Hunter Aircraft (Hansard, 25 March 1957)

§ 7. Mr. Beswick
asked the Minister of Supply on what date the Hunter aircraft was first ordered; when the first machine flew; when it was first reported that the aircraft needed air brakes; and when the first aircraft, so modified, was first delivered for squadron service.

§ Mr. Aubrey Jones
Three prototypes were ordered in November, 1948. The first flew in July, 1951. The original specification called for air brakes, but those fitted initially were found unsatisfactory shortly after the first prototype flew and development of satisfactory air brakes took some time. All production aircraft, the first of which was delivered to the Royal Air Force in June, 1954, were fitted with satisfactory air brakes.

§ Mr. Beswick
Can the Minister say why it was that many of these aircraft were produced with unsatisfactory air brakes before the modification was even called for?

§ Mr. Jones
Yes, Sir. Because under the system then obtaining, and which obtained under the Labour Administration, very few prototype aircraft were produced. The number was too small to allow for the full testing which is desired in these cases.

§ Mr. Beswick
May I ask the Minister not to be fobbed off with this explanation? The fact is that some hundreds of these aircraft were manufactured; that there was ample flying carried out and it was common knowledge that the aircraft was unsatisfactory? Cannot he find out why it was that the modification was not insisted on earlier?

§ Mr. Jones
It is true, as I said, that the difficulty was the limitation of the number of prototypes. Because of this it was decided to substitute a larger development batch.

§ 8. Mr. Beswick
asked the Minister of Supply on what date it was first reported that the engines in the Hunter aircraft were liable to stoppage when the guns were fired; when modifications were effected for squadron service; and whether it is now possible to fire high-velocity ammunition without causing failure or damage to the engines.

§ Mr. Aubrey Jones
It was first reported in September, 1954, that the engines in the Hunter aircraft were liable to stoppage when the guns were fired. This fault applied only to Marks 1 and 4 and did not affect Marks 2, 5 and 6. The fitting of modified engines in Mark 4 aircraft in squadron service began in February, 1957. It is not considered worth while to modify the Mark 1 aircraft. The Mark 4 aircraft when modified are able to fire high-velocity ammunition at any altitude without causing failure of or damage to the engines.

§ Mr. Beswick
Does the Minister attribute the delay in finding out this fault to the fact that a small number of prototypes was ordered? Is it the fact that no guns were fired before 1954; or why was it so late in the production of this aircraft before this fault was tackled?

§ Mr. Jones
I should have thought it stood to reason that if only two or three prototype aircraft are produced it is difficult to ascertain the full nature of the defect; for that you must have a larger number of aircraft.

§ Mr. Wigg
Would the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to say whether all marks of the Hunter have now been cleared at all altitudes for operational use?

§ Mr. Jones
The Mark 6 of the aircraft and the Mark 4, when modified, will comply with all the requirements.

§ Mr. Wigg
The emphasis being on "will" and not "now"?

§ Mr. Jones
Shall I modify what I said? All Mark 6 aircraft now flying and all Mark 4 aircraft modified which are flying do comply with the requirements.

§ Mr. G. Brown
Is not the real lesson of this the fact that we order aeroplanes and then fit weapons to them instead of ordering a weapons system and putting one company in charge of the development of the whole? Has the right hon. Gentleman considered that and considered adopting the American practice?

§ Mr. Jones
No, Sir. It is the policy to order a weapons system.

§ 9. Mr. Beswick
asked the Minister of Supply when it was first reported that the elevator controls of the Hunter aircraft were not effective at a certain speed; when the modification of a moving tail plane was first decided upon; when this modification was effected; and if he is satisfied that these modified controls are as effective as the type fitted on the F86 seven or eight years ago.

§ Mr. Aubrey Jones
The elevator control was first reported as having certain shortcomings in January, 1953. In June, 1953, it was decided to proceed with the design of a flying tail, and the first fully modified aircraft from new production will be delivered in June of this year. The aircraft as modified will be a more advanced and more powerful aircraft than the F86.

§ Mr. Beswick
But is it the fact that the aircraft is now coming along and is not yet an operational aircraft more that ten years after the equivalent American aircraft first flew? Is not the delay over the years in this aircraft and the production of a machine which is still not operationally serviceable something which calls for a major inquiry?

§ Mr. Jones
The Mark 6 aircraft now coming forward is operationally serviceable. In so far as we are behind in the field of fighter aircraft, it is because we were more reluctant than the Americans to hazard men and lives in experimenting in supersonic flight.

§ Mr. Shinwell
Does the right hon. Gentleman seriously tell the House that it is the intention of the Government to produce more fighter aicraft when it is well known that they are not likely to be operational at all in the future?

§ Mr. Jones
The right hon. Gentleman is reading far more into my answer than could possibly be suggested.