HC Deb 29 November 1962 vol 668 cc670-7
The Minister of Aviation (Mr. Julian Amery)

With your permission, Mr. Speaker, and that of the House, I should like to make a statement. I have today signed an agreement with the French Ambassador for the development and production of a supersonic airliner. This will be a joint project undertaken by Britain and France together.

The aircraft will be a slender-wing airliner built mainly of light alloy. It will have a cruising speed of about Mach 2.2; that is, about 1,400 m.p.h. At this speed, it would cut the present Atlantic crossing from 7½ hours to about 3 hours, and the flying time from London to Sydney from about 27 hours to 13 hours. The design of the aircraft has been agreed between the French company, Sud Aviation, and the British Aircraft Corporation. These two firms will carry out the work on the airframe together. They will make two versions of the aircraft, one long-range and the other medium-range. Both versions will be powered by four Olympus 593 turbo-jet engines. This engine is to be developed jointly by the British firm of Bristol Siddeley Engines and the French Société Nationale, SNECMA.

The first flight of the aircraft is expected to be in 1966; and the aircraft should be ready for airline service by 1970. It is reckoned that, on stages of about 1,500 miles, its operating costs will be in line with the best subsonic jet airliners now in service.

France and Britain will share the costs, the work, and the proceeds of sales on the basis of equal responsibility for the project as a whole. About two-thirds of the development work on the engine, and some 40 per cent. of the work on the airframe will be done in Britain. One prototype will be assembled in each country.

The project will be managed by joint industrial management boards set up by the British and French firms concerned. Their work will be supervised by a joint standing committee of officials responsible to the French and British Governments.

The British share of the costs of development, and of jigging and tooling for production is estimated at between £75 and £85 million. This will be spread over the next eight years or so. It will mainly be met by Her Majesty's Government, but the firms will make an appropriate contribution.

B.O.A.C. and Air France will be associated with the project from the beginning. The project is the result of several years of intensive research in industry and Government establishments on both sides of the Channel. Considerable preliminary work has already been carried out in France and in Britain, and the project is much further advanced than any other known design for a supersonic airliner. The aircraft thus has every chance, if we press on with it now, of securing a substantial part of the world market for supersonic airliners. This is a chance that will not return.

The development of the aircraft will ensure that the British and French aviation industries remain in the forefront of the world's long-range aircraft producers. It will also have far reaching consequences—not limited to aviation—in the technologies of metals, nonmetallic materials, fluids, electrics, and electronics.

Even more significant may be the lessons which France and Britain will learn from working together on every aspect of a joint project of this size. Our two countries were pioneers in the early days of aircraft production. Then, they were also rivals. But now the time has come to join forces, if we are to hold a leading position on the air routes of the world.

Mr. Lee

My right hon. and hon. Friends and I recognise that this super- sonic venture into civil aviation is undoubtedly the next stage in development, and from that point of view we welcome it. We agree with the right hon. Gentleman that, quite outside the realm of supersonic aircraft, the effects upon our scientific knowledge will be important and we welcome the opportunity to work with our French friends on important matters like this project.

The Minister has said that our share of the cost, purely for development, will be between £75 million and £85 million. Will he develop that a little, and say what he expects will be the overall cost to the Government and to our own aviation industry? It is far easier for the French, because theirs is largely a nationalised industry which will run the project for them.

The speed of the aircraft is to be in the region of Mach 2.2 as against the Mach 3 aircraft which we understand the Americans are now developing. The Minister also says that we expect to be in operation by 1970, and I think that I have read that the Americans expect their Mach 3 aircraft to be in operation at about the same time. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman can assure the House that we will not find that we are obsolescent before we get into the air at all.

In practical terms, can we be told what the British aircraft industry gets out of this project? The Minister tells us that two-thirds of the development of the engine and 40 per cent. of the development of the airframe will be done in this country. Will he tell us what percentage will be produced, as distinct from development work, within the British industry; and whether such a project will mean that we can now expect the industry to remain at approximately its present size?

The public also needs an assurance about noise and surface damage during the take-off of the supersonic airliner. Can the Minister give us any information on that point?

On the purely economic side, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Government yet have any knowledge of whom they expect to sell this aircraft to, and how many sales would be necessary before we reached the break-even point?

The Minister says that there are to be two prototypes—medium-range and long-range—and suggests that on stages of 1,500 miles or more we can have approximately the same costs as at the present time. Over which routes are these two planes to fly? Does he expect to have the medium-range plane on the Atlantic route and the long-range one on the Australian run? We should be grateful for information on these matters.

Mr. Amery

As to the cost, the greater part will be borne by the Government, but the industry will also bear its share. It is not possible to quantify it at the moment. Negotiation is still going on about it. The firms concerned will be committing their reputation and resources and a good deal of money as well. I should not like to put a figure on it at the moment.

The hon. Gentleman asked me about Mach 2 as against Mach 3. The problem is that anyone trying to build a Mach 3 aircraft will have to go from materials which are known to steels and other materials of which we have much less experience. Therefore, we do not think that it is possible to build a Mach 3 aircraft within the same time scale as we are now discussing.

The hon. Gentleman asked what industry will get out of it on both development and production. We are sharing this project from beginning to end. Plainly, both B.A.C. and Bristol-Siddeley will get a great deal on the development side. The production side, of course, will depend on orders. I could not give a figure of the exact amount of work which will be given to either the engine or the airframe components, but it will certainly be considerable.

Now, noise and damage. We think that, if the aircraft flies at a certain altitude when it becomes supersonic, the damage factor resulting from the supersonic boom will be negligible and the noise factor will be negligible, too. We have the advantage in this country, of course, that the aircraft will be over blue water very early after its take-off.

The hon. Gentleman asked about the market and what the break-even point would be. This depends on a number of factors. If we have the only supersonic aircraft in the field at the time, the market will be a fairly large one and the price we can ask will be fairly high. If there were rivals in or near the field, of course, the position would be different.

Now, as to the routes which the medium- and long-range aircraft will operate. We see the longer-range one on the Transatlantic and Australian routes, and the medium-range one has, I think, been envisaged for routes such as Paris to Beirut or London to Athens.

Sir A. V. Harvey

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the expeditious manner in which he has brought the discussions to a conclusion. Will he bear in mind that, having regard to the importance of the project and the heavy cost, while the work is being carried out by the British Aircraft Corporation, the resources of Government establishments and other airframe manufacturers should be brought in so that knowledge can be pooled to the fullest possible extent?

Mr. Amery

I entirely agree. We are embarking on a major investment of both money and resources. It will bear fruit only if we put the maximum effort behind it.

Mr. Grimond

As there art very many questions arising on this matter, will the right hon. Gentleman consult the Leader of the House about the possibility of having a debate? Secondly, although we are all extremely anxious to further the aircraft industry, is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that this is really the best use of £85 million? Is there not a great need to develop a slower and more economic type of aircraft with a very short take-off?

Is it, in the right hon. Gentleman's view, possible to develop just one item like this, or will the Americans, as has happened before, beat us by having a whole lot of variations under development at the same time?

Finally, will the aircraft have to fly across land at subsonic speeds?

Mr. Amery

I will certainly consult with my right hon. Friend to see whether a debate is possible.

The Government did consider, of course, whether this was the right item on which to spend the money, in view of the general table of priorities for all schemes on which Government investment would be necessary.

The right hon. Gentleman asked about the possibility of a short take-off aircraft. The supersonic aircraft will operate from our existing airfields and, therefore, I do not think that there will be direct competition between it and the short take-off aircraft. The short take-off aircraft has immense military potentialities. Its commercial potentialities are still fairly limited, but we are exploring them.

The right hon. Gentleman asked about the possibility of the Americans catching us up. I do not know whether they would even wish to compete with a Mach 2.2 aircraft. There is no doubt that the combined resources of the four British and French firms concerned are in themselves as big as any individual airframe and engine consortium which the Americans could produce.

Mr. Grimond

Will the aircraft have to fly across land at subsonic speeds?

Mr. Amery

No. I understand that if it flies at supersonic speed at a sufficient height the effects of the sonic boom would be so small as not to interfere with its doing so.

Mr. B. Harrison

Does my right hon. Friend realise that when Seaslug was put forward it was estimated that it would cost £1½ million and it finished by costing £40 million, Thunderbird was to cost £2½ million but ended by costing £50 million, and so on? Our share of this project is estimated to cost £75 million. Could my right hon. Friend give an estimate of what he thinks the real cost will be?

Further, will my right hon. Friend consider publishing a White Paper setting out the market research, the potential customers, and a much closer allocation of the responsibility and estimated real cost of operating this aircraft, including depreciation?

Mr. Amery

My hon. Friend is rather pessimistic on this subject. The estimates we have given are the most realistic estimates that we have been able, after months of research and argument, to evolve.

Mr. Paget

So were the others.

Mr. Amery

As regards a White Paper, I shall, of course, consider any suggestion which my hon. Friend makes. I have great regard for his judgment on many matters. Nevertheless, we have to bear in mind that there are commercial secrets involved here and we must not give all our hand away too early.

Mr. Hunter

May I urge the Minister to impress upon the designers of this proposed aircraft that noise and vibration are of the utmost importance to people living in the built-up residential areas around London Airport? Will he take special care in this respect?

Mr. Amery

Yes; I can reassure the hon. Gentleman on that point.

Mr. Farey-Jones

I am sure that the whole House will approve this aerial entente cordiale, but there is one question which I should very much like my right hon. Friend to answer. Can he give the House a rough estimate of the total number of design staffs and technicians which will be required? Will they be housed centrally, and under whose control will such design staffs and technicians come?

Mr. Amery

I could not give a number off-hand. If my hon. Friend will put a Question down, I will try to answer it. The principle is that we shall try to divide the work as far as possible on a fifty-fifty basis.

Mr. Bowles

What is the estimated landing speed of the aircraft?

Mr. Amery

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put a Question down about that. I am not clear about it at present.

Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop

Does my right hon. Friend really believe that the best way of ensuring the largest possible market for this project is to hand the engine side of it to two companies neither of which has any experience whatever of manufacturing and selling civil jet engines?

Mr. Amery

My hon. Friend asks me a rather straight question. The engine which we shall be using here will be a derivative of the one which has been developed for the TSR2.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

This is the usual difficulty. We cannot debate the matter without a Question before the House.

Mr. Rankin

But, Mr. Speaker—

Mr. Speaker

All I said was that we cannot debate this without a Question before the House.

Mr. Rankin

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.