[Before the Civil Aeronautics Board, Washington, D.C.]

STATEMENT OF POSITION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ON WASHINGTON, D.C., HELICOPTER SERVICE CASE-DOCKET 11941

Scheduled helicopter service by operators who employ aircraft incorporating components common with those utilized by the military (engines, clutches, transmissions, drive-shafting, rotor hubs, blades, etc.) contribute materially to the overall development of those items in terms of service life. Such scheduled operations, with their attendant high aircraft utilization rate, accumulate operating experience at a far greater rate than is possible through normal military peacetime operating experience. The data thus developed can be used by the aircraft manufacturer to improve the reliability, durability and safety of his product. This leads to extension of service life for components common to commercial and military use with resulting savings in inventory, less maintenance, lower operating costs and increased combat effectiveness of military aircraft. The development of a more efficient and economical transport helicopter will tend to provide better commercial helicopter service at lower cost of operation which should be reflected in lower charges to the public, thereby encouraging increased utilization of the service.

While present day use of helicopter service is somewhat limited by cost considerations, improvement in the art with its attendant lower cost of operation, resulting in lower rates, should tend to increase the use of such service.

The Department of Defense favors a more complete national transportation network of all modes. It recognizes the need for the reduction of travel time between metropolitan areas and the airports which are being built farther from those areas to accommodate jet traffic. The Department of Defense favors any increase in scheduled helicopter operations which would accelerate the accumulation of technical and operating experience which can be used in advancing the state of the art and in the reduction of travel time between the airports and the metropolitan areas.

This statement is not to be interpreted as Department of Defense support for any particular applicant to provide a particular helicopter service, neither is it to be interpreted in any way as supporting public subsidy to be paid to helicopter operators.

Mr. WHEELER. I would like to familiarize you with our operation here for just a moment, because we for many years have been the sole local helicopter operator in the Washington area, and we are the only one at National Airport at the present time.

We operate three helicopters, Bell 47 helicopters, 47-H's and 47—J's. We have flown them in this area 75,000 to 80,000 hours over the 6 years that we have been operating.

We operate the police helicopter traffic surveillance operation here in the District for the police.

There are three or four points that you have mentioned that cause me some pause, here, because I think we are getting off on the wrong track.

I think that there is a basic need for a heliport here in Washington. Now, for us who have been worrying with this matter for 5, 6, 7, or 8 years, there is always some reason why some other site is better than the one you select. It does not make any difference which one you select.

We have gone over this matter, and I personally have looked over at least 20 different sites, conservatively. We have gone over them with the FAA people. We have gone over them with the planning agencies. We have gone over them with the city. We have gone over them with the Government people, to see which one would be the best heliport.

You have about three things to take into consideration. One is from an operation standpoint, another from a tax standpoint, and the other from the noise standpoint.

The tax traffic standpoint is primarily what you are thinking of, because if you don't have a good in-town heliport, you will not have successful scheduled operations.

In Washington we have a traffic triangle, really; three points that are the basic generator of our traffic here, or will likely be.

We have the Pentagon Building, we have the Hill, and we have the commercial areas, as represented by the center of it, at approximately 16th and K Streets.

Within that triangle you must have a heliport, if you are going to take advantage of three traffic generators. The closer you get to the center of that triangle, the more convenient the traffic will be. It will be more convenient for the people who use it, and more lucrative and better for the operator.

This location is about the best we have come up with. I would say by far and away the best, because it is close to the Pentagon, it is close to Capitol Hill, and it is close to 16th and K Streets, which is the center of the traffic generation.

Five years ago we urged this very same site upon the board of trade committees who were studying it at that time, on the Planning Commission committees that were studying it at that time, and we tried to persuade the people that this was the site that would be the best site available.

Other people came along, and we got into the problem of the canal site, as you probably recall, over here, and I was in the hearing before the CAB was forced to defend that site, which I knew was not the better site.

I am pleased we are coming back to the site because this is by far the best site we have got from a traffic standpoint.

From an operational standpoint it is equally good because it does not interfere with the traffic of National Airport.

It has the river for the clearer approaches, and so on.

From a noise standpoint, also, it is not near any of the residential areas, and will not interfere with them.

It is pretty difficult to find a site. The sites are limited.

People suggest to you a site that would be farther than National Airport, out here in Virginia somewhere. That is ridiculous.

National Airport cannot be used for a downtown heliport, itself, because it is not close enough in.

We are within minutes of the currency we are dealing in. We are trying to save time. What good does it do to save an hour flying from coast to coast, and then lose it in the terminal time?

So we must get something almost ideally located. The tolerance is very close. We must get a spot that, trafficwise, is almost ideal. And this I submit to you is the spot, and probably the only spot left in Washington.

Now, you can talk about spots over in Georgetown, spots in Capitol Hill, but you are getting on the periphery of that triangle. You are serving one element.

In Georgetown, which is the second best spot, perhaps, your people on the Hill are going to go out to Dulles before they go to Georgetown to get a helicopter.

It is true that the commercial people will use that spot, and perhaps the Pentagon people will use that spot, but a large part of the traffic is generated on the Hill, so it would be a less than ideal spot.

And if you cannot get the traffic to utilize it, all the operational features of the spot are worthless.

Senator INOUYE. I agree with you, as to the feasibility of the location, but it is obvious from the testimony that we have received up until now that this would be temporary, at the very best, because it has been testified that in 18 months Mr. Chalk will start construction there. He has a contract which, very likely, is rather binding.

Mr. WHEELER. That is one of my three points here that I would like to touch upon.

Senator INOUYE. And further, it would appear that because of this short period the amortization rate would be pretty high, and I would like to ask you if you have considered whether your organization would be willing to pay this type of ground rent.

Mr. WHEELER. Yes, sir. I was going to touch upon those three or four points, here.

I have a second point that I would like to touch upon. It is how much traffic will be developed.

I believe you asked that, or one of the Senators asked that question this morning, that will likely utilize the heliport.

In the hearings before the CAB some several years ago, the CAB. each of the applicants, submitted various estimates of the traffic which their experts estimated would be generated.

Our company estimated there would be 225,000 passengers a year generated in 1964 or 1965-225,000.

We estimated at least that much will be available, probably 250,000 or 300,000 right at the present time, and within 5 years, maybe 500,000.

We speak of this as a penetration of the fixed-wing market. The going rate in other words, what percentage of the fixed-wing traffic would utilize the helicopter service. This is called penetration of the market.

The penetration by the other helicopter operators at the present time amounts to approximately 5 percent of the fixed-wing market. If that were used it would run between 250,000 and 300,000.

These are rough figures that would utilize it, using the experience of the other operators in the other cities as applied to the market here in Washington.

These are rough figures, I again say, but this is what you are looking for, I believe; this figure.

I believe that to be a realistic estimate of what can be developed here in the scheduled helicopter service between the airports and downtown Washington, and between the same heliport and downtown Baltimore and in between Baltimore and Washington.

Now, there are two other questions you posed to the witnesses. One is the price of land and the fees necessary for operation.

We have a certificate at the present time. We can operate a scheduled service between the airports at the present time, and if there was a heliport in Washington, as an air taxi operator and operating helicopters under 12,500 pounds, we do not have to wait on the CAB to operate. All we have to do is get into operation.

I think we are going on a wrong premise, to start with, that we must wait. There are two ways in which an operation can be started at the present time.

One is to get a certificate from the CAB, or an exemption from the CAB to permit an operation, or, two, to operate with helicopters under 12,000 pounds.

That is the S-62 helicopter, or the Bell 204-B helicopter, which is a 10- to 12-passenger helicopter.

That you do not have to wait with. You can operate with the larger helicopters if you get an exemption from the CAB to permit you to do so.

Either one of those possibilities exist, so that this heliport could be utilized not a year and a half from now, but in a much shorter time. Now, the price of the land, the rent-this has been a source, quite a good source, of contention between the RLA and-I should not say contention, but discussion, between the RLA and the others, and what a helicopter company can pay for the use of a heliport.

Obviously, we cannot compete with a parking lot. It is not in the cards. There is not that kind of money at this time in the helicopter operation.

But we pay $2.50 a landing for our helicopter at National Airport. Every time we land, and we take off, we pay that. We can pay approximately $10,000 a year for the operation of a heliport in scheduled operation.

Now, we leased a heliport from RLA 5 years ago, over here behind the HUD building on D Street, I think it is, between Seventh and Eighth Streets. We paid at that time $300 a month, and we were proposing to operate our own air-taxi service from that heliport.

It is a long story why we were never able to utilize it, because it happened to be on the wrong side of the prohibited zone here in the District of Columbia. You have a prohibited zone around the Capitol and the White House, which the helicopters cannot operate in. We were just on the wrong side of it, and despite all of our efforts to utilize it as a heliport, spending the money to fence it in, and to make a pad, and so on, we were not able to do so, because we could not get the White House-and the White House Secret Service has to release that so that we can operate it-they would not let us fly over half a street to utilize it.

But these figures are what you can afford for an air-taxi operator, as versus a scheduled air-taxi operator utilizing larger aircraft.

I want to again touch on this problem of what we were supposed to do, and what the operator is supposed to do, in this little plan that you have, and what the Government would do.

We

We understand that we are to put the terminal facilities up. propose to utilize a trailer with handling facilities for our radios, and so on.

So far as paving the parking lot, most of it is already paved, and all that would really be needed would be a fence or some other minor additions to it to make it available for use as a heliport, for either type of operation.

I would like to say a bit about this time element business. I know that this is a temporary location.

However, it has been my experience that the word "temporary" is a very elastic term in Government parlance, and particularly in building parlance. What we estimate as a year and a half, sometimes takes 3, 4, or 5 years.

I don't know how long it will be before Mr. Chalk will be building that building. I daresay that he does not know how long it is going to be. It depends upon many imponderables, one of which is the finances for that building.

With the mortgage market, now if the mortgage market 2 years from now is the same as now, I doubt seriously whether this building will be built in 2 or 3 years, or, for that matter, for 5 years.

There are other matters affecting the utilization of land. It may very well be that there should be a restudy of that land, to make it available as to new or adjusted planning, so that this land will be reserved for a heliport, be it on the ground or on top of a building.

Maybe Mr. Chalk would like to have a heliport. I am informed he would love to have a heliport on top of that building, so that it could be utilized in the period before construction as a heliport on the ground, and then perhaps on the roof afterward.

If not, perhaps, in accordance with Senator Murphy's suggestion, this area could be utilized as a parking lot, with garage, with this on the top of it.

All of this could take place while we are utilizing it as a ground heliport.

Senator INOUYE. I must apologize. I am scheduled to open the session this noon, and I must report to the floor.

You have been most helpful, and if you wish to testify further, we are having another Senator come in to take over the chair.

So I would like at this time to declare a recess, a very brief recessI think for a couple of minutes-until Senator Jordan appears. Thank you very much, sir.

(Brief recess.)

Senator JORDAN (presiding). The subcommittee will please come to order.

We will resume the hearing, and I want to apologize for being late, but I got here just as quickly as I could.

Mr. Wheeler, I believe you were testifying when Senator Inouye had to go and open the Senate.

Mr. WHEELER. I have just about finished, sir.

The only thing I want to urge to this committee is how important it is that we make a start in getting a heliport for this great city that we have.

Our need is greater than anyplace else, because our airports are so far out, and we have lived off of National so long. National has been our airport here for 25 or 30 years. Now all of our traffic cannot be handled through National. We must have some improved terminal facilities.

We must make a start. I have personally been trying to get this heliport here for 5 years, not at this particular site, although this is the most favored site that I can think of, and the best site.

We must make a start. We must make a beginning, to see whether the people of Washington really want and need this service.

I believe, and most people that I have talked to believe that this is an essential service now, in view of this air age.

And making a start here, the cost is a very minimal cost to get an operation underway; $75,000 is a pittance, because we spent a million dollars to get Los Angeles underway, per year. We spent $2 million to get New York underway, a grant subsidy.