TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 25101, 17 December 1942, Page 4

TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT

POST-WAR DEVELOPMENTS GREATER PRODUCTION URGED (N.Z.P.A. Special Correspondent) (Rec. 9 p.m.) LONDON, Dec. 15. In Britain increasing interest is being taken in the role of transport aircraft and their future. Bigger and bigger aircraft are carrying tremendous loads, proving invaluable for war, and the commercial possibilities of these giants after the war arc self-evident. Many people in Britain have suddenly become aware that, compared with America and Germany, this countv- lacks both a supply of these planes and the factories for manufacturing them. The Germans have proved time and time again during the course of the war the value of transport aircraft, the latest instance of this being the reinforcements they are sending to the troops at Stalingrad and to their forces in Tunisia. America has also advanced further than Britain in this department of air warfare, and, in fact, the parachute units recently sent to North Africa ware carried in American aircraft. One reason advanced for the British failure to/have air transports is that she had to concentrate on building bombers and fighters after the fall of France. Germany had at least 3000 transports on the outbreak of the war, showing that she was ahead of British pre-war thought in this regard. Developments in America

While Britain now has large reserves of bombers and fighters, she has not yet turned serious attention to producing transport aircraft. That America is making further developments in bigger aircraft is indicated by the comments of Lieutenant-general H. A Arnold, chief of the United Slates Army Air Force, who stated that the present Flying Fortresses and Liberator bombers were “ the last of the small bombers,” and that “entirely new battle-wagons ” were on ihe way It was recently stated that America was building 110-ton aircraft and would later experiment with 220tonners Since the Americans arrived in Britain they have been giving attention to a planned policy of bomber development, and the new bombers which will replace the Fortresses and Liberators are designed to fly faster, farther, and higher, and to carry more bombs and a more powerful armament. , Commenting on the inadequacy oi transport planes and their future, Mr Colin Bednall. the Daily Mail’s aeronautical correspondent, declared that the whole future of the British Commonwealth and the right to survive after the war depend on victory in the race for the world’s sky routes, “ but, he adds, “the British are losing this air war." , (iml , . Mr Bednall continued: “The whole Empire, the sponsor of the greates-. legion of fighting air forces throughout the world, now possesses but one international merchant airline—tne semi -governmental British Overseas Airways Corporation. It is a tiny fleet and is a motley makeshift of a score of different types, shapes and sizes of aeroplanes, mostly offcasts from elsewhere. I doubt if we could muster sufficient British-built air transports to carry the British delegations to a peace conference.” Britain Alive to Possibilities The fact that Britain is well alive to the possibilities of air transportation, however, is proved by the formation of air divisions which, as already reported, are designed to launch an army into battle with all its equipment. It is realised that Britain paid heavily in Libya by lacking air transports, and Major-general F. A. M. Browning recently told war correspondents that it was likely that General Ritchie would never have needed to retreat to El Alamem if transports had been available to rush up reinforcements. It is hoped that definite steps will be taken to include more transport planes in Britain's aircraft production campaign. It is certainly an aspect of the air in which the dominions are directly interested, if only from the point of view of post-war commercial possibilities.