Aircraft Engines

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30631, 23 December 1964, Page 12

Aircraft Engines

Sir,—Would your correspondents, “Royce” and “Facts Only,” give us facts? Was not the late delivery of the initial Vanguards due to persistent tyre failure? Would “Royce” care to give comparative fuel consumption figures for Conway and P. and W. J.T.3-delta engines? Is not excessive fuel consumption the reason for poor sales and not financial considerations? Were not these patent rights for engines sold in the late 1940’s to the United States relative to now obsolescent Tay and Derwent engines, centrifugal as opposed to the present axial engines and never fitted to high-perform-ance aircraft? It is laughable to suggest that P. and W. or G.E., with all their pure-jet experience, are dependant on Rolls Royce, who from time to time face extinction and whose Conways and Avons can only command 15 per cent of world pure-jet engine sales.—Yours, etc.,

DOUBLE WASP. December 22, 1964.

Sir, —When someone states that a foreign-made article, be it an aircraft engine or an armchair might possibly be equal, or superior to, its British counterpart, there are immediate protests from the diehards, and if the foreign product happens to be of American origin the howls of indignation are doubled. The letters from your correspondents “Royce” and “Facts Only” are typical of this sort of thing. Unfortunately, the arguments contained therein are somewhat unconvincing, especially the rather threadbare excuse of “political and financial considerations.” Would these gentlemen seriously affirm that such considerations influenced T.E.A.L.’s choice of P. and W.powered DCBs, or Qantas’s similarly equipped Boeing fleet, or a dozen other airlines which seem to do very nicely thank you, with such inferior equipment? I shudder to think of the effect upon your correspondents if 8.0.A.C. should of necessity find itself compelled to use American engines in the Super VC10! —Yours, etc., WILLIE THE WASP. December 21, 1964.