From Richard Payne’s ‘Stuck on the Drawing Board’
‘In 1965, the government released a report into the industry and its future, which became known as the Plowden Report. Among many proposals in this report was the advocation that all future airliner projects were to be undertaken as collaborative ventures with Europe, bar some small aircraft. Many of the reports conclusions were negative and provided a field day for competitors who could seize on the fact that Britain appeared to be abdicating from airliner design and manufacture. It saw no predetermined place for an aircraft industry in Britain and the need to purchase from the United States the most complex of weapons systems.
One good point to come out of the report was that any future projects should not be tailor made for one carrier – a la VC-10 and Trident, and that there should be a sustained drive towards the export market.’
Did the Plowden report have a negative impact on the UK’s aeroindustry, was it capable of remaining a player by itself?
By: alertken - 13th December 2007 at 22:27
(Lord Plowden. Report of the Committee of Enquiry into the Aircraft Industry, Cmnd 2853, December 1965, HMSO. Set up by Minister R.Jenkins after Healey’s deletion of HS P.1154/681 and TSR.2, to “shine a light” into an industry perceived, by Labour and its Tory predecessor, as consuming more national value than it created.)
was it capable of remaining a player by itself? In technical competence, certainly; but the Enquiry’s scope was whether it should remain a solo player. International collaboration was not driven by UK capability shortfall, but by capacity excess: e.g after >600 Canberras in 8 years, BAC might have assembled 50 TSR.2 in 6. How was this sector to sustain itself? Firms had feared Plowden would chop all State subsidy and thus destroy them, but by 12/65 it was evident that a Saudi Magic Carpet would give BAC a future. The Collaboration policy was no more than an extension of Concorde: none of the 4 Primes there believed a solo (UK or France) product would have sold other than to the captive. 50% of some sales is better than 100% of a cancellation. RR (Allison/Medway, M.A.N V/STOL) and BSEL (M.45H) had signed up already; the vendor industry never did, so lost its independence.
The thrust of your Q is: does international collaboration leech business from, or add it to UK. Well, every country now does what Plowden proposed: US Primes with competitors and Aerostructures suppliers – Boeing now fabricates zilch on 787 and shares design with its “first tier partners”…inter-State at first, now international. 747 was launched with GD (Convair) nose, DC-10 with GD fuselage barrel.
Sign In
December 12, 2007 at 5:42 pm