Jet - When Britain Ruled the Skies
Discussion
The rest of the world was never ever going to let Britain remain the leader in aerospace technology. Not with a cold war going on and a whole bunch of ex-war industries winding down and looking for things to do. The US and USSR had the demographic firepower to outgun a heavily indebted Britain at this stage of history and industrial development.
An excellent and honest programme. Read James Hamilton-Patterson's book "Empire of the Skies" for an even better review of the 1950s and 60s.
I attended a talk he gave last week in Farnborough and it was very interesting.
There are many, many reasons why Britain's role in aeropsace changed - but Hamilton-Patterson is reluctant to call it a "decline". he prefers to use the word "changed".
I attended a talk he gave last week in Farnborough and it was very interesting.
There are many, many reasons why Britain's role in aeropsace changed - but Hamilton-Patterson is reluctant to call it a "decline". he prefers to use the word "changed".
williamp said:
was the way BOAC favoured Boeing over "our" aircraft, designed for their needs ever fully understood? Was it bribary and corruption, or something less sinister
I think it was genuine economics. Even though they were partly state owned their constitution stated that they did need to be run in as commercial a way as feasible. BOAC was trying to operate in as efficient a way as possible, as you would expect from a commercial entity. However, being partly government owned, they were often placed under inordinate pressure to "Buy British". With that in mind, the government would request that BOAC should set out requirements for aircraft it needed for specific routes and the UK industry would design an aircraft to suit those routes. Often, BOAC's enthusiasm for such practices was lukewarm, knowing full well that an American design (often Boeing) was coming along that would be perfectly adequate for their needs.
So, with an indifferent attitude to the British design already entrenched, BOAC would then go about fiddling with the requirement to ensure it was never going to meet their needs - which was extremely frustrating for the UK manufacturer.
It was a right bugger's muuddle.
It seemed to be several factors. Of our ability to design and build new technology, no question.
Unfortunately the Comet's potential was destroyed by an unforeseen metal fatigue issue, the Britannia arrived five years late due to Air Ministry testing that I think was as a result of Comet disasters, and even when a large American order was possible, it couldn't be built in sufficient numbers. The US aircraft industry may have been behind, but when it got going it was always going to win (cf. the Pacific war).
The British tendency to build speculatively in sheds worked in the 30s and even the 40s, but not in the 50s.
Unfortunately the Comet's potential was destroyed by an unforeseen metal fatigue issue, the Britannia arrived five years late due to Air Ministry testing that I think was as a result of Comet disasters, and even when a large American order was possible, it couldn't be built in sufficient numbers. The US aircraft industry may have been behind, but when it got going it was always going to win (cf. the Pacific war).
The British tendency to build speculatively in sheds worked in the 30s and even the 40s, but not in the 50s.
Also, the UK airliner manufacturers were unused to building large quantities of aircraft. When Vickers were building the Viscount they had to set up two production lines - one at Weybridge and one at Hurn. Bristol were building Britannias at Bristol and in Belfast (Short Brothers under licence).
They also knew next to nothing about customer research and marketing - as they had never really had to do it.
They also knew next to nothing about customer research and marketing - as they had never really had to do it.
Eric Mc said:
Also, the UK airliner manufacturers were unused to building large quantities of aircraft. When Vickers were building the Viscount they had to set up two production lines - one at Weybridge and one at Hurn. Bristol were building Britannias at Bristol and in Belfast
Presumably all the bomber production lines from WW2 had been scrapped, while the US kept theirs?The aircraft production lines set up during the war under the Shadow Factory scheme were government owned and used by the aircraft manufacturers on a temporary basis i.e. for the duration. After the war, most of them were transformed into civilian consumer goods production lines - mostly cars.
The American production lines were mainly owned and run by private companies under government contracts. Some eventually went over to civil use. Ford's Willow's Run factory built thousands of Liberators but by the 1970s was producing cars. Boeing's Wichita plant still makes aeroplanes.
The American production lines were mainly owned and run by private companies under government contracts. Some eventually went over to civil use. Ford's Willow's Run factory built thousands of Liberators but by the 1970s was producing cars. Boeing's Wichita plant still makes aeroplanes.
aeropilot said:
Timmy40 said:
We even sold some jet engines to the Russians who reverse engineered them ( then used them on us in Korea ) Ooops.
I think we actually just gave them to them as opposed to selling.....jmorgan said:
Ayahuasca said:
Don't forget we gave the technology to the Americans too.
I may be wrong here but I thought the deal was "show me yours and I will show you mine", they did not?Eric Mc said:
I think it was genuine economics. Even though they were partly state owned their constitution stated that they did need to be run in as commercial a way as feasible. BOAC was trying to operate in as efficient a way as possible, as you would expect from a commercial entity.
However, being partly government owned, they were often placed under inordinate pressure to "Buy British". With that in mind, the government would request that BOAC should set out requirements for aircraft it needed for specific routes and the UK industry would design an aircraft to suit those routes. Often, BOAC's enthusiasm for such practices was lukewarm, knowing full well that an American design (often Boeing) was coming along that would be perfectly adequate for their needs.
So, with an indifferent attitude to the British design already entrenched, BOAC would then go about fiddling with the requirement to ensure it was never going to meet their needs - which was extremely frustrating for the UK manufacturer.
It was a right bugger's muuddle.
BOAC and BEA were certainly in an impossible position, and I can understand why it would have been easier for them if there had been no UK manufacturing industry, but their attempts to shaft the UK industry were outrageous.However, being partly government owned, they were often placed under inordinate pressure to "Buy British". With that in mind, the government would request that BOAC should set out requirements for aircraft it needed for specific routes and the UK industry would design an aircraft to suit those routes. Often, BOAC's enthusiasm for such practices was lukewarm, knowing full well that an American design (often Boeing) was coming along that would be perfectly adequate for their needs.
So, with an indifferent attitude to the British design already entrenched, BOAC would then go about fiddling with the requirement to ensure it was never going to meet their needs - which was extremely frustrating for the UK manufacturer.
It was a right bugger's muuddle.
Trident: A worldwide market existed for a three engine airliner of that size, so much so that Boeing started working on an exact equivalent in the form of the 727. Then BEA decided that it was too big for them, after furious arguments De Havilland changed the design to suit BEA rather than the rest of the world so Boeing cleaned up. Hardly anyone except BEA bought Tridents, then even BEA announced they wanted 727s, after all the Tridents were too small. A larger Trident was then bodged up as the Trident 3. Final sales. Trident - 117; Boeing 727 - 1,832.
VC10: BOAC insisted on an unusually powerful airliner to get out of short runways in hot African countries, but the time it was in service the relevant countries had extended their runways. BOAC complained bitterly about running costs per seat without mentioning that a) this was because of their insistence on a design that could use short runways and b) passengers liked the VC10 so much there were fewer empty seats so per passenger costs were fine.
Britannia: While awaiting delivery BOAC didn't follow the usual airline procedure of telling the world how great their new aircraft were going to be, they told everyone it was rubbish and needed modifying. The extra work meant it wasn't available until it was almost obsolete.
V1000 aka VC7: A Vickers 4 engine airliner powered by RR Conway turbofans which would have competed head on with the 707 and DC8. It's been argued that it was the existence of the V1000 project that made Boeing change the 707 seating from 5 abreast to 6 in order to compete. But it needed BOAC orders and BOAC announced that they had no need for new jets and could manage perfectly well with Britannias and Comets for years to come. They also said that Conway engines were rubbish. The V1000 was cancelled and the partially completed prototype plus all the tooling broken up. Six months later BOAC announced they needed Boeing 707s because Britannias and Comets were obsolete and no British competitor was available. When they bought the 707s they put Conway turbofans on them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickers_V-1000
I'll stop now because I'm getting depressed.
Dr Jekyll said:
V1000 aka VC7: A Vickers 4 engine airliner powered by RR Conway turbofans which would have competed head on with the 707 and DC8. It's been argued that it was the existence of the V1000 project that made Boeing change the 707 seating from 5 abreast to 6 in order to compete. But it needed BOAC orders and BOAC announced that they had no need for new jets and could manage perfectly well with Britannias and Comets for years to come. They also said that Conway engines were rubbish. The V1000 was cancelled and the partially completed prototype plus all the tooling broken up. Six months later BOAC announced they needed Boeing 707s because Britannias and Comets were obsolete and no British competitor was available. When they bought the 707s they put Conway turbofans on them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickers_V-1000
I'll stop now because I'm getting depressed.
That V1000 tale is very sad indeed. It is truly interesting to wonder what might have happened if the project had gone ahead and received a few hundred orders instead of the 707.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickers_V-1000
I'll stop now because I'm getting depressed.
Eric Mc said:
aeropilot said:
Timmy40 said:
We even sold some jet engines to the Russians who reverse engineered them ( then used them on us in Korea ) Ooops.
I think we actually just gave them to them as opposed to selling.....It's said that when the proposal to buy a foreign engine was put to Stalin (as they couldn't perfect the captured German axial-flow technology) legend has it that his reply was "What fool will sell us his secrets?"
Cue the British Labour government and its pro-Soviet Minister of Trade, Sir Stafford Cripps
aeropilot said:
Eric Mc said:
aeropilot said:
Timmy40 said:
We even sold some jet engines to the Russians who reverse engineered them ( then used them on us in Korea ) Ooops.
I think we actually just gave them to them as opposed to selling.....It's said that when the proposal to buy a foreign engine was put to Stalin (as they couldn't perfect the captured German axial-flow technology) legend has it that his reply was "What fool will sell us his secrets?"
Cue the British Labour government and its pro-Soviet Minister of Trade, Sir Stafford Cripps
I don't think the Russians quite believed it. I'm not sure the Americans were too pleased about it either. The MiG 15 gave them a lot of trouble in Korea.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan-Gurevich_MiG-...
Edited by Timmy40 on Friday 22 May 14:34
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff