FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1963
1963 - 0692.PDF
664 FLIGHT International, 9 May 1963 AIR COMMERCE... A model showing how Liverpool airport will look when the 7,000ft runway is com pleted in autumn 1965. The existing run ways and terminal areas are to the west of the new runway LIVERPOOL STEPS OUT IN the mid-1930s the far-sighted Liverpool city councillors decided to encourage the growth of industry on Merseyside in order to balance the almost complete specialization in shipping, which they felt could be disastrous to the city in the event of any recession or change of pattern in the nation's trade. For centuries Merseyside has been linked with shipping; today the port handles over 20,000 vessels a year and the facilities are now being expanded and modern ized at a cost of £70m. Yet even this substantial industry has been overshadowed in importance by the spectacular growth, which is still continuing, of general manufacturing industries within a 25-mile radius of Liverpool. A common feature of the majority of these undertakings is the high value and advanced technical nature of the products—motor cars, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, electronics, foodstuffs, are a few important examples; the significance of this fact is that the cost to the consumer of most of these items benefits by air-freight distribution, and the large number of well-paid management staff means that there is a need for fast and frequent transport services to similar industrial areas and the markets as well as to social and holiday centres. No one doubts that Lancashire and the North-West Midlands— and Merseyside in particular—need fast, frequent and direct air services to London, most European capitals and industrial areas, and many points around the world, especially North America. But, with the existence of Manchester Airport and its fine new terminal building and 7,500ft runway already operating with precision approach aids, the big question is: Will these two sectors of the Lancashire and North Midlands industrial area develop sufficiently to support their nearest airport, or will one of the airports starve? Since the Liverpool City Council has decided to spend £2m over the next two years, with financial assistance from the Ministry of Aviation, in building a 7,000ft runway equipped with ILS and precision approach radar, time will partially answer the big question. But one possibility is still open to debate: could Liverpool, because of its better location for building a 10,000ft runway, become the major north of England long-haul airport? It has been estimated that with a valley at one end and a housing estate at the other, it would cost £3.5m to extend Manchester's runway to 10,000ft—or more than the entire cost of building a similar runway at Liverpool. Other advantages claimed for Liverpool are the virtual absence of any noise problem and a better weather record. At a symposium on civil aviation on May 3 in the Liverpool Town Hall the airport committee told delegates from 30 airlines, travel and trade agents, technical agencies and the Ministry of Aviation. about the long-term plans for the City of Liverpool, the economic factors of Merseyside and the future plans for the airport. Questions from the delegates followed. Alderman S. Minion, chairman of the airport committee, out lined the objects of the symposium, which were to encourage airlines to consider Liverpool with a view to introducing new services and for the council to get some idea of airline opinion to help them match the new developments to the operators' requirements. Alderman H. MacDonald Steward, MP, chairman of the redevelop ment and planning committee, described the exciting long-term £151m scheme for developing over 100 acres in the middle of the city. Dr R. Smith, an economics professor from the University of Liverpool, described the Merseyside industrial boom, naming more than 15 companies and giving a brief account of their size and activity as well as their communications problems. In the two years since the Liverpool Corporation resumed management after the airport's 16 years under State control, more than £400,000 has been spent on improving the amenities of the terminal building and runways. Wg Cdr H. W. G. Andrews, the airport director, described this work in detail and emphasized the Corporation's willingness to help operators to get established at Liverpool, mentioning traffic surveys, ATLB representation, economic rates for office and hangarage accommodation, and air craft and traffic handling. AMERICA'S REAPPRAISAL CAREFUL reading-between-the-lines of the recent US " Statement on International Air Transport Policy," briefly summarized last week, is necessary, since it is a much emasculated version of the 600-page original submitted to the White House on September 10 last year (issue of February 14, page 220). It is what the Ameri cans would call a "sanitized" version, for public consumption. In contrast with their usually extravagant frankness about everything, the Americans are not proposing to disclose in full the policy that will shape the future of their international air transport industry and all that goes with it. The brief 15-page condensation was issued after the original had been very thoroughly discussed by the CAB, FAA, State Depart ment and the White House. No positive recommendations were made, it is understood, in the original. It was a masterly survey, rather than a master plan, by a study group, appointed by the President, including two eminent US economists. The alternatives, it is believed, were clearly stated in the original and it is presumably of the choices made that this summary is now issued. Quite the most startling statement comes at the end of a discussion on foreign carrier pooling. This, of course, is a market-sharing restrictive practice which so far as Americans are concerned is not only abhorrent but illegal; yet the statement says: "US carriers will be permitted to participate in [pools] only when the national interest requires." This one sentence is a major reversal of US policy, signifying changes in US law and indicative of an entirely new attitude towards foreign competition. A little earlier in the summary, however, is a statement of policy about restrictive practices among foreigners which makes the foregoing something of a non sequitur. The industry must, says the summary, be "as free from restrictions as possible, whether these be imposed by governments or through inter-carrier arrange ments. Any policy of arbitrarily restricting capacity, dividing markets by carrier agreements, encouraging high rates or curtailing services for which a demand exists, would be harmful to our national interests. Such a policy would not be in accord with our basic attitudes towards private enterprise . . ." The concept of more than one US flag carrier, the report says, is "sound and deserves to be reaffirmed"; and evidently with PanAm's efforts to become the US chosen instrument in mind it adds: "Government flexibility in implementing international, political and aviation policies would be reduced if the interest of any single carrier became, in the long run, too dominant a factor in US aviation policy." So much for the PanAm-TWA merger, "he report further adds that "achievement of the traditional poicy
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
