§ 19. Mr. McMasterasked the Minister of Aviation what further research and development he intends to initiate in the field of multi-jet vertical take-off and landing aircraft.
§ Mr. J. AmeryThere is at present no United Kingdom requirement for the development of an aircraft using multi-jet techniques. I am, however, considering with the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany the possibility of a joint experimental project. This would be directed to the application of the multi-jet principle to transport aircraft. No decisions have yet been taken.
§ Mr. McMasterIs my right hon. Friend aware of the danger of sharing the results of pioneering in this country with Germany, France and other countries who have successfully developed multi-jet planes, so that we are in danger of losing the advantage which we have gained as a result of pioneering in this revolutionary development?
§ Mr. AmeryI hope that what I have said about the experimental project under discussion will allay some of my hon. Friend's fears.
§ 24. Sir J. Edenasked the Minister of Aviation whether he will make a statement on the progress of the Hawker P 1127 and P 1154 vertical take-off and landing aircraft.
§ Mr. J. AmeryDevelopment of the P 1127 for the tripartite evaluation programme is proceeding satisfactorily. The first of the nine aircraft ordered for the programme is expected to fly early next year and the evaluation should start as planned early in 1965. Development of the P 1154 is continuing under holding contracts pending a final decision on the project.
§ Sir J. EdenIs it not a fact that the P 1127 is the most advanced aircraft of its type in the world? Can my right hon. Friend tell the House what steps are being taken to sell this aircraft, or components of it, to our N.A.T.O. allies? Can he further assure the House that this aircraft will be used as a basis for providing the future needs both of the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force?
§ Mr. AmeryThe P 1127 has been put forward as a possible Fiat G 91 replacement aircraft for those countries which have a requirement of this kind. It has not as yet found a market for that purpose, but the work done on theP 1127 will be of vital importance to the development of the P 1154, which has been considered in the first place as a Hunter replacement for the Royal Air Force and possibly as a Sea Vixen replacement for the Royal Navy. A final decision on this project has still to be taken.
§ Mr. HealeyCan the right hon. Gentleman explain why, in view of the fact that he has answered his hon. Friend's Question about the P 1154, he transferred similar Questions by myself and my hon. Friend to the Minister of Defence? Is this another example of trying to pass the buck for an unpleasant decision?
§ Mr. AmeryNo, Sir. The hon. Member should not misread motives like that. The Question to which he refers is one of policy, regarding the suitability of a certain aircraft to the requirement of the Services. I have answered this Question because it concerns the progress of certain programmes—the P 1127 and the P 1154.
§ Mr. CroninAs there is widespread apprehension on the subject, can the Minister at least make a statement as to the progress made in developing the P 1154 for the Royal Navy?
§ Mr. AmeryI was saying that the development of the P 1154, which is still in an early stage—that is to say, at a stage where no differentiation is yet required between the two Services—is continuing under a holding contract, pending a decision on the contract as a whole.