FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1968
1968 - 0029.PDF
FLIGHT International, 4 January 1968 31 Letters Devaluation: a Bleak Outlook SIR,—If the rest of British industry receives as much benefit from devaluation and the rest of the present Government's economic policy as .the British aircraft industry and airlines will, then Britain's future is indeed bleak. Out of a 14.3 per cent devaluation, 6 per cent is immediately lost by the aircraft manufacturer because of the removal of the export rebate and the SET premium for manufacturing industry, while the cost of imported raw materials and equipment wall increase— along with fuel costs, overseas publicity costs and travelling and other expenses for salesmen. Less benefit will be gained by sales of aircraft like the Jetstream and HS.125, which are finished to customer requirements by overseas agents, while those such as the Fokker Friend- ship and Fellowship will be slightly cheaper because of their high British content. Indeed, relative HS.748 and Herald versus Friendship and YS-11 prices are probably unchanged, due to higher costs facing the former and lower costs facing the latter, which cancel out 'the slight advantages of devaluation. Many companies, notably Rolls-Royce, are working to capacity, and the cost of the work sub-contracted to overseas concerns by R-R will increase. As our £1,000 million of US aircraft will now cost £1,140 million, and the aircraft and aviation equipment most eligible for offset sales are the same as the aircraft and equipment for which there are full order books, one can only assume that devaluation must be a measure designed to push offset work towards our notably inefficient and old-fashioned shipbuilding industry (with apologies to Vospers). BO AC will have to pay £16 million more for its Boeing 747s, and also more for Boeing SSTs, while Concorde will be slightly cheaper, although our share of the development costs for Anglo-French projects will rise, and our share of production work fall, in dollar terms. However, one bright spot would be Government and BOAC intervention for an "Anglicised" 747 a la 707-420. Any home-base savings in airline costs will be offset by increased foreign-base costs, which, coupled with higher sterling air fares and the reduced spending power of the overseas travel allowance, will make 1%8 a bleak year for the airlines, and particularly for the indepen- dents which do not have BEA's and BOAC's opportunity for flying foreign visitors to this country. There will be little comfort for either BEA or BOAC, though, even if our tourist trade increases as a result of devaluation, because the militant BEA and BOAC pilots will probably press for higher subsistence. Hindhead, Surrey DAVID W. WRAGG Recorder Recovery SIR,—With reference to Geoffrey Scott's article, "Saving the Record," in your issue of December 14, I would like to correct his comments on page 1003 regarding accidents to the BAC One-Eleven during flight-testing. It is not strictly true to describe the accident to the One-Eleven G-ASJD as a loss; the Accident Investiga- tion Branch's report describes it as an emergency landing. Further, in neither of the two One-Eleven accidents mentioned was the Midas recorder ejected. In the case of the accident on October 26 the ejection system was not fitted with g-switches but, due to local damage on impact, the complete recorder housing accidentally broke away from the main structure and was later recovered almost undamaged. In the second case, although g-switches were fitted, the forces resulting in the wheels-up landing were in- sufficient to actuate the inertia-switch system. As Mr Scott mentions, there are considerable prob- lems in using ejectable recorders, particularly concerning the methods for initiating actual ejection. Temperature- sensitive switches, inertia switches and hydrostatic switches have all been fitted. It can be argued that the hydrostatic method of ejection initiation is the only one offering any guarantee of recorder survival and would obviously be of value in such cases as the recent Comet loss. An aircraft crashing on land and ejecting a recorder package at relatively high velocity is likely to cause more damage to the recorder than leaving it in the structure. The recorder may possibly be fired directly into a nearby solid object, or perhaps into the centre of a severe fire. This does not, of course, apply to a tumbling aerofoil device which, if mounted on an ex- tremity of the aircraft, is likely to fall well clear. I would certainly endorse Mr Scott's views that any revisions made to the legislation regarding accident re- corders should give more thought to the data-processing method used. Whether wire or tape is utilised as the recording medium, the end product could very easily be made into a common format suitable for processing on a central computer. Farnham, Surrey D. R. PERRYMAN E.266 = MiG-23 SIR,—If your correspondent Mr R. A. McVittie (Letters, December 14), refers to pages 386-387 of the 1967-68 edition of Jane's All the World's Aircraft he will find confirmation of the fact that the E-266, alias Foxbat, is indeed the MiG-23. Surbiton, JOHN W. R. TAYLOR, Surrey Editor, "Jane's All the World's Aircraft" Stansted—according to Mr Greenwood . . . SIR,—Mr Anthony Greenwood, Minister of Housing and Local Government, when interviewed during the ITV documentary The Stansted Affair, put forward as one reason in favour of the siting of London's third airport at Stansted the fact that "if Shoeburyness or Foulness were used, Southend Airport might have to be closed down." It seems strange that the Minister should show such concern for the future of Southend Airport when he has himself severely jeopardised that future by refusing per- mission to lengthen the only extensible runway, thus forcing Southend's main user and breadwinner to divert a substantial proportion of its 1968 flying programme to Stansted. The present main runway length at Southend is a mere 5,265ft, a length which can only discourage the increasing number of jet operators from using this air- port. By the time London's third airport becomes fully operational there will be no Southend Airport for the Minister to take into consideration—unless he at once allows the expansion that will alone enable the airport to continue as an economical concern. South Ockenden, p. J. WILSON Essex . . . and Miss Goldring SIR,—The ITV programme on The Stansted Affair on December 12 included remarks, by Miss Mary Goldring, which were grossly insulting to British air traffic con- trollers. Although I did not see the programme myself, I am informed that, out of the many factors affecting airport capacities, she put forward just three as possible reasons for the difference in movements between Heath- row and American airports such as Kennedy and O'Hare. These were (1) British controllers are lazy; (2) they are incompetent; or (3) American controllers are unsafe. She
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
