Will non-military users benefit?

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 31981, 7 May 1969, Page 12

Will non-military users benefit?

In his paper of April, 1969, Mr Wilkes argues against the 1 1 likelihood of widespread com- 1 mercial use of Omega. Mr Wilkes says that “no: commercial aircraft are yet! using Omega, and no air! operators have been reported as interested.” However, as mentioned above, 8.0.A.C. is planning to use Omega on its African routes. The Prime Minister, in his statement of June 26, 1968, had also referred to the possibility of Air New Zealand being interested—a fact that was subsequently confirmed publicly by the airline. A paper entitled “Omega [ System Quotations” circulated by a Christchurch group of critics cites a number of pas-' sages from Kuebler’s article! in “Navigation” to suggest] that Omega is too expensive and too sophisticated for commercial users, and that it offers no attractions for them. A similar criticism of Omega is offered by the Canterbury University physicists group, also citing “Navigation." The above paper quotes : Kuebler as saying: “Perhaps ■ it should be added that there ■■ are virtually no requirements., for small boat navigation-: systems outside the presently!' used navigation aids.” Lifted!' out of context, this statement 1

looks like a criticism of Omega. But in its original context, the statement clearly includes Omega among the “presently used” systems which'are considered satisfactory for small boats. The Canterbury physicists (April 19, 1969) referred to Omega as "the system which the Prime Minister has claimed on various occasions will be of value to pleasure craft, fishing boats, coastal transport, light aircraft, etc.” Examination- of the Prime Minister’s statement does not seem to reveal any mention of coastal shipping and light ; aircraft. ' In their statement of April 2, 1969, they criticised the Prime Minister for telling the ' Federation of Labour that I “the Omega system will not be used in submarine warfare” and that “the evidence does not support the assertion that the Omega system could be used by submerged submarines.” The Prime Minister had made no such statements. What he said was (a) that Omega was not designed for use in submarine warfare —not that it would not be ‘ used in submarine warfare; . and (b) that the evidence did -not support the assertion that ;Omega could be used effectively in connection with the launching of nuclear missiles.