Viewing page 233 of 274

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

COT Division, 1st Session--Final Report       81

(Left hand column)

use. He did not, however, consider this to be a possible solution, but proposed that some degree of standardization, an interim measure, might be achieved by providing port of entry facilities only for inter-regional flights.
  Group Captain C.J. Campbell (Canada) said he considered that future development of improved aids would automatically result if existing aids failed to reach the internationally agreed operational requirements. 
  Group Captain H.R. Grahm (United Kingdon) said that it had, in his opinion, been a serious mistake to lay down different operational requirements for long- and short-distance navigational aids. It would appear that both Canada and Australia, among other nations, were supporting the use of an R/0 system as a short-range aid and of a hyperbolic system for long-range flying. It would, consequently, be extremely difficult to develop an integrated system to cover both short- and long-range navigational.
  Mr. H.A. Ferris (Canada) said that the operational requirements laid down for long-range aids did not cater for problems of traffic control, although this facility was incorporated in the requirements for short-range equipment. Although it was possible to navigate on fixes for long-range flying, this method could not be applied to short-range work.
  Mr. H. Larnder (United Kingdom) said that, if operational requirements for international traffic only were required, this should be made clear to Committee A. Some members of this Committee were at present attempting to draw up operational requirements covering air traffic control problems whereas others were in favour of omitting these facilities. If different countries had different operational requirements, these should be impartially discussed. One part of the world should not be regarded as inferior to another, neither should any region be required, against its better judgement, to accept an inferior device in the interest of international standardization.
  Squadron Leader M.B. Sarwate (India) asked whether it could be stated how soon the following equipment would become available:
  a) An integrated system giving long- and short-distance navigational and automatic control and landing facilities;
  b) Self-monitoring GEE ground equipment capable of withstanding monsoon conditions.
  The Chairman asked the United Kingdom Ministry of Supply to furnish Squadron Leader Sarwate with the answers to these questions.
  Mr. C. Holt-Smith (United Kingdom) proposed that a committee should be set up to tabulate regional problems  

(Right hand column)

and requirements. Attempts were being made to solve interregional problems before those of the regions themselves. Insufficient information was at present available on the detailed engineering considerations which would influence decision; nor was any organisation in a position either to dictate to individual sovereign nations, nor greatly to modify their prejudices. If regional problems were solved first, PICAO would be in a better position to deal with those of the independent inter-regional routes.
  Mr. H.R. Adam (Australia) said that existing or proposed military aviation schemes would not permit consideration at this juncture of regional problems only. Failure on the part of PICAO to arrive at a decision on the major problem of standardization on the international routes would be disastrous.
  Air Commodore Chamberlain (United Kingdom) said
that, in his view, two mutually exclusive courses were open to PICAO, if it insisted on universal standardization. PICAO could either:
  a) decide that there was, at present, insufficient data available to enable the Conference to select systems for international standard use and could postpone any decision for a period of, say two years; or
  b) agree that the choice lay between an R/0 and a hyperbolic system and, after lengthy discussion, take a vote on this issue.
  In his opinion, the vote would be cast in favour of an R/0 system. Those nations supporting a hyperbolic system would then have to decide, whether or not, to proceed in their own territories with installation of a technically superior system in the face of an otherwise unanimous international opinion.
  If, on the other hand, PICAO agreed to postpone decision (a possibility which he understood Dr. Warner viewed with alarm), rival claimants would return home to develop still more completely the competing systems, with a consequent hardening of regional opinion and commitments which it would be even more difficult to reconcile two years hence.
  The probability, which it would be as well at this juncture to face, was that the United Kingdom, supported by some European nations, would vote for GEE, would be outvoted by an overwhelming majority and would be faced with having to decide whether to waive its technical and operational convictions in the interests of complete international standardization.
  Mr. C.S. Cockerell (United Kingdom) said he believed that, if PICAO either recognised or standardized on both GEE and the CW omnirange for interim use and, at the same time, stated that what was required was an accurate R/0 computer system for world standardization, such an equipment would emerge in a very short time.