunday newspaper recently that BEA are soon to introduce no-reservations "air bus" services on the London - Glasgow route. Although the corporation has been thinking about the introduction of such services for three years or more, it has set itself no target date as yet. Lord Douglas, in a Flight interview in April 1960, guessed that "walk-on" services might be introduced in the spring of 1962 on the London - Glasgow route, but that such a ticketing procedure "must depend on the attainment of a high frequency service." His views on this subject were reported in Flight for April 8, 1960. Frequency on the London - Glasgow route is at present nine daily, or roughly once every 2£ hours. This frequency is much the same as last year's though, of course, bigger-capacity Van guards are scheduled in place of Viscounts. The increase in capacity over last year is of the order of one quarter. Last year the average number of peak-period seats offered each week by BEA on the London - Glasgow route was about 11,000, compared with 800 in 1947. About one-third of all passengers on the route are now travelling by air. This proportion—especially with the impetus of the three-guinea night fares—is likely to increase steadily. London - Glasgow is obviously a plum traffic route, and one which is ripening for no-reservations treatment. The prerequisite of a successful no-reservations service is, probably, an hourly frequency, depending on the availability of standby aircraft to cope with overflows. Eastern Air Lines, as described in the article beginning on page 316 of this issue, began their "Air Shuttle" services on the New York - Boston and New York - Washington routes at a weekday frequency of one every two hours.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
