Foreign markets for commercial airplanes can be fully as important, if not more important, than the domestic market for this type of aircraft. The large parts of the world, such as China and Latin America, which have shown intention of rapid industrial development after the war, may depend on aircraft in large measure for the development of their internal transportation systems. This means a market not only for United States airplanes, but also a field of activity for United States pilots and ground crews, for branch facilities of United States companies to service American-built planes used abroad, and at a later date for United States participation in the development of foreign aircraft manufacturing. The Government has an important responsibility in this regard. Post-war military and commercial production will provide employment to only a fraction of the more than 2,000,000 workers now engaged in aircraft production. The best insurance against future aggression is a strong and healthy aircraft industry based on vastly expanded private plane sales. And the private plane industry might eventually approach the employment dimensions of the automobile industry. The following suggestions may serve to stimulate private plane use (a) Pilot training should be continued in colleges to insure an adequate supply of military pilot material and to stimulate demand for private planes. (b) Disposal of surplus military planes suitable for private use and equipment should be so handled as to encourage, rather than repress, post-war demand. (c) Development of airfields, airstrips, and approach roads should be encouraged, with Federal aid if necessary, and construction should begin as soon as possible after V Day. Just as large scale use of automobiles awaited highway development, private flying awaits airport development. The Army and Navy should place military development orders with competent manufacturers released from war-plane production; such orders will insure the continuance of engineering improvements which are essential to both military and civil aviation and will help manufacturers over the transition to peacetime production. Also the Services should inform manufacturers of the probable scale of military orders during the post-war period. Question 7: What principles should be followed in handling Government-owned aircraft factories, aircraft, and airfields? A. AIRCRAFT FACTORIES The Government is today the sole owner of facilities which account for half of all airframe and engine production. In addition the Government has a very substantial interest in most of the other airframe and engine facilities. The problem with respect to the wholly Government-owned facilities has two partsfirst, policy for the period of cut-backs in production while the war continues-this has been discussed in the answer to question 2; and second, long-range policy after the war. Our long-range policies toward the Government-owned airplane plants arise from the fact that most of these plants are located in areas which have never before been centers of metal-working industry. Dallas, Fort Worth, Wichita, Atlanta, to mention a few are new centers of industry created by the war. There are the large airplane plants, newly trained industrial management and labor, and the community's trade and services built up at least partially in scale to the increased population and income. The future growth of our country will be aided by the transfer of these new industrial facilities and skills to peacetime pursuits. The democratic development of our country will be aided if we can find peacetime industries for these new centers and we will avoid the harmful effects of creating ghost cities. Therefore, our policy should be to work with and encourage those interests which desire to create new enterprises to continue the activity now being carried on by the Government-owned airplane factories. We should cooperate with chambers of commerce in these communities, with committees for economic development, with established firms in other regions which want to extend their production to these communities. Naturally, this cannot be handled by the War Production Board alone or even in major part. It involves credit arrangements, transport facilities, raw material supplies, and many other factors which concern a number of Government agencies. I do, however, recommend a positive Government policy in this regard and promise full cooperation by the War Production Board. This policy would coincide with the interests of the Air Forces. As I understand it, the Army Air Forces wishes to retain ownership to the great Governmentowned bomber plants because they are strategic in maintaining preparedness after the war. In some cases, the Army will wish to keep these plants in partial production. In every case, the Army will wish to lease all or part of the facilities to responsible private enterprise. This will serve the purpose of keeping in the community the industrial know-how and skilled labor force which have been built up during the war-the main requirements for a speedy resumption of mass aircraft production when required by the Army. Even if in some cases the Army may require keeping the plant intact, thus making it impossible to convert to nonaircraft production, it will be desirable to develop other industries in these areas in order to retain in the community the industrial basis required to bring the war plants into operation quickly and speedily. B. AIRCRAFT I have little to add to Mr. Patterson's comments on the disposal of Governmentowned aircraft. I think that one of the important phases of post-war air transport will be the large-scale use of planes by business firms and Government agencies for speedy liaison required for the most efficient prosecution of industry. The disposal of Government-owned aircraft will give an impetus to this development, which once established will create an important permanent market for the peacetime airplane industry. In addition, the disposal of suitable smaller military airplanes for private pleasure use and for use in training civilians to fly can help to make the whole people at home in the air. I have found the report you published prepared by the Harvard Graduate School of Business an excellent guide in this field. I would like in particular to call attention to the desirability of having used planes and equipment returned to manufacturers for repair and overhaul before ultimate disposal. With the existing Office of Price Administration price ceilings, this could be done in such a way as to protect the consumer financially while avoiding speculation in airplanes and protecting the public against dangerous and unworkable aircraft. It would immediately help the manufacturers of light transports and trainers whose contracts have been severely reduced and in some cases eliminated. They could do the work right away, keep their personnel together, and begin to build a distribution apparatus for the post-war period. C. AIRFIELDS Development of civil aviation on a large scale after the war requires a large network of smaller airfields and landing strips tying into larger commercial fields to the extent that the services wish to dispose of their airfields. They should be sold to municipalities and other local Governments with the coordination and review of the Civil Aeronautics Administration to insure their most intelligent linking with a system of civilian airfields. Question 8: What plans should be made for a post-war national defense program for the aircraft industry; through research and development; through stand-by capacity; through other methods? This question is of major concern to the Army and Navy and, I understand, that their plans are in a fairly advanced state. First, both agencies are selecting the plants that they desire to keep in military production after the war, and in stand-by condition. This information is being used in the forward plans for reducing the output of aircraft after the defeat of Germany. Second, they are making plans for continuing in the post-war period research and development in the field of aircraft. It would be most unfortunate to discontinue these activities after spending huge sums on projects which at the end of the war will presumably be in various stages of completion. It seems to me, therefore, most important to provide funds so that the technical superiority in military aircraft that the United States now enjoys will not be lost. Third, a war-mobilization plan for the aircraft industry should be prepared. With the experience that we have had, I am sure that this plan, both in its over-all size, and in its detail, will be far superior to anything we had at the outset of this war. (Whereupon at 11:55 a. m., the committee adjourned.) APPENDIXES APPENDIX I AIRCRAFT OWNERS AND PILOTS ASSOCIATION, Hon. JAMES E. MURRAY, Committee on Military Affairs, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: Your letter of July 3 to Mr. Ludington has been forwarded to me, but not in time to get a reply to you by July 12. Government and other studies indicate that of the order of 300,000 new small planes of the type used by private fliers, and of the order of 3,000 transport planes will be in the air a few years after the war. We believe this 300,000 figure will be reached only if considerably better small planes are available post-war than were available pre-war. The available pre-war plane owner remained a plane owner only 2.4 years (average) due mainly to insufficient usefulness to him of the plane. Hence, to build a large and sound industry we must have better planes as well as more landing fields. We believe that your committee should view the matter from two standpoints. Manufacturers of planes should be got into production as soon as possible (a) On a basis where they can make small planes, engines, and accessories with maximum manufacturing efficiency so that a new era of low costs will replace the pre-war era of high costs for most aviation equipment. (b) On a basis where new models of greatly increased usefulness will come onto the market with utinost rapidity. For instance, we urgently need planes with much lower landing speeds, we need planes with much higher cruising speeds, and we need good amphibious planes, and all of these at popular prices. As examples of conditions we must change are the following. A pre-war private plane to cruise 200 miles per hour cost of the order of $15,000, a figure totally out of the question for 99 percent of the prospective customers. An amphibian to cruise at three-quarters of that speed cost over $20,000. Radios, engines, speed indicators, etc., cost of the order of 10 times what one is accustomed to paying for automotive equipment. It is true that pre-war planes could be bought at popular prices, namely in the range of $1,200 to $2,000, but what we need post-war is planes at those prices that are much more useful. Hence, we urge you to do those things which will result in much better planes at popular prices coming on the market promptly. Sincerely yours, Mr. JAMES E. MURRAY, L. P. SHARPLES, Chairman of the Board. AIRCRAFT SALES CO., Fort Worth Tex., July 10, 1944. Chairman, War Contracts Subcommittee, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. MURRAY: Your letter of July 3d addressed to me as president of the National Aviation Training Association in Kansas City just reached my office here in Fort Worth. After reading over your questions quite thoroughly it seems that questions 6, 7, and 8 of your questionnaire are the only ones our association can answer or reply to at all. But those three questions cover a lot of territory, and for that reason I have this minute put in a call to Col. Roscoe Turner, who is president of the National Aviation Trades Association this year. 98534-44-pt. 9——9 I will give him the details of these questions and ask him to contact you direct. The writer was one of the two main organizers of the National Aviation Training Association, which is now the National Aviation Trades Association. For 2 years I was vice president of that association, president last year, and this year chairman of board of directors. Mr. William A. Ong, of Kansas City, and former president for 2 years, is also being sent a copy of your questionnaire with the request that he answer directly to you. We, the fixed base operator, know full well the scope of our part in post-war aviation, the part we have played in wartime aviation and that of pre-war aviation. We know that the Army and Navy's place in this affair today was made possible through the nucleus that had been built up in pre-war times by this little bunch of pioneers who struck to aviation because they liked it and not because there was money in it. Through Civilian Pilot Training and War Training Service a tremendously large job has been fulfilled by these operators for the Government in the training of hundreds of thousands of pilots in the United States Army and Navy, for the various Air Transport Commands and the various training fields, to say nothing of the replacements for the air lines which were taken away by the armed forces. Much credit has been given to labor for its part in building airplanes, ammunition, et cetera; little has been or may ever be given to the various operators, pilots, and mechanics who worked unstintingly for the last 4 years from the very crack of dawn to late at night instructing students Saturdays, Sundays, holidays and all. I say that they can look back on the last 4 years with a great deal of price and with the knowledge that they have done their bit to help their country when it was most needed. Several hundred operators were employed this way. They, like the manufacturers of airplanes and other things, increased their business in like ratio to take care of the necessary numbers that were given to them. They borrowed capital or got capital to go in with them and now that they are through with this training as of August 1, they have exceptionally large investments which they cannot use if some further encouragement is not given to them. They do not look for subsidies or money help. They look for help in promoting post war aviation and keeping things going that are now started. Things that are so thoroughly needed by the Government to keep its background and backbone of aviation in case it is needed again and in order not to let it get in the same rut that it was before the war started. This The past 4 years have been a period of tremendous educational value to the public in general as far as aviation is concerned. Some 5 years ago the writer recalls that be asked the president and dean of Texas Christian University here to allow him to put a poster in the assembly hall advertising flight courses. was refused on the basis that if they did so, the parents of the kids at this school would immediately take them out saying that they would not have them in a college that was so slack as to allow youngsters to fly. Today if even a small sponsored flight course of any kind is inaugurated by a school or college, these same parents go to their Senators and Congressmen and raise the very dickens unless their boys or their girls are allowed to participate in this aviation training program. Also, at various gatherings such as at Rotary Club luncheons it was the writer's habit to offer to take whole groups for an airplane ride to acquaint them with aviation. Usually the majority of them refused to go, saying that they had rather keep one foot on the ground. Now, unless one is fully prepared to take everybody at the gathering for a ride, it is a foolish thing to offer to take them because the long beards and all will immediately accept. Four or five years ago one air line accident in the United States would immediately curtail flying on all the air lines for periods of from 2 weeks to a month sometimes. Today, and I have seen this very thing happen; if an air liner crashed on the field while several airplanes were loading for departure, the people would look and remark how terrible it was, but when their trip was called for loading they would board the air liner and continue on their journey. It is about the same principle as a family having someone that they love very much killed in an automobile accident. They climb in a car and go to the funeral-they do not put the car in the garage and never ride in it again. These points are mentioned to try to exemplify the educational value and achievement that we have made in the past 3 or 4 years. War Training Service recently sold for the Defense Plant Corporation most all of the large airplanes that they have bought from the private owner and the operator for this training program. They are amazed at the tremendous demand for airplanes in the country today. If they had but looked at the number of pilots that are available now and the people that have learned to fly and use airplanes for transportation, they would have known this demand existed even though they were selling old airplanes. Some 4 or 5 years ago we had a total of 26,000 pilots in the United States. Today there are several times that many pilots outside of the armed forces. These include doctors, lawyers, businessmen, women, and girls who have learned to fly in the last 4 years and does not include nearly 1,000,000 pilots that have been trained by and for the armed forces. The major fields throughout the Nation have been improved and better shops and hangars have been built, but we still need thousands and thousands of airports at smaller towns to make flying popular. The automobile increased in numbers due to an education along that line such as we have had the past 4 years in aviation, and also due to the fact that roads were put in for the automobile. If the roads were not here, the automobile would be of no use, and so it is with flying. We must have many thousands of small airports-not huge investments at just a few centers but small fields scattered throughout the Nation in all the little towns and villages where there can be landing strips. We talk about having the boys come back from overseas to jobs that are ready for them. As far as aviation is concerned there is no better way that I know of or a more proper time to start this as now with the hundreds of operators who have nothing further to do in a military manner. I do not mean for the Government to subsidize these operators or give them money to go ahead with, but to encourage them in going ahead with commercial aviation developments and give them some assistance along that line. Question 6: What are the most important steps that the Government and industry can take now to promote the rapid development of civilian aircraft production? The personal views of the writer are as follows: Leaving air line and feeder air line aircraft apart, both of which are actually civilian aircraft, and taking other civil aircraft used for business and pleasure into consideration, first encourage and allow the development and the building of prototype airplanes by the various companies which are now being put out of aircraft production for the Government. The building of a new airplane and the development of new ideas and the testing of them take time. Let that be started now. We realize that there are a lot of things that we need right at the present that are far more important than new airplanes for the private owner. However, builidng the new prototypes is not satisfying the private owners demand; it is merely preparing and paving the way for the future. Also, in order to keep up the process of education that we have already begun we must set up ways and means of selling the present surplus of army aircraft back to the private owner allowing him to use it if it does not in any way interfere with the war effort such as gasoline production, et cetera. Thousands and thousands of light aircraft or what we call the puddlejumper class are now standing idle throughout the country. Most of these airplanes need work before they are sold; they need conditioning to make them safe to turn over to people who might buy them. Devise a way of selling these airplanes so that they are handled through legitimate aircraft distributors or through the factories themselves. There are enough approved shops throughout the country to absorb and recondition these airplanes and merchandise some of them. Do not sell those airplanes straight to the customer in the condition they are now. You do not sell trucks to individuals when you are disposing of surplus quantities of those nor do you sell liquor to the individual consumer. Those various commodities are sold to authorized dealers and distributors of the commodity in question. Selling these airplanes on a bid basis is all right, and putting them out in bunches will relieve the Government of a lot of paper work. If they are sold in lots of 25, 50, or 100, it would relieve the pressure of the necessary work of disposing of them through Government channels. The operators in the field who are now prepared to do such work with approved shops standing idle are also distributors of aircraft whose business was taken away from them through tne normal couse of war. It will give them a chance to go ahead and recondition these airplanes and resell them to the public just the same as you do the trucks and the various other surplus equipment. First, the safety of the people who buy these airplanes can best be looked after by selling them to legitimate dealers. Second, it will keep these idle shops going and create work and give an incentive to the men to not close their places. Then another reason and a very important one which we feel cannot be overlooked is this: The majority of light airplanes are sold on the time-payment plan. We do not expect airplanes to be cheaper in the immediate post war era than they were before the war started. In fact, due to labor and all other things combined we expect them to be somewhat higher. The down payment on those airplanes whether it is in the form of a trade-in or by cash will necessarily be a little higher than it used to be. Thousands and thousands of people today have more money than they have ever had before. They are able to buy airplanes such as this |