The British 707 that could have been

[Byker]

The British aircraft manufacturing industry of the postwar era was a mess.
There were petty disputes among companies, redundant research because no one
wanted to share anything, lack of public funding (this one is
understandable), and failure to adapt to the new era of air travel.

"We have handed to the Americans, without a struggle, the entire world
market for big jet airliners." — George Edwards, Vickers managing director

[R2D2]

On Sun, 1 May 2016 11:44:17 -0500, "Byker" > wrote:

>The British aircraft manufacturing industry of the postwar era was a mess.
>There were petty disputes among companies, redundant research because no one
>wanted to share anything, lack of public funding (this one is
>understandable), and failure to adapt to the new era of air travel.
>
>"We have handed to the Americans, without a struggle, the entire world
>market for big jet airliners." — George Edwards, Vickers managing director

There's also the fact that the gov and BOAC only supported/financed
aircraft designed to cover the Empire routes, which were all
short-ranged and needed low passanger nymbers... and refused to
sanction bigger planes.

[Byker]

"R2D2" wrote in message ...
>
>There's also the fact that the gov and BOAC only supported/financed
>aircraft designed to cover the Empire routes, which were all short-ranged
>and needed low passanger nymbers... and refused to sanction bigger planes.

Passenger numbers had to be kept down because in the aftermath of WWII, few
people could afford to fly. No airline, not even BOAC, wanted Bristol
Brabazons or Saro Princess flying boats.

Boeing took notice of the V.1000's six-abreast seating layout and
incorporated it into their up-and-coming 707, so not all of Vickers' efforts
were for naught.

[Ri©ardo]

On 01/05/2016 17:44, Byker wrote:
> The British aircraft manufacturing industry of the postwar era was a mess.
> There were petty disputes among companies, redundant research because no
> one
> wanted to share anything, lack of public funding (this one is
> understandable), and failure to adapt to the new era of air travel.
>
> "We have handed to the Americans, without a struggle, the entire world
> market for big jet airliners." — George Edwards, Vickers managing director

So the de Havilland Comet, albeit flawed (from which much was learnt by
the world aviation industry) never led the way? As we know "the pioneer
doesn't always get the best land, sometimes he ends up dead in a ditch
with arrows in his back."

As for "no one wanted to share anything", and supposed "redundant
research", we did share a great deal but, unfortunately, it seems it was
with the wrong people.

http://www.aviastar.org/air/england/miles_m-52.php

"At the time of the M-52's development, there was a so-called
bi-lateral "agreement" between the UK and the US to share all knowledge
and research data into supersonic flight. Reps from Bell and the USAF
visited Woodley (home of the MIles Aircraft company) where they were
shown everything and given all the data they wanted. Away they went with
all of Miles data and experience but it was then discovered that an Act
of Congress forbade giving away sensitive data to another country!
Surprise, surprise! Shortly afterwards the Bell X-1 flew super-sonically
for the first time and one only needs to look at it to see its heritage.
The M-52 and Winkle Brown could have done this is if our then government
had not been so wimpish or was it put under unknown pressure as a later
one was with TSR-2?"

I could also mention the McMahon Act and the sharing of nuclear
information...

Ri©ardo

--
Moving Things In Still Pictures

[R2D2]

On Sun, 1 May 2016 13:57:30 -0500, "Byker" > wrote:

>"R2D2" wrote in message ...
>>
>>There's also the fact that the gov and BOAC only supported/financed
>>aircraft designed to cover the Empire routes, which were all short-ranged
>>and needed low passanger nymbers... and refused to sanction bigger planes.
>
>Passenger numbers had to be kept down because in the aftermath of WWII, few
>people could afford to fly. No airline, not even BOAC, wanted Bristol
>Brabazons or Saro Princess flying boats.

Yes, but that short-sighted view crippled almost any possible expert
deals...

[R2D2]

On Mon, 2 May 2016 11:59:22 +0100, Ri©ardo >
wrote:

>On 01/05/2016 17:44, Byker wrote:
>> The British aircraft manufacturing industry of the postwar era was a mess.
>> There were petty disputes among companies, redundant research because no
>> one
>> wanted to share anything, lack of public funding (this one is
>> understandable), and failure to adapt to the new era of air travel.
>>
>> "We have handed to the Americans, without a struggle, the entire world
>> market for big jet airliners." — George Edwards, Vickers managing director
>
>So the de Havilland Comet, albeit flawed (from which much was learnt by
>the world aviation industry) never led the way? As we know "the pioneer
>doesn't always get the best land, sometimes he ends up dead in a ditch
>with arrows in his back."
>
>As for "no one wanted to share anything", and supposed "redundant
>research", we did share a great deal but, unfortunately, it seems it was
>with the wrong people.

Add giving away to the USSR the engine powered 2 geenrations of Migs
and the Il-28...

[Byker]

"R2D2" wrote in message ...
>
> Add giving away to the USSR the engine powered 2 geenrations of Migs and
> the Il-28...

And allowing British Communist sympathizers in on secrets during the
Manhattan Project...

[Byker]

"Ri©ardo" wrote in message
...
>
> So the de Havilland Comet, albeit flawed (from which much was learnt by
> the world aviation industry) never led the way? As we know "the pioneer
> doesn't always get the best land, sometimes he ends up dead in a ditch
> with arrows in his back."

The contemporary Sud Aviation Caravelle served the European market quite
well

[Savageduck[_3_]]

On 2016-05-02 21:46:08 +0000, "Byker" > said:

>
>
> "Ri©ardo" wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> So the de Havilland Comet, albeit flawed (from which much was learnt by
>> the world aviation industry) never led the way? As we know "the pioneer
>> doesn't always get the best land, sometimes he ends up dead in a ditch
>> with arrows in his back."
>
> The contemporary Sud Aviation Caravelle served the European market quite
> well
>
>
> <image>

In the 50s and 60's, as a passenger I have flown in Caravelles
(primarily SABENA), Viscounts, DC3's, DC6's, DC7's, DC9's, Electras,
Constellations and 727's, all over parts of North America, Africa and
South America. All my long haul flights up until the early 1970s were
in Connies, Electras, and 707s of various airlines.
Then there was also a period (69-71) when the most common form of
aviation for me was very much rotary wing, with an occasional 707
and/or L-1011 thrown in.

--
Regards,

Savageduck