Basic HTML Version
36
SST may cause unbearable noise and
considerable damage to the upper atmo–
sphere. While this may be true, the
controversy over the SST involves more
than concern over atmospheric and
noise pollution. It is pure economics
and world politics. This side of the
question is rarely discussed by the news
media. But it is important and the story
should be told.
What worries many U. S. business–
meo is that a British-French combine
and the Soviet Union are also building
supersoníc transports. Both prototypes
are already flying, although not yet com–
mercially. The Soviet Union currently
holds the lead with its TU-144. Named
after designer Andrei Tupelov, this
smaller supersonic transport is 188Yz
feet long and will carry 120 passengers.
The Soviet SST is totally government
financed . Sorne feel the Russians have
interna!, domestic needs for a com–
mercial supersonic aircraft. "lt's a long,
crummy ride from Moscow to Vladivos–
tok," said U. S. Civil Aeronautics Board
Chairman S. D. Browne. But another
primary reason for their accelerated
production program is the desire for
yet
anothe1· Commrmist propaganda
" victory."
There was little chance of the
TU-144 becoming a threat to the free
world market unless the United States
cancelled its SST program completely.
Sorne observers feel that the U.S.S.R.
may now have a competitive advantage
in the field of commercial aviation for
the first time in history. A few Asían
nations have already placed orders for
the Russian model, which is priced
lower than the Franco-British Concorde.
The Concorde, also smaller than the
U. S. prototype, is expected to be com–
mercially operational sometime in 1973.
The supersonic Concorde airliner has
been called a "money trap" with no
escape chute for Britain and France.
There is much talk in París and London
that the $2 million per week project -
employing 50,000 people - may be
scuttled. The British would like to pull
out and have wanted to do so for years.
In the past they could not because of
legal commitments to the French. These
have since expired. Now, the British are
in too deep - and the French refuse to
cancel the project.
The
PLAIN TRUTH
France and Britain are splitting pro–
duction costs 50-50. Even though the
two nations have already jointly built
a working prototype, their Concorde
remains on very uncertain footing. Its
price has skyrocketed to more than $24
million per plane.
But even though the future of the
Concorde seems rather bleak at the
present time, both Britain and France
hope to eventnally make a profit. Both
national economies - especially Brit–
ain's - need a boost. Without the U. S.
supersonic aircraft flooding the market,
a profit may now be possible. Once again
the consideration is
economic
-
how
to compete successfully agaínst
other
nations.
America's Entry
In an attempt also to compete profit–
ably, the U. S. was planning to manufac–
ture a "bigger and better" plane.
America's proposed entry, by Boeing,
would be 100 feet longer, carry over
twice as many passengers, and cost sev–
eral míllion dollars more.
There had been many more prelimi–
nary orders for the Boeing model than
for any foreign plane. But it, too, had
been plagued by problems - the biggest
of which was financia!.
Nevertheless, whatever the cost, the
conseosus of many aviation experts is:
"WE .MUST BUILD."
According to
Najeeb Halaby, President of Pan Amer–
ican World Airways, the U. S. Senate's
refusal in December, 1970, to approve
an additional $290 million for produc–
tion of two prototype SST's was a
"drastic, extreme measure." He added,
"If
somebody else does it [produces the
SSTJ we will lose world leadershíp in
aviation,
a.r u;e have lost it in
shipping."
On the other hand, no one is really
sure that the SST would be profitable.
Sorne say "yes," others say
"NO."
How–
ever, most are in agreement that the
U. S. will lose its corner of the aviation
market without the SST.
But wínning the SST race wouldn't be
enough. Already planners are talking
about the HST - the hypersonic traos–
port. "lt's a plane for the year 2000,"
said one commentator, "that promises
to offer more of everything: more
speed, more Federal expense and more
problems."
May
1971
The 6,000 m.pll. HST would make
the 1,800 m.p.h. SST look Iike a
turtle. It would be half-plane and half–
spaceship. The HST may well require
vertical rocket-assisted take-offs. Sorne
experts even consider the HST as a
semi-orbital vehicle.
In
spíte of the
obvious problems, planners are confident
they will be able to solve any problems
the HST may have.
Sorne say the HST would
be
a finan–
cia! bust. But proponents say "no" -
that new markets will open up. On the
other hand, no one really knows íf even
the SST would be profitable. However,
most everyone seems agreed that the
U.
S. will lose its corner on the aviation
market without the SST.
An Economic Necessity?
Aviation experts believe that
if
the
United States loses the SST market, it
could a]so
lose
the market for subsonic
aircraft - especially sínce the British–
French combine is also considering the
development of a series of airbuses for
short-distance travel. Airlínes tend to
rely on a single supplier for all their
aircraft due to ease of maintenancc,
equipment compatibility, and cootinuity
of pilot training.
Sorne SST opponents - induding
ecologists and environmental experts -
seem to think Congress, by denying the
money for the U. S. project, can keep all
other
nations from building SST's. But,
unfortunately, Congress cannot. The
U.S.S.R. and the British-French com–
bine already have flying prototypes.
Accordíng to
Newsu;eek's
Henry Wall–
ich, "... if the Concorde proves techni–
cally and commercially viable, the only
remaining question is whether the vari–
ous nuisances are to be produced by
their plane or ours.
We camzot escape."
Without America's Boeing SST, Brit–
ain and France may themselves take
the market, forcing U. S. airlines to buy
the Concorde in order to remain com–
petitive with foreign airlines. Today,
the U. S. is a strong exporter of planes.
If
the Concorde takes over the world
market, the U. S. will become an
importer
of planes. By having to ímport
such fantastically expensive equípment,
the American balance of payments
could be dramatically affected, causing