FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1963
1963 - 1377.PDF
FLIGHT International, 8 August 1963 199 Can Britain Learn from France ? "Flight International" photograph Mr E. C. BOWYER answers some questions by FRANK BESWICK on a highly topical subjeet THE successful Paris Show last June, the omission this year of the Farnborough Display, the narrowed 1962 gap between French and British aviation exports: all these have encour aged a closer study of the way the French organize their affairs in the aviation field. They have also given a sharper edge to the recom mendations made by the Air League in their Memorandum on French Aviation. I am convinced that we have lessons to learn from our friends across the Channel, but it would be a useless exercise to study their achievements without giving proper weight to our own. So within the context of the Anglo-French comparison I put some questions to that formidable champion of the British aircraft industry, Mr Edward Bowyer, CBE, director and chief executive of the SBAC. It is suggested [I put to him] that the French aviation industry has gone ahead not because it has more competent technical resources at Us disposal but because it has a pattern of planning, and a relationship between industry and State, which enables technicians to develop their potentiality to the full. Do you think there is anything in this? It is important [Mr Bowyer replied] to see the growth of the french aircraft industry in perspective. Over the past four years its turnover has remained at a level of between two-fifths and one- half of the value of the British aeronautical turnover. In the same period French export shipments have risen from one-quarter to two-thirds of the British figure. However, if you measure exports on the basis of orders received (which perhaps gives a better pointer to the future) the French total also has moved upwards— but in relation to the United Kingdom has fallen from par in 1960 to 40 per cent below in 1962. The achievement of either country cannot properly be attributed to any one factor. French success has been due to technical merit a "d keen Government support, particularly in the field of exports. After the event one is always tempted to attribute success entirely to planning and foresight; but a long list of cancelled French prototypes belies this conclusion. On the point of technical potentiality, I should have thought our achievements and our admitted lead in many different fields could be quoted as acceptable evidence that our technicians are not exactly frustrated. Incidentally, your question seems to ignore the existence >n this country of the Ministry of Aviation, which has no counter part in France. Can I clarify these export figures ? The Air League table showed a French total equivalent to £107.3m in 1962 against £83.2m for 1960, and comparative British figures of £114.6m for 1962 and £142.3m for I960. Do you accept these ? And how do you break down the figures for ^orders received" ? Our information, derived from published reports of the USIAS —our opposite number in France—show actual French shipments of £78.8m in 1962. This total includes the re-export of considerable British material, especially engines. It is also relevant that the British figures given by the Air League do not include the value of aviation electronic material shipped separately. As for "orders received'' it is difficult to give a breakdown, because of restrictions placed by the Ministry on publication of details of military orders. A particular point which emerges from a comparison of our struc ture with that of the French, and one which the Air League stressed, is that the French have an organization which can draw up an invest ment programme for the industry over a period of years, giving greater stability that way. Does that idea appeal to you ? The degree of stability achieved by the French system can be overrated. Neither the military Loi Programme nor the long-term plan for civil aviation has the force of a loi de finance. Each depends for implementation on an annual vote of funds by the National Assembly, which may at any time override the previsions of the planners. This is broadly similar to the position in the United Kingdom. The French plans have the weakness of an over-rigid time scale, as is evidenced by the recent French Government announcement of an intermediate plan to tide the industry over the gap between the 1960-64 Loi Programme and its successor for 1965-70. The necessity for clear forward thinking in aviation is obvious; but if we have anything to learn from France in this respect we must avoid the pitfalls which they have experienced. But when we come to meet this necessity for clear forward thinking, and the defining of estimates of long-term requirements, both for home and overseas production, what kind of organization in Britain can act as the equivalent planning body to the French Comiti Nationale pour VExpansion de P Industrie Aeronautique ? The French have no single centralized planning body for aviation. Ultimate decisions are taken by the Government, which may or may not accept the advice of several official, semi-official and private B
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
