FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1969
1969 - 0138.PDF
As part of a wind-tunnel programme involving seven complete and 14 partial models, this 4.7 per cent scale model of the DC-IO trijet is being prepared for tests in the I2ft-diameter tunnel at NASA's Ames Research Centre, Moffett Field, California. This tunnel is cap able of airspeeds from zero to Mach I and the tests will evaluate the high-lift system and control and stability characteristics AIR TRANSPORT... NOISE CERTIFICATION SET BACK? IF the United States go ahead on a unilateral basis with their proposed noise-certification rules (see last week's issue, page 80) agreement on a world wide basis through the International Civil Aviation Organisation will obviously be very much more difficult to achieve. The British and French authorities have been in complete agreement about the way in which the very real problems should be tackled and are understood to have been about to put their latest proposals to the USA when the Federal Aviation Administration's Notice of Proposed Rule-making was issued on January 3. When, last month, unilateral action by the FAA was believed to be imminent the US authorities were asked by the .British and French to delay the publication of any proposed rules until discussions could be held. The draft of the Anglo-French-American proposals, pro duced on May 1 last year and under discussion with the airline and manufacturing industries and noise-abatement interests, is believed to be generally similar, in its main provisions, to the FAA's proposals. .Noise ceilings for new aircraft on approach and take-off are, for instance, an essential part and the use of effective perceived noise decibels (EPNdBs) is common to both, but the FAA's proposals have a number of features, and forms of wording, which will be extremely difficult to interpret and put into practice, and which will leave the industry in uncertainty. For instance, who is to decide when achievement of the "floor" or "objective" of 80 EPNdBs for all new aircraft is "economically reasonable, technologically practicable and appropriate" and how can the permissible "trade-offs" toe agreed? Again, the FAA proposes (to apply the rules to all subsonic transports with high by-pass ratio engines, irrespective of the date of certification. The tripartite proposals are somewhat less specific and are concerned to ensure that all aircraft, and new, stretched ver sions, shall meet the noise requirements if certificated on or after specified dates in the future. A separate noise certificate, without which operations would not /be permitted, is also proposed, whereas the FAA intends to tie noise limitations firmly to the aircraft Type Certificate. Both exclude the SSTs, which will toe separately considered. The tripartite proposals specifically exclude all aircraft now flying, but the FAA's pro posals refer to a study of the "relevance" of the noise-restric tion concept to aircraft mow in service—with a consequent 122 FLIGHT International,23 January 1969 threat of some future requirement for the re-engining of these aircraft with quieter powerplants. Just what has driven the US authorities to go ahead with their own proposals is anybody's guess—but the reason is presumably that political or other pressures have forced the FAA to get something done quickly with their powers under Ithe law enacted last July. If a set of rules is unilaterally applied by the country with the biggest civil air transport industry it will obviously be more difficult to achieve inter national agreement on a somewhat different form of noise- certification. BEA's GERMAN "PROFIT CENTRE" THE BEA concept of "profit-centred" divisions will be taken a step further on April 1 when the airline's German division will be put on the same footing as its Scottish division, which was the first geographical profit centre. The aim of this form of structure, introduced in 1967, is to set up a group organisa tion embodying a number of constituent operating units. Each of these is to be headed by an executive in full control of his unit's activities and fully accountable for its results. One of the points of the 1967 reorganisation, said the airline's chief executive, Mr Henry Marking, was to "bring about the changed attitude of mind which should come from pushing self-accountability and responsibility down the line." Already, he added, a keener sense of responsibility for profit able operation at lower levels had been noted. The BEA internal German services, locally controlled from Berlin and with West German cabin crews, are particularly suited for segregation as a profit centre. The regional general manager, Mr Patrick Gillibrand, is based in Berlin, where new headquarters at Tempelhof were to be opened last Monday, January 20. The German network produces an annual revenue of about £8.5 million, some 7.5 per cent of the BEA total. US FARE-INCREASE PROPOSALS ALTHOUGH each US airline now filing proposals for new passenger fares with the Civil Aeronautics Board has taken a somewhat different approach in computing the new fares, the general effect in each case has been to increase the level by about five per cent. Most recent carrier to file with the CAB is United Air Lines. As the largest airline outside the USSR, United's CAB filings are always considered with great care by competitors before they act. American Airlines, for example, i have delayed their fare proposals until they could examine ^ United's along with those of TWA. Officials at American are ' also hoping that in time the CAB will give some clue as to ' whether it will accept the fare^increase proposals, and if so, < what other fare reductions may be required. J The approach taken toy United is a revolutionary one. ) Instead of the patchwork of passenger fares now existing, the airline proposes to recompute its domestic passenger fares according to a simple formula based on two kinds of charges; a fixed per-ticket charge and a variable charge based on mite age flown. If United's proposals are accepted by the CAB, coach fares would be based on a $9 (£3 15s) charge per one way ticket, plus 5.55 cents (5£d) per mile flown, computed from oity-cerrtre to city-centre. First-class fares would be com puted on a basis of $10 (£4 3s 4d) per ticket, plus 6.95 cents (7d) per mile. Under this formula, passenger fares on short- haul trips would be increased by about $4 (£1 13s 4d). On a few medium-length routes fares would be reduced slightly. Long-haul coach fares would be unchanged for .the most part. Increases in first-class fares would range from $6 (£2 10s) short-haul to S20 <£8 6s 8d) long-haul, with an increase of less than $6 for some intermediate-length trips. United told the CAB that promotional fare discounts, such as the family ' plan and certain stand-by fares, are in need of change but that these would .be considered later. ' In a statement accompanying the fare proposals, United i said that "carriers and the CAB have a rare opportunity to eliminate complexities, anomalies and inconsistencies in the * existing fare structure while at the same time relieving the * industry's revenue problems." Whether the CAB will agree , is problematical. Until now the board, or at least the Demo- j cratic majority of the five members, has insisted that every fare- , increase proposal must be accompanied by a corresponding
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
