HC Deb 27 April 1966 vol 727 cc693-4
47. Mr. Wingfield Digby

asked the Secretary for Defence what fresh assurances he has sought and received about the bomb load of the F111, as a result of the recent investigation in the United States of America.

Mr. Healey

None, Sir.

Mr. Digby

Is it not a fact that there seems to be some fresh information as a result of the work of the investigating committee of the House of Representatives and, in view of the importance of this aircraft to the Government's defence policy, would the right hon. Gentleman ask for further information?

Mr. Healey

I think that the hon. Gentleman ought to do his homework. He should know that Congress has not been investigating the aircraft which we are buying, the F111A: it has been investigating a totally different aircraft, the FB111. The hon. Gentleman should do his homework.

Mr. McMaster

Has the right hon. Gentleman swallowed, hook line and sinker, the story of the American manufacturers that all the bad American planes have been sold to America and that all the good ones are coming to us?

Mr. Healey

That is a good comic remark, but it is so irrelevant to the subject that I had better not comment on it.

Mr. Paget

Would my right hon. Friend confirm or deny that the drag has turned out in our version to be about 20 or 25 per cent. greater than expected?

Mr. Healey

I cannot remember whether my hon. and learned Friend asked me to confirm or deny. I deny it.

Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that, for a given range, if the drag is up, the bomb load must be down? Since the President of General Dynamics informed hon. Members on both sides of the House that all was not well with the engineering, ought not the right hon. Gentleman to inform himself better?

Mr. Healey

I can assure the House that I have taken the trouble to inform myself very well on this, and we are satisfied not only that the range is adequate but that it is still several hundred miles in excess of the radius of action of the TSR2.

Mr. Rankin

Would my right hon. Friend say that it is the case that the F111A and the FB111 originate from the same model? Is it not possible that some of the faults in the FB111 might be transmitted to the F111A?

Mr. Healey

To clear it up for my hon. Friend, the best analogy was trying to turn a Mirage into a totally different sort of aircraft by making it the Mirage IV. This is what the American Administration is trying to do in turning a tactical strike aircraft, the F111A, into a nuclear strategic bomber aircraft, the FB111. This presents serious problems but was not relevant to our purpose.