The Airtourer Story

Victa Consolidated Industries’ Aviation Division was not the only post-war attempt to establish a viable light aircraft production industry based on an Australian design.

In the fifties and early sixties, there were several others – notably the CAC Ceres, the Hamilton Jackaroo, Toowoomba Foundries “Southern Cross”, the Yeoman Cropmaster, and of course, the aircraft that has become the Transavia Corporation’s Airtruk, today the sole surviving Australian light aeroplane still in quantity production.

But if Victa’s effort was not the first, it was certainly the most ambitious – as well as the one that showed the most promise and gained for Australia the greatest international prestige.

To trace the real beginning of the Victa Airtourer story we need to go back 55 years, when a Polish schoolboy, the son of a university professor of engineering, won an aeromodelling competition. His prize was a flight over his native Warsaw in a rotary-engined World War I biplane of the Polish Air Force.

That flight captivated young Henry Millicer for life. Five years later at the age of 14, he built a successful primary glider and, still too young to fly it himself, lent it to the Warsaw Aeror Club. At 17 he qualified as a glider pilot and later set a new Polish gliding distance record, achieving his Gold C distance at the same time.

He took a degree in mechanical engineering, began a further course in aeronautical engineering, and became a junior designer in a Polish aircraft factory. In his spare time, he trained as a military pilot (again on antiquated rotary-engined biplanes), with the Polish Air Force Reserve.

When World War II broke out in 1939, he flew army observation aircraft against the German offensive for a time, then, with 30 other pilots flew to the Rumanian Black Seaport of Constanza to take delivery of 28 Hawker Hurricanes and Fairey Battles which had been shipped from Britain for the Polish Air Force.

Before the aircraft could be unloaded and assembled, Russia invaded Poland, and the young airmen were summarily interned in a Rumanian gaol. They bribed their way out, evaded the police, and finally obtained exit visas through a Romanian girl who worked in the office of the Prefecture of Police in Bucharest.

In France, Henry Millicer served as a pilot in a squadron of the French Air Force. When France fell in 1940, he and his companions made their way south, “living like brigands,” until they were able to escape to England by sea. There, as a member of the Polish Air Force, he flew Blackburn Bothas with Coastal Command and later Wellingtons in Bomber Command and was awarded the AFC and MM.

Invalided out of flying with a stomach ulcer, he served for a while as an interpreter but then resumed his studies at London University. After gaining an MSc in aeronautical engineering he took out British citizenship and became a designer engineer under Professor G. T. R. Hill, creator of the revolutionary Westland-Hill Pterodactyl tailless aircraft of the early thirties.

Later he joined Airspeed where he worked on the design of the Ambassador airliner. After the aircraft had flown successfully, Millicer went to Hunting Percival. There, as well as working on the Percival Prince & Prentice he made a design study of a side-by-side two-seater low-wing training aircraft as a private venture. This was accepted by the company, and as the Percival Provost, became the RAF’s new basic trainer – the aeroplane that was undoubtedly the inspiration for Australia’s own CAC Winjeel.

In 1949, a crash into power lines while flying in poor visibility landed a badly injured Henry Millicer in hospital for several weeks. The accident seemed the last straw in the succession of tragedies that had plagued his family over the previous 10 years. His mother had been killed in the bombing of Warsaw, his father badly injured, and his only brother had died later at the hands of the Gestapo. Even his brother-in-law, who had returned to Warsaw after the war for discussions with the Russians, had been arrested and mysteriously disappeared in Russian prisons.

With plenty of time to brood, Henry Millicer finally decided he was finished with Europe. He would make a new start in a new country. But where?

Quite unexpectedly his mind was made up for him – a letter arrived from Australia offering him the post of Chief Aerodynamicist with the Government Aircraft Factory in Melbourne.

Joining GAF in August 1950, he worked there for 10 years, becoming responsible for the aerodynamics of the Indivik II and III and the design of the Malkara anti-tank missile.

But his love of personal flight persisted. In the early fifties, he was already devoting his spare time to the development of an advanced two-seater sailplane when the Royal Aero Club in London announced a Commonwealth-wide design competition for a light aeroplane “suitable for air touring; economical to construct, operate and maintain, and easy to fly”.

For Henry Millicer, the specification seemed made to order and, with two GAF colleagues he lost no time in entering. A thousand man-hours of work followed and the detailed design was submitted by the closing date at the end of 1952.

Three months later, when the results were announced in London, it was Henry Millicer’s “Air Tourer”, a wooden, low­ wing, tricycle undercarriage 2-3 seater, powered by a de­ rated Blackburn Cirrus Minor engine, that was the outright winner.

As well as the £100 prize, the terms of the competition provided for fi. nancing the building of the winning design in England. But with the Australian win widely acclaimed, and with local industry offers to help put the aircraft into production, Henry Millicer wrote to the Royal Aero Club seeking financial assistance for the construction of two prototypes in Australia.

There was no reply to his letter, nor to two subsequent follow-ups sent by registered post. Only years afterwards did Henry Millicer learn the real reason: Apparently not envisaging the winning entry coming from anywhere but the United Kingdom, the competition organisers were taken aback at the prospect of funding the construction of the aircraft overseas. As a result, the promised financial support became a political hot potato and was quietly propped. As one of the adjudicators explained to Henry years later, the real problem was that “the bloody colonials won it”.

Meanwhile, Henry Millicer and other aeronautical engineers and enthusiasts who shared his vision of economical personal flight were meeting in Melbourne to plan the formation of a group with aims similar to those of the Popular Flying Association in the UK.

Their efforts culminated with the founding of the Ultra Light Aircraft Association in October 1955 and 18 months later with the promulgation of DCA’s historic “Ultra Light Aircraft” Air Navigation Order, authorising the construction of amateur-built aircraft in Australia.

The new ANO provided the opportunity Henry Millicer was waiting for. An Air Tourer Group was formed within the ULAA and, with encouraging support in cash and kind from Australian industry, the Aero Club Federation and the Department, construction of a prototype was begun in a rented garage. Numerous donated components, including engines, instruments, wheels, tyres and brakes necessitated a good deal of redesign and the final choice of power plant became a 65 hp Continental.

By the time the Millicer Air Tourer was ready for its first flight at Moorabbin Airport early in 1959, East-West Airlines had agreed to produce the aircraft commercially at Tamworth and the aero club movement was looking to it as a potential replacement for their aging fleet of Tiger Moths and Chipmunks.

The granting of the Air Tourer’s C of A in July 1959, the first Australian design to achieve that status since pre-war days, brought more favourable publicity. Industry and aero club notables who flew it were loud in their praise and the aircraft, now officially VH-FMM, was flown to Tamworth for evaluation preparatory to East-West Airlines beginning work on a second prototype to be fitted with a metal spar and a Continental C-95 engine.

For Henry Millicer now the future looked rosy. With an initial production run of 12 aircraft planned for 1960 and 50 a year to follow, there seemed no reason why the Air Tourer should not become the standard club aircraft throughout Australia.

Unfortunately for the project, less than a fortnight after arriving at Tamworth, VH-FMM sustained an engine failure during an aero club demonstration flight and was extensively damaged during the ensuing forced landing on rough ground.

The crash. experience vindicated many of the Air Tourer’s design features and the aircraft was repaired for a total cost of £1321. But collective and corporate decisions sometimes have little relation to logic, and the accident was enough to give the erstwhile manufacturers cold feet. They withdrew from the agreement, “due to other commitments”, politely pointing out to Millicer that “our change of plans should in no way be construed as indicating a loss of faith in the type”.

Undaunted, Henry Millicer formed his own company, re­ designed the Air Tourer with an all-metal wing and set about finding another Australian backer. For a time, though there seemed no lack of potential customers for the aircraft, no industrialist capable of handling its manufacture seemed interested.

Then several months later in the winter of 1960, while weather-bound at Mangalore Aerodrome in central Victoria, Henry Millicer got talking to another pilot. He turned out to be Garry Richardson, son of Mervyn Richardson, chairman of the great Australian success story, Victa Consolidated Industries Ltd.

Mervyn Richardson, engineer and aviation enthusiast of many years standing, had built an aero engine incorporating contra-rotating propellers as early as 1914, but his idea had not been taken up. Now, as a successful industrialist, he was in the process of developing a four-seat, low-wing all-metal aircraft, the Victa R-2, with the intention of producing it for the Australian market. Both he and his son Garry were pilots and flew Victa’s executive Bonanza on company business.

The chance encounter at Mangalore led to further talks in Sydney and the outcome was Victa Consolidated Industries’ decision in August 1960 to put the Millicer Air Tourer into large-scale production.

Appointed Chief Designer of Victa’s Aviation Division, Henry Millicer resigned from GAF, moved to Sydney, and set about re-designing the Air Tourer as an all-metal aircraft that, with a 100 hp Rolls Royce Continental 0-200A engine, would be fully aerobatic.

Within two months of Victa’s production announcement, orders for the new aircraft now designated the Victa Air tourer, were pouring in – 15 for the Royal Victorian Aero Club, two for Latrobe Valley, six for the Auckland Aero Club in New Zealand, and three for the Royal Aero Club of NSW.

“The Airtourer is tailormade to club training requirements”, commented RAC of NSW President Peter Lloyd. “It is a highly versatile and economical trainer with excellent performance. ”

Reported the Australian Financial Review: “The sales have knocked the opposition flat. Victa are now hunting aero club and private owners to follow up their advantage, and have made a start on export. Asian sales will be pressed in visits to Southeast Asian countries before the end of the year.

“Victa plans to exhibit the Airtourer at the Paris Air Show next July as a try for the European market. Having been designed for the British market . . . it should have an appeal there. No British aircraft in the same category is in production today. The opportunity could be great. ”

Deliveries from the new aircraft factory being built at Milperra were expected to begin in June 1961, and production was being scheduled initially for a run of 125 aircraft.

While work progressed on the metal Airtourer, Victa shipped the original wooden VH-FMM to New Zealand for a demonstration tour. The aircraft received excellent press, but amongst New Zealand’s general aviation industry, the tour proved a mistake – the wooden construction and utilitarian finish of the prototype created an unfavourable impression and led to the cancellation of the Auckland Aero Club’s order, a setback from which New Zealand sales recovered only after the all-metal Airtourer was well in production.

Meanwhile at Victa, although the prototype of the R-2 four-seater had now flown successfully, the project was shelved in order to concentrate on Airtourer production. Not surprisingly, tooling-up took a good deal longer than expected and it was December 12, 1961, before the first all­ metal Airtourer 100, VH-MVA was ready for initial flight testing. DCA Type Approval was finally granted in July 1962, almost 10 years from the day when Henry Millicer had submitted his entry to the Royal Aero Club’s design competition.

With the production line now rolling, Victa introduced an alternative higher performance version, the Airtourer 115, fitted with a Lycoming 0-235 115 hp engine and the two models were marketed side by side – the fastest fixed undercarriage two-seat trainer available in the world.

Sales during 1964 included an expected order for an Airtourer 115 from no less a buyer than the Piper Corporation, ostensibly for evaluation in the US. The Airtourer’s aerobatic capability evidently appealed to Piper, and with nothing to match the aircraft themselves, the company were looking to the possibility of building the Airtourer under licence if they could secure a US Air Force contract for a light, economical basic training aeroplane. However the contract stipulated the aircraft was to be of US design, and the plan was dropped.

So encouraging was the Airtourer order book by this time that Victa now instructed Millicer to investigate the design of an economical, fast four-seater, aimed specifically at the Australian market, but with good prospects for export. So began the development of the Victa Aircruiser. As well, developmental work was continuing with Victa’s experimental two-seater gyroplane designed by J. Blackler and intended for aerial work operations, a project actually begun when the Aviation Division was first formed in 1959.

A sound advertising campaign, good sales promotion, and a continuing enthusiastic daily and technical press kept Airtourer orders coming in. In March 1963, the Federation of Australian Aero Clubs announced the award of the Oswald Watt Medal – their highest honour – to Henry Millicer “for his outstanding contribution to the Australian aviation industry”.

By early 1965 Victa had produced its 100th Airtourer – and occasion marked by displaying the aircraft at a Council of Industrial Design dinner attended by the Duke of Edinburgh in Sydney – and had begun a determined marketing campaign in the United Kingdom. With the formation of a Victa UK subsidiary to look after sales, Glos-Air were appointed to handle aircraft assembly and service at Staverton Airport, Gloucester.

From the start, the Victa Airtourer created a sound impression attracting favourable reviews from the British aviation press.

“Its arrival in England this year is especially welcome” commented Air Pictorial, “for not only does it seem to be the long-awaited ‘Tiger Mother replacement’ but is a Commonwealth product imported into the UK by Victa (UK) Ltd, the English subsidiary of Victa Ltd, Sydney. Hitherto, the nearest approach to a Tiger replacement was the Chipmunk, also a Commonwealth product, having been designed and first built by de Havilland of Canada. Now it is the turn of Australia. ”

Within days of the launching of Victa’s UK campaign, the initial import quota was sold and the waiting list was continuing to grow.

But back in Australia storm clouds were brewing. Several months before, in the Aero club bar at Bankstown Airport – the daily meeting place for Bankstown’s aviation fraternity – senior executives of Australia’s “Big Three” distributors had joked to Miller, “You’re getting too big for us Henry. We’re going to have to get you!” The trouble was that behind their undoubted good humour, they meant every word of it.

During 1964-65 with theAirtourer holding a steady 67 per cent of the market, imports of the other two-seat trainers to Australia amounted to only 40 aircraft. But by the end of the following financial year, the number imported had quadrupled. Cessna dropped the price of their Model 150 by 25 per cent, while Piper and Beech effectively lopped 12½ per cent off the prices of their equivalent Cherokee and Muskateer range. In the US, the Cessna Company issued an edict that all franchise holders were to buy at least five 150s each, and in Australia both Cessna and Piper introduced a three-month customer evaluation period as an incentive for potential buyers.

Late in 1965, realising that their big American competitors were out for blood and that the future of the local light aircraft industry could well be at stake, the Victa management got together with two other struggling Australian light aircraft manufacturers, Cropmaster and Transavia, a company that was now confident it had a winner in its Airtruk. As a group, the three companies approached the Federal Government with a request that a Tariff Inquiry be held into the question of bounty assistance for two or three years while they establish production runs big enough to allow them to compete successfully with overseas manufacturers.

Victa’s own case was not primarily one of seeking import restrictions on competitive products – the company claimed it had no wish to penalise the general aviation industry by having tariffs imposed which would put the price of light aircraft out of reach of the average buyer. Rather, Victa was seeking a subsidy on their Aircruiser production for a short time to enable their factory to become self-sustaining in what had now become a highly competitive market.

But as it seemed unlikely that the bounty application would be heard by the Tariff Board for at least 12 months or even two years, Victa made a second application to the Department of Trade seeking a temporary quantitive restriction on the imports of two-seat trainers over and above the number brought into the country during the previous financial year, plus an allowance for the national growth rate of 20 per cent per annum. Victa was quick to emphasise that this request applied only to two-seat training aircraft selling in Australia in direct competition with the Airtourer, and was to combat “the form of dumping by American manufacturers” which was obviously to combat the outstanding sales success of the Airtourer in Australia.

Pointing out this was a short-term measure to bridge the gap pending the hearing of Victa’s bounty application, Australia’s aviation press described the proposal as “eminently fair”. A decision on Victa’s application for the temporary quantitive restriction on imported two-seaters was expected from Canberra by mid-January 1966.

In the meantime, opposition to Victa’s Airtourer production was no longer confined to the vested interests of its American competitors – treason had begun to rear its ugly head even within the elite seclusion of Victa’s boardroom.

“Nothing succeeds like success”, says the old adage. But the opposite is also true, and this first setback to the Victa Aviation Division’s enterprise had begun to eat into the company’s confidence like cancer.

With a great deal of money already expended by the Aviation Division, and with little return to show for it, some Board members were showing increasing signs of impatience with the company’s profitability.

From the beginning, the driving force behind the Aviation Division had been the Chairman, Mervyn Richardson himself, and to a lesser extent his son Garry, both of them aviation enthusiasts in their own right.

But this idealism was not shared by other directors, for the most part, hard-headed businessmen. With the retirement of Mervyn Richardson from the Board, there came mounting opposition to the Aviation Division.

The Victa Board were frankly not interested in aircraft manufacture and wanted a way out. The Big Three’s concerted opposition, together with Victa’s consequent application for government assistance gave them the key – if the Department of Trade didn’t give them the protection they were seeking, they would have an excellent excuse for clos­ ing down the Aviation Division without loss of face.

Garry Richardson, who had succeeded his father as Chairman didn’t like it, but he lacked the iron determination of his father – the man who had built the Victa empire from nothing in less than 13 years. He bowed to the board member’s pressure.

In mid-January 1966, Victa’s application for temporary protection on imports of competitive aircraft was turned down and Trade Minister McEwen announced that the company’s bounty had been referred to the Tariff Board. However, no date had yet been set for the hearing.

A month later, with no hint of warning to the industry or to its 170 aviation employees, Victa shocked the entire Australian aviation community with its announcement that Airtourer production was to cease immediately. Work on the Aircruiser, which was nearing certification, would continue at least until a Type Certificate was obtained, and there were also hints that Airtourer production could possibly be resumed if and when a favourable decision was received on the company’s bounty application.

Two-thirds of the Aviation Division’s workforce, amounting to 100 employees, were laid off at once from the Milperra factory, leaving 50 to continue spare production and service aircraft “under existing contractual arrangements”.

“The Aviation Division has shown a definite loss in four years of production,” explained Victa Chairman Garry Richardson.

What he did not say was that the other Divisions into which Victa Ltd had diversified – buildings, design, electrical, steel structures and boats – were also unprofitable on paper.

Or, even that, most significantly, of all Victa had received on the very eve of the decision to close the Aviation Division, an order from Sir Derek Bailey, Chairman of Glos-Air in the UK, for no less than 72 Airtourers – a seeming windfall that under Board pressure, Garry Richardson refused to accept.

The fact of the matter was that, with the completion of the 160th aircraft, Victa’s unit cost of the Airtourer had at last broken even, with the result that future production, had it has been continued, would have gradually put the Aviation Division back in the black – and perhaps even allowed the company to reduce the cost of its aircraft to meet the competition from overseas manufacturers.

For a time the shock wave generated by Victa’s decision created a furore among enthusiasts keen to see Australia’s own light aircraft industry succeed, “It is a source of amazement that the Australian Government would allow this vital industry to collapse at such a time,” declared one writer. But with no word of encouragement from either the company itself or the Federal Government, the ferment became a seven-day wonder.

With its reduced staff, Victa’s Aviation Division settled back to its work of completing the prototype Aircruiser. Henry Millcer himself, under contract to Victa as Chief Designer, stayed on to see it through. Whatever happened in the future, the Airtourer production line was a saleable asset. But the Aircruiser in its present state of development was worth almost nothing. Even though hopes of eventually getting the Aircruiser into production looked slim, the work had to continue until the aircraft had completed its certification flying and been granted its Type Certificate. Even the Victa Board could see that.

Six months later in June 1966, the long-awaited Tariff Board hearing began. Dragging on with characteristic obliviousness to the urgency of the situation for a further six months, he ing took evidence from opposition interests as well as the companies seeking assistance. Apart from strong support for the application from the aero club movement, much of the witness evidence became a sorry spectacle of personal nest-feathering at the expense of a national asset by individuals ostensibly proud to call themselves Australians – an apparently desirable appellation so long as it did not affect their pockets.

Meanwhile, the Aircruiser began its flight testing and was hailed by the aviation press for the excellent aircraft it was, with detailed flight reviews following as soon as the prototype could be made available.

The RAAF was also impressed, evincing keen interest in the Aircruiser as the basis for a new elementary training aeroplane. Visiting Air Vice Marshall Brian Eaton at his Canberra office one day to discuss its potential, Henry Millicer shared with him his concern over the Tariff Board hearing.

Air Vice Marshall Eaton immediately picked up his telephone and dialled the number of an acquaintance on the Board. “Don’t let that aeroplane go out of the country,” he told his friend. “We want it here as a trainer. ”

Early in 1967, with the Tariff Board hearing now completed but with month following month without the slightest sign from the Government of its outcome, Victa sold the Airtourer design, together with all jigs, tools and manufactured parts, to Aero Engine Services Ltd of Hamilton, New Zealand.

“We have finished with aircraft production completely,” Chairman Garry Richardson declared to the press. Privately the Victa directors told Henry Millicer, “We could not afford to put the Aircruiser into production!” Just over a year later the same Board announced a company profit of almost $900,000 after allowing $40,000 for tax – an earning rate of 74 per cent on the company’s ordinary capital.

With all hope of the company resuming aircraft production now gone, only the fate of the prototype Aircruiser remained to be decided.

Henry Miller and the last remaining employees of the Aviation Division completed the final modifications to the Aircruiser for the issue of its Certificate of Airworthiness and left Victa in September 1967 – bitterly disappointed to a man at the sad end of an enterprise which, only a short time before, had seemed so full of enthusiasm and promise. “Didn’t you know you’ve been a tax bunny for the past seven years Henry?” one of the Directors asked Millicer when he called to say goodbye.

But even the manner of Henry Millicer’s going was not without its trauma. Barred by his contract from leaving Victa when he was offered a promising academic post with a NSW university, and with his Airtourer royalties already signed over to the company to protect the jobs of his Aviation Division staff when the closure had first threatened, Henry Millicer had to resort to legal measures to be paid what was due to him for the termination of his contract. As Miller himself said, “Someone had to get the blame”.

Later that same year, “Aero” magazine, concerned lest the now-saleable Aircruiser project might be bought by foreign interests, ran a review of “this best seller aircraft which is now in danger of being lost to foreign capital,” adding some biting comment on “the apathetic Government which would not lift a finger to assist. ”

Again there was a spirited response from the nation’s aviation enthusiasts and, at the suggestion of a reader, a “Support the Aircruiser” campaign was begun to save the aircraft for Australia by public subscription. It was a gallant try, drawing a response from over 400 individuals before the magazine was forced to cease publication in the middle of 1968. It is said that the reason for the magazine’s abrupt demise was the withdrawal of all advertising by certain overseas aircraft manufacturers and their Australian distributors as a reprisal for “Aero’s” determined championing of the Aircruiser cause.

Meanwhile, AESL in New Zealand was rubbing salt into the wound by doing just what Victa said could not be done successfully – they had put Airtourers back into quantity production and were selling them in Britain and Europe.

In 1968, Henry Miller, now on the academic staff of the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, made a last-ditch stand to save the Aircruiser for Australia – he approached the Commonwealth Aircraft to see if they would consider putting the aircraft into production.

With a favourable response from CAC Chairman Sir Lawrence Wackett, Millicer wrote a complete production program for the aircraft, based on a new CAC factory to be built for the aircraft, based on a new CAC factory to be built for the purpose on vacant land adjoining Moorabbin Airport. But before the project could be pursued, Sir Lawrence Wackett met with an accident, was forced to retire from CAC, and the proposal lapsed.

Two years later Victa sold the entire Aircruiser project to AESL in New Zealand for an undisclosed price.

Today, the RAAF’s CT-4 Airtraine’i, a military production version of the Aircruiser built in New Zealand by Aerospace industries (the name adopted by AESL after the company had “grown up” as an aircraft manufacturer), shows something of what might have been had circumstances been different.

Reflecting on those events more than 12 years later, it seems incredible that a country like Australia could be so short-sighted, so inept in its administration, as to let an industry of such national importance be sold down the drain, as Henry Millicer puts it, “for 30 pieces of silver”.

The enterprise of nations such as Sweden, Israel and Brazil, with considerably fewer resources at their disposal than Australia, does little to enhance the handling of the whole sorry affair, whether at the government, corporate or personal level of those involved.

There is also much that has never been satisfactorily explained – the extraordinary chain of misfortunes that seemed to contrive against the Airtourer’s success throughout its production history, as well as the probing questions that an incredulous aviation press asked when Victa’s Aviation Division was finally disbanded.

Perhaps there are no answers, but knowing the power and influence of the forces arraigned against the Airtourer’s success, it is hard to believe events were as circumstantial as they appeared.

What of Henry Millicer himself? To his great credit, he is not embittered and holds no grudges for what took place. Rather, in the best tradition of a visionary, he is still looking enthusiastically to the future.

But he admits to deriving a lot of satisfaction from the fact that, of all the Airtourers that were Australian registered, most are still airworthy and are the prized possessions of members of the active Airtourer Association, of which Millicer is now Patron. Even the prototype Aircruiser has returned to the fold from New Zealand – its proud owner Association President Sonny Rankin of West Wyong, NSW.

His only other concern with the past is what can be learnt from it, for he believes earnestly in Australia’s need to have a light aircraft industry of its own and does not want to see the same blunders repeated. As Principal Lecturer in Aeronautical Engineering at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, he is head of Australia’s three aeronautical engineering faculties and takes a heavy responsibility to his students.

“I have 13 students to sell to the industry at the end of this year and 15 next year,” he explains. “I want to see that there are jobs for them in their own country. ”

(The author gratefully acknowledges the assistance of Mrs Kathleen Millicer, whose carefully catalogued records greatly facilitated research for the Airtourer Story. )