Reece

I survived the cynical introduction, only to be subjected to an overdose of misinformation. For instance: the Hornet is the most expensive fighter ever built (obviously Ten research had never heard of the F-14, F-15, Tornado or perhaps even the Foxbat), or that the Hornet had been plagued with faults and serious problems from its first flight (the F/A-18 has enjoyed one of the smoothest flight development programmes ever achieved by either the USN or USAF; only two aircraft have been lost to date and the aircraft generally is achieving reliability and maintainability standards unknownin previous generation multirole fighters) The programme then went on to attack the Hornet on cost escalation, and fair enough. Unfortunately, the point they overlooked is that virtually every such programme these days has cost-inflation-plus clauses clearly defined in the contract. Imagine contracting to buy, say, a GMH Commodore in 1980, for it to be delivered in 1985 and to pay 1980 prices. You don’t have to be an economist to figure that one out! Mind you, the recent action by USN and Congress to ensure that MDC toes the line on flyaway price is certainly to be applauded and good news for Australia; it is a shame the Reporters did not quote it in that context.

The surprise of the whole report though was, lo and behold, halfway through we are informed (with a smile) that ‘Ah, but if you want a killing machine the Hornet is superb’ and so we swing to accolades and pilot interviews telling us how great the aircraft is. Trouble is that by this time the viewer is wondering not why the RAAF bought the Hornet but why he is watching such a pointless news item.

Needless to say that old whipping horse from years back, the F-111, also came in for the ubiquitous thrashing – ‘Has Australia purchased another F-111?’, they said; well I certainly hope so!

STEWARDS IN FAIRYLAND

I was appalled by the actions of Qantas flight stewards and stewardesses when they stopped the airline for several hours on October 22nd to promise industrial disruption against a Qantas initiative of reducing flight crew numbers on such sectors as Sydney to Melbourne. At the time of writing 16 service crew are carried on this routine short-haul transit with a minimal number of passengers. Qantas are opting for 12 service crew which would equate more realistically with that of TAA’s A300. The reason for this is that apart from the transits being overstaffed anyway, Qantas needs the additional manpower to cater for their Adelaide and Zimbabwe services. By reducing crew numbers on the transits to realistic levels they won’t have to hire additional crew for the new services. Logical perhaps, but a little too much for those pampered stewards to comprehend. Their actions early in 1981 were a paramount cause of Qantas’ enormous 1980/81 loss and now they look set to do 1t all again. It is about time the stewards, through their union, woke up to economic reality, the 1980s is not a garden of roses and their dog in the manger attitudes will only serve to undo all the good marketing work that Australia’s national carrier has undertaken in recent years. People will be reluctant to travel on a carrier where there is perceived service crew hostility and the possibility of flights being cancelled at short notice – and Qantas deserves better than that.

TRAVELLING FULL CIRCLE

While taxiing at Toulouse recently, following a visit to Airbus, I saw an interesting sight – my first Mercure. Remember that ill-fated 737 took-alike that Dassault built in the late sixties, only to sell a total of ten aircraft? Well, there was one, idling away in the colours of the only carrier to invest in the type, Air Inter. What struck me though was that if you threw in a few more fuel tanks (the Mercure’s downfall was its ridiculously short legs, for instance, it could barely fly Sydney/Melbourne at max. payload!) and hung on two CFM56s then you would be looking at a 737-300. Who said aviation doesn’t travel in circles, next they will be flying airships!

HARD TIMES FOR GA

Has Australia ever had a more severe recession, short of the actual calamities of the nineteen thirties? Certainly, in my time I have never seen things as bad, and 1t’s not just monetary either; drought and unseasonal weather over the past fifteen months has in most cases made a bad situation worse. Badly hit have been the distributors of GA aircraft. Marketers of US-built aircraft have seen their 1983 models soar in price through the combined effects of high inflation and a decaying Australian dollar. In the past eighteen months, the shift between the US and Australian dollars has been in the region of 20%. Combined with inflation this has added as much as a third to the cost of newly imported US-built aircraft over the past year. If this wasn’t bad enough the interest rates we pay nowadays are nearly twice what they were in percentage terms compared with the early seventies and on top of that credit itself is still a rare commodity. The situation, from my humble position, appears to be easing though as rates begin to fall, credit availability improves and the market begins to slowly recover This time last year Australia was in pretty good shape; let’s hope that this time next year the worst of the worst will be well and truly over.

ATC BLUES

How many times have you watched the monumental amount of traffic at LA International or Heathrow or Honolulu? Then travelled back to Sydney and watched Jumbos holding for up to fifteen minutes, idling away airline profit and irreplaceable fuel, while traffic, some of 1t carrying two or three passengers, drifts in at widely spaced intervals. You wonder why it has to be that way, when other people can get it together to the point of having upwards of eight aircraft visual on the approach at any one time at many international airports. Robert Bell attempts to answer this very question in our special ‘Life in the Tower’ feature in this issue. What are the problems and what are the solutions? Find out in this informative two-part series.

A CHANGE FOR THE BETTER

Australian Aviation has been impressed with the emergence of what appears to be a new attitude at DofA. Operators, particularly in the struggling general aviation area, are finding a new ‘can we help you’ attitude from many DofA personnel who formerly were famous for their inability to be cooperative with the very industry that supports their being. Good work DofA, keep it up.

COMMUNICATION NOT CONFRONTATION

While on the subject of the Department, how’s this for an idea? With so much disillusionment and mistrust built up between operators and the old Department over the past decade, would it not be a good idea to instigate a series of seminars aimed at providing a forum for the new Department to address the specific problem areas of aviation (at all levels) in Australia direct with the industry? Addresses by various departmental heads explaining their position would go a long way to creating a better environment for all concerned. Similarly, a question and answer session following each address would allow the industry to present its side of the coin and certainly, a more productive and cooperative attitude would follow. The Department of Defence did this in 1980, and it was most constructive. You can’t beat communication – how about it, DofA?

TAA ON A WINNER WITH BUSINESS CLASS

I’m not a punter but if I were I would be taking a bet on TAA’s Business Class being a long-term winner for the airline. It is no secret that TAA got well and truly walloped by Ansell during 1981/82 with much of TAA’s high yield First Class traffic defecting to the luxury of Ansell’s Golden Wings Club and other niceties including an aura of high frequency and easier access to the aircraft. TAA hope that with their revitalised cabin service and such innovations as Business Class, they will be able to win back the essential two per cent that they lost to ATl I had the pleasure of travelling Sydney to Melbourne recently as a Business Class passenger and can only say that it is well worth the extra 15% surcharge on the standard economy ticket. The difference from economy is clearly evident, increased leg room, separate Business Class cabin aft of First, near First Class food service, free drinks and other niceties. On the Melbourne-bound leg my two nearest passengers were both businessmen who formerly travelled first but due to the recession were now forced to fly economy. Not being enamoured with this they tended to fly less than before and to make more use of Telecom. Whether or not a decrease in face-to-face contact had affected their business in the past six months they did not know but thought that it would in the end. Introduction of Business Class had tended to get them back into the air and off the phone, the very thing that TAA execs had hoped. The salient point for both carriers is that one of the two businessmen had formerly flown Ansell And this of course is the very essence of the TAA push, to win back high-yield fares, while hopefully not diluting their First Class patronage, from Ansett before that carrier introduces its 767 through mid-1983.

One major area both airlines never mention though, when discussing the fall-off in patronage is the excessive fare increases we have in Australia. Fares have soared more than 20% in the past year and have doubled since 1978. From where we sit this is the major reason people are not flying as much as they did during the sixties and seventies, at least in relative terms of growth. We are all conditioned to product increases in line with inflation but when fares jump every six or eight months then there comes a point where each individual person eventually says ‘no, I won’t make that trip and save the money. ‘ It is worth noting that this extends from visiting grannies to members of the board; my Business Class friend mentioned above for instance was a senior executive with one of Australia’s largest companies.

A CATCH 22 SITUATION ON QANTAS TRISTARS

How close was Qantas to signing a contract with Lockheed on their L1011 Tristar just prior to the demise of that great airliner? Well, we will never truly know but it is said by people I trust that an affirmative decision be our national carrier was very, very close. With this in mind it must be disappointing for Qantas executives, straddled with so much over-capacity, to see that PanAm are selling off their Tristar fleet at very reasonable prices. How reasonable? Well, how about a package of five aircraft for around $100 million, and that would buy long-range L1011-500s barely one or two years old. The addition of a small number of these aircraft into the Qantas fleet would allow the carrier enormous flexibility on such routes as trans-Tasman Australia to Asia, Noumea, Fiji and perhaps Hirari. The reason: of course, that the PanAm Tristars are so attractively priced is the precise reason Qantas cannot buy them, a true Catch 22 situation.

WHAT’S HAPPENING AT EAST WEST?

When Bryan Grey and Duke Minks were preparing their invasion of East West Airlines last winter many people wondered what would really happen if they took control. Would the Tamworth-based earner remain much as before or would 11 change radically? Nobody really knew, though they all speculated.

As we go to press a lot is happening at old East West. There is talk, and indeed some good old-fashioned poker playing going on between the aircraft manufacturers and the airline on a major change of equipment. East West is considering rolling over its entire F-27 fleet for new leveraged lease aircraft, either new F-27s, BAe 748s or a radical change to F-28s and BAe 146s, or a mix of the two types. A day after announcing the 45% discount Golden Oldies pensioner fare (one way to compete with the new XPT trains) East West goes into a headlong battle with their aircrews and closes the entire Melbourne operation.

By the time you read this no doubt all will be resolved, but the one point to make is that certainly East-West as we knew it is well and truly a thing of the past.