Reversal Of Policy Denied By N.A.C.

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31154, 2 September 1966, Page 16

Reversal Of Policy Denied By N.A.C.

N.A.C. is well aware that aircraft manufacturers are apt to put the most optimistic performances of an aircraft before a prospective customer and due allowance has been made for this in assessing competitive aircraft, according to the general manager of the corporation (Mr D. A Patterson). Mr Patterson was replying to an Auckland correspondent, Mr N. C. Wiseley, who

suggested that N.A.C. had completely changed its policy since last year. Mr Wiseley wrote: — “It would appear that statements by the National Airways Corporation relative to the performance of the Boeing 737 represent a complete change of policy since last year. I recall that before the Air Services Licensing Authority, NA.C. disputed performance figures that S.P.A.-

N.Z. had obtained from the manufacturers and operators of the Hawker Siddeley 748 turbo-prop aircraft. “Manufacturers’ estimates, they claimed, were distorted in order to effect the sale, while the costs of overseas operators did not necessarily apply in New Zealand. Now 12 months later, N.A.C. are prepared to commit themselves to an aircraft that has not, as yet, left the drawing-board. “It makes one wonder as to the validity of many of the other antiS.P.A.N.Z. arguments advanced by the corporation before the Air Services Licensing Authority.” “Mr Wiseley misrepresents the situation in that N.A.C. did not question the operational characteristics of the 748 but did raise queries as to the accuracy of S.P.A.N.Z. economic predictions of this aircraft in relation to the figures actually achieved by other operators," Mr Patterson says.

“That these queries were sustained by the Air Services Licensing Authority after hearing all available evidence on the subject should be sufficient indication of their validity. “N.A.C. Is well aware that aircraft manufacturers are apt to put the most optimistic performance and economic figures before prospective customers whether the aircraft has flown or not, and due allowance has been made for this fact in assessing competitive' aircraft. “That the 737 has not flown is of no particular significance under circumstances now prevailing. The aircraft is a direct derivative of the well proven 707 and 727 using the same proven fuselage construction, the same proven systems and the JTBD engine with over 3 million flying hours behind it. “The aircraft are also produced by a manufacturer who has the most experience of any in the world of commercial jet construction and by the time N.A.C. plan to take delivery almost 100 will be in airline service with major airlines. “It is also a fact that the 1-11 and the DC9, both from proven manufacturers, have been ordered off the drawing board. In the case of the 737 the guarantees given by the Boeing Company amply protect the Corporation’s interests in the remote event of the aircraft failing to meet its specified performance. “This is a vastly different set of circumstances to those

which prevailed in the Her-ald-Fokker controversy. In that case neither company had built a successful civil aircraft since before the war and in both cases the design was entirely new and untried. “The total lack of orders for the Herald demonstrated the lack of appeal this aircraft had for airline operators and the fact that only three were sold supports N.A.C.’s policy at that time. “Because a policy is formulated to conform with a particular set of circumstances it does not necessarily follow that the same policies should apply some eight years later to an entirely different situation.”