FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1964
1964 - 0766.PDF
FUGHT International, 19 March 1964 445 AIR COMMERCE... (Continued from Page 412) ARGOSY 220s FOR BEA BEA are to replace their fleet of three Argosy 100s with five of the latest Argosy 220s. This is the version powered by four Rolls- -Royce Dart 526Hs and with a take-off weight up from 88,OOOlb to 93,0001b and maximum payload-range performance raised from 400 statute miles with 25,3001b to a claimed 500 statute miles with 31,0001b. Cruising speed of the Argosy 220 is also a little higher— 285 m.p.h. compared with 276 m.p.h. Negotiations are proceeding between BEA and Hawker Siddeley for the manufacturer's repurchase of the Argosy 100s. A particularly important feature of the Argosy 220 is the wider front and rear loading doors, permitting it to accommodate the 108in pallets now standardized on Boeing 7O7-32OCs, DC-8Fs and the VC10. The first Argosy 220 made its initial flight at Hawker Siddeley's Avro Whitworth Division at Baginton on March 11 and deliveries to BEA will start in the autumn. To demonstrate pilot visibility and fight deck layout of their proposed supersonic transport Boeing have constructed this full-scale mock-up. The painted backdrop depicts the view a pilot would have of Seattle- Tacoma International airport during approach. The mock-up is in the approach attitude THE BRITISH EAGLE APPEAL DECISION WHILST British Eagle has welcomed being awarded increased frequency licences on its two domestic trunk routes from London to Scotland, it has said: "The decision does not entirely fulfil our requirements, which are to satisfy the travelling public's needs on all the domestic trunk routes which we operate." Although the reaction is cool, the awards do mean that from April 1 British Eagle can just offer a reasonable daily commuter service between London and Edinburgh and Glasgow. The airline's similar appeals in respect of routes to Belfast and Dublin, and for a licence to operate | on the London - Manchester route, have again been refused. The awards follow the recommendations of Sir Arthur Hutchinson—the commissioner appointed to hear British Eagle's appeal (Flight International, December 26, 1963, and January 2, 1964) against the ATLB's across-the-board refusal to grant any of the airline's second round of domestic service applications (Flight International, October 17 and 24, 1963). In presenting his reasons for recommending the frequency increases, Sir Arthur is in considerable disagreement with many reasons advanced by the Board for their opposite conclusions. In the commissioner's opinion, the ATLB had gone against the weight of evidence and argument that had been put before it in favour of the increases, and had attached undue weight to BEA's arguments claiming that traffic was not coming up to the estimates given at previous hearings and that the corporation's position had deteriorated as a result. Of the evidence on which the Board based its conclusions on the account to be taken of the financial situation of BEA's domestic trunk route services (which it had been stated would be £8.7m in the red by March 31, 1964), Sir Arthur says there was nothing in the evidence presented that could justify the Board's conclusion that the routes are unlikely to be profitable "for some time." He adds: "Whether or not there was proper admissible evidence to support any forecast of future profitability, I think that the Board have attached undue importance to the point." When British Eagle presented its case to the ATLB in August, one of the main arguments was that changed circumstances made the licences essential if the airline was economically to operate a pattern of domestic trunk route services. The Board gave no credit to this argument. In his findings, Sir Arthur notes that in another part of their report the Board had accepted the contention that reasoning from an earlier hearing must be considered in the light of changing circumstances, and therefore he does not think the Board was consistent to discard British Eagle's viability arguments after earlier accepting them in principle. Although at the hearing and the appeal British Eagle had not argued their case on the grounds that BEA's services were inade- quate, they presented a number of witnesses who spoke in favour of another operator on the route. Mr Gotch, an American air transport consultant, presented evidence from experience in his country which showed big increases in traffic growth on routes where a second operator—carrying at least 10 per cent of the traffic —was introduced. Sir Arthur concludes that in his opinion there was no method by which the Board could decide with mathe- matical precision on the question of adequacy, but that on the evidence before them they were correct in believing that BEA's services were reasonably adequate—an opinion which Sir Arthur does not think was conclusive against British Eagle's case. Regarding the actual increases to be allowed, Sir Arthur thinks it is difficult to argue for or against any figure. It will be recalled from the original 1961 hearing that the existing licensed frequencies are what British Eagle said it would operate when services began. In choosing to allow an increase from seven to ten nights per week between London and Edinburgh and from seven to 12 per week to Glasgow, Sir Arthur says this will enable the airline to mount two return nights per day on five days per week in the case of Edinburgh and six days per week in the case of Glasgow. In upholding the Board's decision to refuse a frequency increase on the London - Belfast route, the appeal commissioner notes that British Eagle's case was the weaker because the airline did not appeal against the original decision in 1961 and that present traffic predictions are less hopeful than for the Scottish routes. In spite of the fact that the estimates of traffic on the London - Manchester route had gone up at successive hearings, Sir Arthur upholds the ATLB refusal to grant British Eagle a licence to operate on the route at all. In the light of consistently high load factors and the heavy advance bookings on the route by passengers con- necting with flights beyond London, it is even more surprising that this second most busy domestic route is still preserved as a BEA monopoly. Sir Arthur upholds the Board's decision to refuse a frequency increase on the London to Dublin licence which is still the subject of bilateral negotiations. The most notable thing to come out of this appeal decision is the number of occasions on which the commissioner's conclusions are diametrically opposed to those of the Board while theoretically based on the same evidence—an extraordinary state of affairs. Lead- ing air transport countries regulate their industry on the basis of a scientific evaluation of such questions as viability and adequacy. The long-drawn-out saga of British Eagle's domestic service applica- tions points to the need for an urgent overhaul of the United Kingdom's regulatory machinery, which should be operated by the ATLB or by Ministry commissioners, but not by both.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
