Jet - When Britain Ruled the Skies

Jet - When Britain Ruled the Skies

Author
Discussion

Eric Mc

121,785 posts

264 months

Friday 22nd May 2015
quotequote all
Dr Jekyll said:
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.

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.

The tail of the Trident is the saddest of all.

aeropilot

34,302 posts

226 months

Friday 22nd May 2015
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Dr Jekyll said:
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.

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.

The tail of the Trident is the saddest of all.
Didn't know about the Trident debacle....... I did know about the VC10 saga and the VC7 that wasn't, as I'd had an uncle that worked for BOAC engineering at Heathrow back in the 60's.

The old Trident was a noisy beast. Makes me laugh wben I hear people complaining about noise around Heathrow these days. It's almost morgue-like these days with all the modern high bypass fan engined stuff that is almost at 500ft by the time they've crossed the airport threahhold! Blimey, they should have been living under the flight path back in the 60's & 70's as I was, with screaming (and smokey) Tridents, VC10's & Caravelles etc. clawing their way into the sky over the house at barely much above tree top height smile

Simpo Two

85,150 posts

264 months

Friday 22nd May 2015
quotequote all
I wonder how these catastrophes and tales of politico-corporate backstabbing would have been in the age of social media. Would hypocritical assholes with hidden agendas been exposed in time to rectify the damage, or would the sagas have got even more complex and Machiavellian?

Eric Mc

121,785 posts

264 months

Saturday 23rd May 2015
quotequote all
There were leaks and reports back in those days too. Test Pilot Bill Waterton was summarily fired by Glosters for being honest about their products - and then fired from hios position as aviation editor of the Daily Express for being too outspoken about the industry in general.

NordicCrankShaft

1,721 posts

114 months

Saturday 23rd May 2015
quotequote all
Thanks for this, what a fantastic series!

I've only managed episode one so far and it makes you realise that the biggest casualty in all of this is the air defence of this once mighty country. If anything the threat these day's I think is far greater than that of 40 years ago, Russia, Korea, the Middle East and then countries like Iran and the constant motormouth of Argentina.

The v bombers were fantastic feats of engineering, for me the Vulcan is just as iconic as the Spitfire and represents everything that this country was good at.

Simpo Two

85,150 posts

264 months

Saturday 23rd May 2015
quotequote all
NordicCrankShaft said:
If anything the threat these day's I think is far greater than that of 40 years ago, Russia, Korea, the Middle East and then countries like Iran and the constant motormouth of Argentina.
The threats are more diverse and difficult to deal with, but Iran and Argentina aren't going to turn up at Dover with tanks and landing craft, and Korea doesn't have the capability to nuke London. The main threat from these types is some grubby fifth columnist setting off a bomb somewhere.

Eric Mc

121,785 posts

264 months

Saturday 23rd May 2015
quotequote all
And the British aerospace industry is alive and well and still a major revenue earner for the country. In fact, you could argue that in the "golden era" it was a drain on the British economy rather than a contributor.

Aerospace has changed EVERYWHERE since the 1950s and 60s and these changes have resulted in fewer independent airframe manufacturers. Just look at the situation in the US.

aeropilot

34,302 posts

226 months

Saturday 23rd May 2015
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
I wonder how these catastrophes and tales of politico-corporate backstabbing would have been in the age of social media. Would hypocritical assholes with hidden agendas been exposed in time to rectify the damage, or would the sagas have got even more complex and Machiavellian?
Judging by the F-35 debacle I'd say such catastrophes are alive and well in the modern world of social media.

Eric Mc

121,785 posts

264 months

Sunday 24th May 2015
quotequote all
Procrastination, indecision and plain idiocy are human attributes totally independent of any era.

Simpo Two

85,150 posts

264 months

Sunday 24th May 2015
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Procrastination, indecision and plain idiocy are human attributes totally independent of any era.
They are, but with things like Twitter a story can be around the world in minutes rather than days/weeks (and also allow the chattering classes to take part).

Eric Mc

121,785 posts

264 months

Sunday 24th May 2015
quotequote all
Chatter away. I don't think it makes a HUGE amount of difference. If anything, it might push the decision makers into making even worse decisions.

V8 Fettler

7,019 posts

131 months

Sunday 24th May 2015
quotequote all
British industry was generally very tired after WW2, the UK was bankrupt. US industry was booming at the end of WW2. The US aerospace industry had perfected mass production during WW2, the UK aerospace industry was still a essentially a cottage industry.

Representatives of Boeing were supposed to have visited de Havilland post-war and made comments along the lines of "How do they manage to make aircraft here?"

And yet British engineering ingenuity was still of the very highest calibre.

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

260 months

Sunday 24th May 2015
quotequote all
V8 Fettler said:
........the UK aerospace industry was still a essentially a cottage industry.

Representatives of Boeing were supposed to have visited de Havilland post-war and made comments along the lines of "How do they manage to make aircraft here?"

And yet British engineering ingenuity was still of the very highest calibre.
I think the two went together. Designing an innovative and ingenious aircraft often means that people who didn't previously work together have to learn to collaborate, which is a lot easier in a shed where everyone shares the same teapot. Trying to mass produce in a shed is tricky though.

V41LEY

2,889 posts

237 months

Sunday 24th May 2015
quotequote all
I watched this series a few years back. Great TV albeit a little depressing. As I recall from the programme, being the most innovative and ground breaking in terms of design and materials count for nothing if you don't have a government prepared to back the projects and a home market to sell your products into. Time and again, BOAC rubbished the stuff coming out of our factories and governments lost their nerve using public money to support development. The other issue was that with a booming market in airline travel etc there was no way UK manufacturers could satisfy the market in the timescales required hence the success of Boeing in capturing such large orders.

Eric Mc

121,785 posts

264 months

Monday 25th May 2015
quotequote all
And it wasn't just Boeing back then. In the 1930s, 40s and 50, America also had other major airliner manufacturers in the form of Lockheed, Douglas, Convair and Martin. In fact, until the advent of the 707, Boeing was the least successful of the American manufacturers when it came to airliner building.

As well as Boeing Stratocruisers, BOAC also flew Constellations, Argonauts (Canadian DC-4s with Merlins) and DC-7s.

V41LEY

2,889 posts

237 months

Monday 25th May 2015
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
And it wasn't just Boeing back then. In the 1930s, 40s and 50, America also had other major airliner manufacturers in the form of Lockheed, Douglas, Convair and Martin. In fact, until the advent of the 707, Boeing was the least successful of the American manufacturers when it came to airliner building.

As well as Boeing Stratocruisers, BOAC also flew Constellations, Argonauts (Canadian DC-4s with Merlins) and DC-7s.
So true. Another case of - 'What might of been !'.
Always wonder if there could ever be a museum of fully flying commercial aircraft with some of some of the old classics - Comet, 707, Trident, VC-10 to name few etc. Would be pretty amazing if only a pipe dream !!

Simpo Two

85,150 posts

264 months

Monday 25th May 2015
quotequote all
V41LEY said:
Always wonder if there could ever be a museum of fully flying commercial aircraft with some of some of the old classics - Comet, 707, Trident, VC-10 to name few etc.
Unfortunately it wouldn't be commercial!

Eric Mc

121,785 posts

264 months

Monday 25th May 2015
quotequote all
V41LEY said:
Eric Mc said:
And it wasn't just Boeing back then. In the 1930s, 40s and 50, America also had other major airliner manufacturers in the form of Lockheed, Douglas, Convair and Martin. In fact, until the advent of the 707, Boeing was the least successful of the American manufacturers when it came to airliner building.

As well as Boeing Stratocruisers, BOAC also flew Constellations, Argonauts (Canadian DC-4s with Merlins) and DC-7s.
So true. Another case of - 'What might of been !'.
Always wonder if there could ever be a museum of fully flying commercial aircraft with some of some of the old classics - Comet, 707, Trident, VC-10 to name few etc. Would be pretty amazing if only a pipe dream !!
We obviously bemoan the retrenchment of British aviation in regards to the number and variety of airframe manufacturers.

But this change is not unique to the UK. If you go back to 1945 and list all the American manufacturers and look at how many there are now you can see a similar pattern.

1945

Boeing
Douglas
McDonnell
Grumman
Consolidated
Republic
Martin
Curtiss
North American
Lockheed
Beechcraft
Piper
Bell
Vultee
Chance-Vought
Fairchild
Cessna
Taylorcraft
Northrop
General Motors (mostly Grumman aircraft)
Ford (mostly B-24s)

Today

Boeing
Lockheed-Martin
Northrop-Grumman
Beech and Bell( both part of the Textron Group)
General Dynamics
Cessna
Piper