FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1962
1962 - 0860.PDF
858 FLIGHT International, 31 May 1%2 WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE LICENSING ACT?... and the other tries to prove the opposite. The fact is that if there is going to be a vast expansion in the next ten years it probably doesn't matter at all if there is diversion. But what is important is whether it is in the national interest that there should be diversion. Again this centres round the economics of the operation; if the second operator is more efficient then it might be in the public interest to have massive diversion. To say that diversion as such— even material diversion—is wrong makes nonsense of what has hap pened since 1950. If this had been a deciding factor then there would have been no post-1950 development of the independents at all. Let me get this straight; are you saying that any application could properly be considered and decided in an impartial, objective, non- political manner, simply on the basis of full economic data, publicly presented and discussed before the Board ? What I am saying is that an absolute essential is that the econo mics of a proposed operation should be discussed, and to get the safeguard which the Minister talks about they should be discussed publicly. But they cannot always be decided on that basis alone, for virtually any parallel operation would be ruled out on account of economics. In some cases there must be another consideration. The Board must make a decision of policy as to whether they want a second operator or not. If the issue is evenly balanced, if it could almost be settled by the toss of a coin on the basis of present-day economics, then my view is that the advantage lies with having a second operator, and as a matter of policy that should be the deci sion. It may take several years before it can be decisively proven that a second operator would "further the development of British civil aviation," but it should be announced now that the policy is to take decisions on the basis that the case for a second operator will be proven. The whole issue involved should have been sorted out in the beginning and the Act should have been drafted accordingly. After all, Lord Leathers sorted it out in the early 1950s. At the moment neither the independents nor the corporations know where they stand. They both are putting up an excellent case from their own points of view, and without any stated policy to guide the Board the decisions might go either way. This is not the sort of situation in which plans can be made with confidence by anyone. DOUALA TRAGEDY SOLVED? WORKING under immense difficulties, as is evident from the pictures on page 850, the team which has been investigating the Caledonian Airways DC-7C disaster on March 4 at Douala appears to have discovered the possible cause of the accident. A statement published by the Ministry of Aviation on May 22 says: "The investi gation being made by the Cameroon authorities into the accident to a Caledonian Airways DC-7C at Douala on March 4 suggests the possibility that a spring tab on the elevator may have jammed due to side play of the spring mechanism arm. The effect of this would be to make the aircraft difficult to control in the pitching plane. Similar mechanisms are used in DC-6 aircraft. "The Air Registration Board, having discussed the matter with the Federal Aviation Agency, have required airlines using British registered aircraft of these types to inspect the mechanism as soon as possible and to ground any aircraft on which the side play is sufficient to enable jamming to occur. These inspections continue. "In addition, the Air Registration Board have informed their overseas surveyors and Commonwealth airworthiness authorities of this matter, and the Ministry of Aviation have notified their civil air attaches." The investigation has been hampered not only by the fragmented nature of the wreckage, but also by the heat, insects, snakes and swampy jungle terrain into which the aircraft came down. The investigating team has comprised, in addition to two Ministry of Aviation officials, representatives of the French accident investiga tions authorities (acting for the Cameroon Republic, formerly a French colony). There have also been observers from Caledonian Airways (the deputy managing director, Capt A. Thomson) and If, as you say, the Board have been given no policy directive, then it is rather difficult to understand some of the decisions. For example I find that in 13 of 18 opposed applications they appear to be explaining the decision by saying "It can have little impact upon BEA," or "It won't make much difference"; if there was no policy involved would it not be rational to think that such applications would have been rejected altogether ? Well, our explanation is that the Board may be working to a policy that has not been announced. They seem to think that they must give something, even though from an economic point of view it doesn't make sense. But, if the decision can be upset at the appeal this is of little use anyhow. And, of course, even if the Commis sioner accepts the Board's findings, the Minister need not accept the decision of the Commissioner. The Minister may say he has not the same policy as that under which the Board is coming to its decisions. What, then is your general opinion of the 1960 Act? Do you think it will fulfill the hopes that were raised? As written,.no, we do not think so. It is creating a tremendous amount of uncertainty. You may say that over the years it will work out and that people will find out what criteria the Board will apply to an application and what the chances are; but you just can't work an industry like this. We are not now holding a brief for either State or private industry, but one side should be put out of its misery and someone in autho rity should say what future policy is going to be. Knowing as you do the discussions which went on between the Ministry and the independent companies, in the decade before the Act, and with the experience which we've had of the 1960 Act, would you say the independents have reason to be satisfied? By and large the Act must be a disappointment to the indepen dents. It is a story of lost opportunities, of lack of collaboration over the past two years, and a belated readiness to invest sums of money of the order really required. * * * Most of the criticisms made by Mr Curtis apply to the 1960 Act rather than the Board, but experience shows that within the limits of aviation legislation there is room for considerable adjustment. I propose later to offer the views of others as to what adjustment might be made. from Sabena (the Belgian airline maintains the DC-7Cs as part of their contract with Caledonian Airways). The second Caledonian DC-7C, G-ARYE, has been operating since it was delivered by Sabena on April 5, and the company is now negotiating for the delivery of a third aircraft, probably in the middle of next month. AIR FRANCE DC-3s MODERNIZED AS the result of recent maximum gross weight restrictions on the DC-3 imposed by France's SGAC (Secretariat General a l'Aviation Civile), Air France has decided to modify its DC-3 fleet which, numbering 31 aircraft, is the largest of this type owned by any European airline. Basis of the modification is the Maximizer kit produced by the Garret AiResearch Aviation Service Division at Los Angeles, and this, like Tranair's "Dakmaster" and PanAm's Hi-per DC-3 conversions, improve performance by reducing aero dynamic and cooling drag and recovering some of the exhaust thrust. The kit features redesigned engine cowlings and leading edges, redesigned cylinder baffles and oil cooler ducting together with a "Siamese" jet thrust exhaust system. Drag is also reduced by modifying the main undercarriage doors, fairing of the tailwheel and sealing the aileron gaps with strips. A marked improvement in single-engine climb performance has resulted which enables Air France's modified DC-3s to continue to operate at a gross weight of 28,0001b. The SGAC had ruled that French DC-3s should not operate at more than 26,0001b after January 1, 1962 unless second segment single-engine climb per formance was improved.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
