DEBATED TUDOR

Wanganui Chronicle, 29 September 1947, Page 5

DEBATED TUDOR

TWO-YEAR ARGUMENT 8.0.A.C. REQUIREMENTS

(N.Z. P. A.—Special—Copyright.) London, Sept. 23. The long tussle over the production of the Tudor I airliner, which for two years has been the subject of criticism, delays, slangings, denials, counter-denials, and costly chaos, has been brought to a head by the allegation made by Sir Roy Dobson, managing director of A. V. Roe and Companly (the builders), that a “certain clement’ in 8.0.A.C. prefers American aircraft to British. 8.0.A.C. is now carefully studying his remarks. Il commented that mere will be widespread public support for Sir Roy’s suggestion that if 8.0.A.C. do not want the Tudor they should say so immediately, and .that there should be a searching examination. The British public have been somewhat mystified at the wrangling over the Tudor, since they have been accustomed to learning during the war that Britain produced the best aircraft in the world. HISTORY OF THE TROUBLE. It is pointed out by A V. Roe and Company in a statement that the Tudor 1 and the Tudor II (the latter intended for the British-Australian service) were planned in 1943, and that the company was directed by the Ministry of Supply, to submit its proposals to 8.0.A.C. Several alterations were asked for by 8.0.A.C., but these were met, and the jrototype flew in June, 1945. Complications occurred after the announcement of airworthiness standards by the first International Conference at Chicago. Changes in design had to be made to meet these new requirements. Yet, after overcoming many difficulties, the company found that the expected trial runs over the routes on which the Tudor I was intended to operate, including the north Atlantic, were not made. Instead a Tudor was selected at random and taken by 8.0.A.C. to Nairobi in December, 1946. “It therefore seemecj to indicate," says the statement, “that even at that stage 8.0.A.C. had secretly decided they were not going to operate the Tudors over the North Atlantic. However, as the result of the trials, a critical report was issued by 8.0.A.C. in February. 1947, alleging three major defects, which were used as arguments for declaring the aircraft unsuitable for on any of their routes." W ANTED FOR SOUTH AMERICA.

Other points made by the company include a statement* that while 8.0.A.C. could not make up its mind about the Tudor, British South American Airways were pressing for the Tudor I to be converted to the Tudor IV specifications, with the intention of asking the Minister of Supply to allocate them 10 Tudors. There is some speculation as to what 8.0.A.C. s reply will be. Meanwhile aviation cncles comment that airline companies in general resent the Government edict that airliners should be ordered through the Ministry of Supply. They want direct contact with the makers when selecting, ordering, and approving machines. This triangular system of getting aircraft produced, ii is stated, results in perpetual friction. The Tudor “flare up." it is declared, was caused by the clash between airline technicians and the makers of aircraft.